|
| |
Interpretation of Bible teachings |
|
|
|
James 5:14
|
| |
It seems that, out of a same Bible text, the Catholic church derives different teaching (interpretations) than Protestants. eg They use Jam 5:14, 15 to support their ceremony of oil anointing in illness, treating the verses as establishing the ceremony. What principles do we have to determine if it's the case? |
| |
Interpretation of Bible teachings |
|
|
|
James 5:14
|
| |
Please understand that a complete answer to this question would be quite long. Take this information and consider it while you search for Gods answer...and He will definately have one.
1. Most importantly, the idea that scripture has many different interpretations is not true. Hear me out. Yes there is a Priesthood of believers and we do not need to consult anyone but God to understand His Word. But this is not a license to interpret scripture in whatever way best fits our lives or beliefs. God wrote the Bible...end of discussion. To believe that it was a product of man and it may have mistakes is wrong. If it has one mistake, the whole of it can not be trusted. It may have a second mistake and we dont know where it is, so can you trust any of it? What if the part about how to enter into heaven has an error... It is either God Breathed or its not. See 1 Peter 1:20. The Bible must be interpreted with this question settled in your heart. God had only ONE meaning when He wrote it. Scripture has an abundance of Applications to our lives today...it is Living and active, and able..., but only one meaning. Try not to forget that God chose a certain generation and people group to unveil Himself to for the purpose of recording scripture, and that is not us. The epistle to the Corinthians does not begin with greetings to the 21st century Christians in So in So USA. It was to them in their time and their cultural setting. It does apply to us, but it was written to them.
2. Anointing ones head with oil may not mean what you think. In the cultural setting, way back in the time of Moses, God gave very discriptive laws about treatment of the sick. It was the priest who one went to when they were sick and they told them what requirement God gave for that situation. There were no doctors, only priest...elders. For many of the wounds then, a bandage soaked in wine and olive oil was appropriate to heal it. It was the elders responsibility to make sure you took care of the wound properly. This was the case later in the lives of mostly Jewish converts to Christianity in the time James wrote his epistle. In other words, the elders made sure you took their medicine. The wording Anoint your head with oil would have a profoundly different meaning to someone in the first century than it does today. This answer can be studied much more, especially using the Greek language it was written in which gives more details as to its meaning...ie.does the Greek word in place of head in English mean the literal head or does it have a broader meaning for the whole body...the head is control of the entire body as is with Christ being the head of the Church...
Consider this limited answer and go back to the text and look again.
Remember, if you hold that this taking to the elders and anointing someones head with some oil could lead poeple to believe doctors and medicine is not necessary. Maybe all that anointing ones head with oil does is get their hair all greesy!
Hope I helped some... |
| |
Interpretation of Bible teachings |
|
|
|
James 5:14
|
| |
Prayer is the more significant of the two ministries performed by the elders, for the overall emphasis of the paragraph belongs on prayer. There are a number of reasons for understanding the application of oil as medicinal rather than sacramental. The word "anoint" is not the usual word for sacramental or ritualistic anointing.
Three different Greek words are translated "anoint" in the NT. Each expresses the same basic idea of rubbing or spreading oil, perfume, or ointment. It is a well-documented fact that oil was one of the most common medicines of biblical times (ISA 1:6 From the sole of your foot to the top of your head
there is no soundness--
only wounds and welts
and open sores,
not cleansed or bandaged
or soothed with oil.; LK 10:34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him.
[NIV]). |
| |
Take Your Holy Spirit from me? |
|
|
|
Ps 51:11
|
| |
"No believer of the present Church Age need ever pray, 'Take not thy Holy Spirit from me'; for Christ promised His own that the Spirit would 'abide with you forever' (Jn. 14:16; compare Eph. 4:30). But it is always proper for the Christian to pray that he may be conformed to the conditions essential to the full ministry of the Spirit." (note at Ps. 51:11, New Scofield Reference Bible, 1967, Oxford University Press) "In the O.T. economy, the Holy Spirit was particularly related to service, rather than salvation...Here David is asking God not to take away his service as the anointed king of Israel..." (p. 846, The Ryrie Study Bible, 1976, 1978, Moody Press) |
| |
Isai 41:2 referring to Christ or Cyrus? |
|
|
|
Isaiah
|
| |
Is 41:2 NASB "Who has aroused one from the east
Whom He calls in righteousness to His feet?
He delivers up nations before him
And subdues kings.
He makes them like dust with his sword,
As the wind-driven chaff with his bow." . . . The "man from the east" refers to Cyrus, not Christ.
. . . "one from the east. The Lord anointed Cyrus the Great, king of Persia, to accomplish His righteous will by conquering Babylon in 539 B.C. and allowing some of the Jewish exiles to return to Jerusalem . . . He founded the Persian Empire and ruled from ca. 550 to 530 B.C." . . . (MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1015) |
| |
QUESTION CONCERNING KING CYRUS |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
IN THE BOOK OF ISAIAH CHAPTER 45:1 STATES THAT CYRUS KING OF PERSIA IS GOD'S ANOINTED ONE. CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANOINTED AND GOD STIRRED UP HIS SPIRIT AS IN EZRA CHAPTER ONE. |
| |
In Jesus' name...except baptism? |
|
|
|
Col 3:17
|
| |
Dear wdc, Well answered! Not because you reflect MY thinking, but because you answered the question, using the Bible. I have no notion or desire to be 'correct, as compared to other wrong people.' I want to please my Lord and Savior, Jesus, the Anointed One. I, too, believe in the Trinity, but am not a Trinitarian. I believe in three cleansing baptisms, but am not Baptist or Pentacostal or Charismatic. I believe in ministry, but am not a Minister. Blessed be the name of the Lord, without the adjectives. (Before anyone jumps on that, thinking that I mean the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are adjectives, this is not my meaning. Trinitarian, Calvinist, Methodist, Charismatic, etc. are all modifiers of the noun Christian. These are not blessed and holy, but human. My apologies to any that take offense. If anyone believes their adjective to be 'special,' let us all know.) In Jesus' name. |
| |
Acts 2:38 not water baptism? |
|
|
|
Col 3:17
|
| |
ACTS 2:38 IS ABOUT WATER BUT IS ALSO A SCRIPTURE THAT RECONIZES JESUS AS MESSIAH. REMEMBER OF EVERYONE THERE,THEY WERE ALL JEWS.TO BECOME A JEW IN THE OLD WAYS WAS TO BE BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF YAHWEY, PETER IS JUST CLARIFYING THAT CHRIST JESUS IS THE ANOINTED , AND THAT THE NAME OF THE SON OF GOD IS JESUS. THESE JEWS WOULD ALLTIMATLY GIVE THEIR VERY LIFE TO DENOUNCE THE LAW AND JUDAISM.LOVE YOUR BROTHER IN CHRIST RCSCROLL |
| |
Please explain this verse? |
|
|
|
Mark 15:34
|
| |
Dear friend, you are right! It is a shame when our zeal to inform others of our thoughts turns us from the 'job at hand.' I will attempt to stay on track, and thank you for reminding me of focus and dignity.
The words Jesus spoke are a quote from Psalm 22:1. Some say that He probably prayed the entire psalm, as a testimony that He Himself answered the prophecy of this psalm. (The Pulpit Commentary)
"Posterity will serve Him; It will be told of the Lord to the coming generation.They will come and will declare His righteousness To a people who will be born, that He has performed it." Psalm 22:30,31 NASB
I am of this camp, I find it unthinkable that the Lord was 'temporarily seperated' from the Trinity, or that He 'experienced' hell. I do believe that he experienced death and derision that the prophecies would be fulfilled, and that He would indeed be proven victorious over Satan. Only God's Anointed could do so. Though He was 'as a lamb led to slaughter,' from the moment after "It is finished," He was crowned in glory and resurrection power. For us, Amen!
In Christ Jesus. |
| |
Should Benny throw the Holy Spirit? |
|
|
|
Not Specified
|
| |
Is it Biblical to throw the anointing of the Holy Spirit around like Mr Benny Hinn does at the crusades?? (To me it looks like a side show and I do not feel it glorifies God in any way) |
| |
Should Benny throw the Holy Spirit? |
|
|
|
1 John 4:1
|
| |
Is it Biblical to throw the anointing of the Holy Spirit around like Mr Benny Hinn does at the crusades?? (To me it looks like a side show and I do not feel it glorifies God in any way) |
| |
Should Benny throw the Holy Spirit? |
|
|
|
1 John 4:1
|
| |
"Beloved, do not believe every spirt, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world." I've seen Benny Hinn in action a couple of times and a few others of his stripe on occasion. I receive more nourishment from eating a hamburger. Ever read "Elmer Gantry"? Biblical? You'll have to make that decision for yourself, I'm afraid. I've long since made mine. |
| |
Do Jewish people have to be born again? |
|
|
|
Rom 10:12
|
| |
1) "For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek: for the same [Lord] is Lord of all, and is rich unto all that call upon him:" Rom 10:12 ASV (1901)
. . . 2) To whom was Jesus speaking when he said "Ye must be born again" (John 3:7)? Was it not to Nicodemus, a Jew himself and "a ruler of the Jews"?
. . . 3) Yes, Israel was God's chosen nation. But chosen for what? "chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God" (Rom 3:2). Israel was the chosen nation through whom God gave to the world the written Word, the Law and the Prophets, and also the Living Word, His Anointed, the Messiah (Hebrew), the Christ (Greek).
. . . To say that the Jewish nation was chosen for salvation is to err. As we know, salvation is open to people of every tribe and tongue and nation. It is open to "whosoever will."
. . . Even if the Jewish nation were chosen to salvation, every individual Jewish person would still have to believe that Jesus was the Messiah before he could be saved or born again. To assume that the elect don't even have to trust Christ for salvation is beyond error, it's totally illogical and contradicts every passage of Scripture on the subject of salvation.
|
| |
Isai 41:2 referring to Christ or Cyrus? |
|
|
|
Isaiah
|
| |
Is 41:2 NASB "Who has aroused one from the east
Whom He calls in righteousness to His feet?
He delivers up nations before him
And subdues kings.
He makes them like dust with his sword,
As the wind-driven chaff with his bow."
. . . The "man from the east" refers to CYRUS, not Christ.
. . . "one from the east. The Lord anointed *Cyrus* the Great, king of Persia, to accomplish His righteous will by conquering Babylon in 539 B.C. and allowing some of the Jewish exiles to return to Jerusalem . . . He founded the Persian Empire and ruled from ca. 550 to 530 B.C." . . . (MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1015) |
| |
2nd Why must we call Jesus 'Lord' |
|
|
|
Phil 2:11
|
| |
Dear dboy: I will do my best to answer your questions.
. . . 1) I agree with you that 99 percent of the people you know could tell who you are talking about when you say "Jesus." The same is true of my circle of acquaintances. But I respectfully disagree with you when you say that adding 'Lord' isn't going to change anything. Perhaps not to the people you're talking to. But the title Lord when used with the name Jesus or Jesus Christ is loaded with scriptural meaning. The Jewish religious leaders had no problem recognizing "the carpenter's son" as Jesus. But most of them would rather die and go to hell before they would ever say Jesus is Lord.
. . . Rom 10:9 ASV "because if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus [as] Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved:" Rom 10:13 ASV for, "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Philippians 2:11 ASV "and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Note in Phil 2:11 "JESUS CHRIST IS LORD."
. . . 2) I agree with you, Jesus is more than "just the Lord", although I wouldn't phrase it that way. Words have meaning and the words we use are important. "Just the Lord?" Properly understood, the word Lord when applied to Jesus Christ carries with it so much meaning, that one can hardly use the phrase "just the Lord." It is almost like referring to Him as "just God." If He is God, He is everything, having all the Deity, glory, splendor, authority and power as the Father does. It's like saying, "Oh, that Texan sitting over there? He's nobody. He's 'just' the President of the United States."
. . . To confess that Jesus Christ is Lord or to call Him the Lord Jesus Christ implies that he is all the other things you so correctly say that He is.
. . . But Scripture itself lays a heavy emphasis upon the title Lord. The words "Lord Jesus Christ" appear together in 106 verses in the King James Version of the Bible. Whenever anything is repeated once in the Bible, it is significant. But for a thing to be repeated 105 times has to carry a lot of weight, if the words of the Bible mean anything at all.
. . . Why do I single out the word Lord? Because the Word of God singles out the word Lord in connection with Jesus Christ. It does so 106 times.
I am not criticizing you or your question. But I must say that we cannot go by what everybody else says. Or by what everybody else calls the Lord Jesus Christ. All our teaching and belief is based solely on Scripture, nothing else. I'm not saying you do this, but many people make the mistake of getting their theology (doctrine, teaching) and their terminology from Christian songs and Christmas cards. Be safe. Get your terminology and teaching from the Bible only.
Also note that Christ is the Greek word and Messiah is the Hebrew word for "Anointed" or "Anointed One". Both words mean THE SAME THING. To call Him both Christ and Messiah would be redundant. That the Christ is the Son of God as well as Saviour and Redeemer is understood, it's a given among Christians in general.
. . . Again, dboy, I care about you as a dear brother in the Lord. I submit my answer to you in all humility and respect. I hope that this helps answer your question. Yours in Christ, JVH0212 |
| |
Please tell me: What does "filled" mean? |
|
|
|
1 Cor 12:13
|
| |
are you not baptised in the Holy Spirit and speak with tongues? Being filled is knowing fully the mind of Christ.Comming into the shirkina presence of God with power and a boldness,witout a conscience yelling out that we are not worthy. Being Filled is like a bucket with holes in it and you have to keep topping it up.The Lord would have you come into His throne Room of Grace and have those Holes Repaired.For the Lord wants to Fill you so that He may pour you out to whom He would and there will be no lack nor bottom of the Pot shall show forth.Amen Jesus!When the holes are repaired then the anointing will stay within us.YIC |
| |
Divine Healing? |
|
|
|
Matthew
|
| |
Sorry, I have, once again, failed to clarify my question. There is a 'theology' out in the charismatic world of Christianity today that says no christian has to be sick. They say that it is ALWAYS GOD's will for christians to be healthy, and if you're sick you must be doing something wrong. So, the conclusion is that all christians can receive a healing, if they have enough faith and do everything else that GOD wants them to do, this idea is what I was phrasing as Divine Healing. Do you believe in this idea? Do you know of any Scripture that would support it?
The same movement is unearthing the idea that GOD is about to pour a financial anointing on believers, and we are going to be rich, so that GOD will be able to use our tithes. This message usually comes with a request for a 'seed' of faith to start the harvest of wealth. Is there anything is Scripture to support this idea? Please express your (everyone!!) opinion!! GOD bless!! |
| |
Mrk16:17/Act2:11 what's the difference |
|
|
|
Mark 16:17
|
| |
In this reference, to speak with a "new" tongue means that those who believe, accept Christ and have been anointed with the power of the Holy Spirit, will have a new message...the message God has given them. They will no longer speak the same things or have the same thoughts. God will order their tongues and tell them what to say.
To speak "in" tongues, is to have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and will speak in their own language. This is a language that satan can not understand. Speaking in tongues is for the purpose of edifying and exhorting. If the message is for you, there will be someone present to interprete for you. If they message is the church or whole gathering, then someone will interprete to them.
Speaking in tongues and praying in your own prayer langauge is different. Prayer language is the language that you use to pray when not praying a public prayer. If you were asked to do the invocation at a service, you wouldn't pray in your prayer language...no one would understand and that would not be edifying to the group. |
| |
Unbaptized children |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
What are the Sacraments?
The sacraments are defined in the Prayer Book as "outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual grace, given by Christ as sure and certain means by which we receive that grace." This means that we recognize God as active and sustaining in our lives, and through the sacraments we participate in this sustaining and saving power. The two main sacraments in the Episcopal Church are the sacrament of Baptism, in which we are initiated into new life with Christ, and the Eucharist, in which we remember and celebrate Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. Baptism happens only once in a person's life, but the Eucharist is celebrated at least once a week. The other traditional rites that have sacramental character include confirmation, ordination, marriage, reconciliation (confession and absolution), and anointing of the sick.
|
| |
What teacher read Isaiah? |
|
|
|
Luke 4:18
|
| |
Jesus is the teacher who was handed the book of Esaias to read, the passage read was "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,because He hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; He hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. the special significance of this was that the scriptue was fulfilled. |
| |
Baptism, Trinity, and Teachers? |
|
|
|
Acts 2:38
|
| |
Dear Hank, I read the posting to which you refer, and had the exact same three questions, though my conclusions are a bit different.
1)I can't find anywhere in scripture that would support Jesus baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, or in the name of Jesus (Himself) either. I can't 'do' anything with Matthew 28:19. As I said earlier, I do not believe in a 'formula,' but in a holy prayer from the heart. This is a dilemma for me, as we have Jesus' commandment and the historical record of His holy messengers. I cannot even, in good conscience, 'say' both ways just to satisfy all (human) hearers. I, personally, trust that Peter and the disciples and saints in the Book of the Acts of the Apostles had a purpose that came from God when they Baptized in the name of Jesus. I will some day stand before God, and I pray that He will see my heart, my faith, my convictions when I give answer for my decisions. My prayers in the name of Jesus are not a result of teaching I received, but of my (humble) understanding of the commandmants of the Lord Jesus, and His disciple's obedience to them.
2)I could never say that "The Trinity is symbolic of one Spirit." I am a firm beliver in a Tri-une God, or the Trinity. I have been reading Reformer Joe and his excellent attempts to explain the Trinity, and am in complete agreement with his 'One God, Three Persons' theology. (Though I prefer JVH0212's exposition) I am not, and have never been Oneness or Jesus-only. My decision to pray in the name of Jesus has nothing to do with a 'Jesus is God is the Holy Spirit' theology. I am much too simple-minded to believe in that spiritual (mystical) spaghetti :-) But, before you start patting me on the back... I am not Trinitarian! Not because I am against their doctrine, but because I do not like adjectival Christianity. I am a Christian, a follower of the Lord Jesus, the Anointed One of God. I believe that He sent His Spirit as Comforter, to indwell and lead His church to the return of Christ.
3)"The answer is not in man." True, but men have been entrusted to preach the Gospel since Day 1, when Peter stood up to proclaim the Risen Savior, and new life in Him. "My advice to the gentleman who responded to my queston is that you put your trust in no man and don't let another interpret for you." I have heard both side claim Divine understanding to support their bent. Of course I read the Bible (Duh!), but I also read and listen to men. Then, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, I try to discern the mind of God.(in the cacophony:-) God's ways are always less complicated than man's, and always bear the fruit of peace and love.
Thank you always for your insightful commentary.
In Christ Jesus, charis |
| |
Can we be truely sinless and not perfect |
|
|
|
Heb 4:15
|
| |
Why do you not understand that this is the what Christ died for.Why did He have to be the first born of many bretheren? Christ died a man just like you and me.Jesus suffered like a man so just like you and me didnt have to . Jesus justified you ,just as though you never sinned.
The Flesh is weak but the Spirit is willing .What is sin and why dont you think it is possible to be without sin? Any thing that is not of faith is sin. If we walk in the spirit we will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.1 john 2:16 tells us what is not Gods so that we can aviod the sins.Lusts of the FLESH ,lusts of the EYES,and the PRIDE of LIFE.all fleshly, strange isnt it? I presume you have never laid hands on someone in the name of Jesus and seen them healed.
If jesus wasnt a man ,which he is, why did he suffer like we do? . His words on the cross were ,Father why has thou fosaken me, God could not look on sin. Even the Clouds covered up the sight from the heavens.
Gods dont die. Gods dont sweat blood in desperation then to surrender His will to the fathers. All these things men suffer,James 1 :14 states you are tempted when you are drawn away through your own lusts, Jesus was tempted with His needs,bread cause He was fasting and Power cause He knew who He was. Jesus went to the utermost temptation so we could have a way of escape because we are not tempted above what we are able. We are only tempted from what is in us ,and when we over come the temptation goes away. If we submit ourselves to God and resist the devil he shall flee. I ask you have you resisted temptation to the point of sweating blood? no me either, Jesus went all the way so we didnt have to. He made the road so that we could follow. Jesus said Be thou perfect as our Father in Heaven is perfect.why would Jesus say such a thing if it were not possible? Do you not conceive that is possible to walk in that same ministering anointing that Jesus had. Isnt that the Fulness of God? LOVE.
Isaiah 7:9 states If you do not believe surely you will not be established. Jesus said ;All things are possible to those that believe. Colossians 3:14 Love is the Bond of Perfection.
read John 11:11 Jesus states that Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up. the same as the little Girl. YIC. |
| |
Is being "slain in the spirit" biblical? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Is the practice of being 'slain in the spirit' a biblical practice? No, I really don't think it is. In fact, not only is the term not in the Bible, the experience is not in the Bible either. There are many examples in Scripture of human beings falling to their knees as they witness the incredible glory of God. This is what happened to the apostle John (Rev. 1). But the idea of being touched by a human being who is "anointed" by the Spirit and then being knocked cold is not a biblical phenomena.How are we to explain these experiences? It may be a psychological or emotional phenomena. Someone may so strongly expect to be knocked cold by the Spirit thought to be present in the anointed preacher that when the preacher touches him or her, down he or she goes. Sociologists have noted that this type of experience is actually common to many religions. There's also the possibility that the powers of darkness may be involved in this experience (2 Thess. 2:9). Many who believe in being 'slain in the spirit' like to cite certain passages such as Genesis 15:12-21, Numbers 24:4, 1 Samuel 19:20, and Matthew 17:6. But in every case they are reading their own meaning into the text instead of drawing the meaning out of the text. These passages in context offer no support for the idea of being 'slain in the spirit'. |
| |
Is being "slain in the spirit" biblical? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Steve, in each case that you cited above, it was God that was acting through His Presence and not an act of man (where someone who has 'anointing' lays their hands upon you and you are knocked cold). I agree with you and EdB that God can do whatever He wants, but I feel that calling this "temporary paralyzation" by God being 'slain in the spirit' is a bad way to describe such an experience. It should be more like "overcome by the Presence of God" or something like that. In any case, I feel that it must be God who governs and administers such a Presence or power over people instead of man. I realize that God could 'work through' man if He so desires, but there must be an undeniable Presence of God there that affects the entire congregation as a whole instead of a singled out person. I also believe that there is a difference between being 'slain in the spirit' and being 'pierced to the heart' (Acts 2:37). |
| |
Does anointing with oil heal? |
|
|
|
Mark 6:13
|
| |
Why did the disciples anoint sick people with oil? Was oil believed to have had any healing properties? |
| |
Does anointing with oil heal? |
|
|
|
Mark 6:13
|
| |
Olive oil was the medicine of the time. To anoint with one was applying the best medicine known, BUT applying it in a "faith" context. Applying it with a prayer for God to bring the needed healing.
Sometimes God's answer to our prayer for healing is seeing that the patient obtains the best professionally trained medicial care available. |
| |
Pls elaborate abt consecrated oil to be |
|
|
|
Mark 6:13
|
| |
The use of consecrated oil can be found in the Bible to anoint Holy objects: Ex. 29:36, 30:26, 40:10, Lev. 8:11 and Numbers 7:1. King David was anointed three times to be King (1 Sam. 16:13, 2 Sam. 2:4, 2 Sam. 5:3). Personal anointing is used to ordain a king or priest (Lev. 8:30, 1 Sam. 10:1,6, 1 Kings 1:39, 19:16, 2 Kings 9:3, 11:12, 23:30). Anointing an honored guest was customary treatment at a banquet (Psalm 23:5, 141:5, Luke 7:46, 2 Sam. 12:20, Ecclesiates 9:8, Dan. 10:3). In these cases, normal olive oil could be used not only to wash oneself, but also to pray. However, consecrated oil is not only used for priests but also to commission (Psalm 45:7, Zechariah 4:14, Messianic- Isaiah 61:1, Dan. 9:24, Luke 4:18, Acts 4:27, 10:38).. So we can see the differences in the uses of consecrated oil and normal oil for praying, anointing and commissioning. Oil is also used for healing (Mark 6:13, Luke 10:34, James 5:14). In 1 John 2:20,27, John speaks of the anointing of the Holy Spirit, who will teach us all things.. (Nave's Topical Bible) |
| |
Does anointing with oil heal? |
|
|
|
Mark 6:13
|
| |
Accordint to Mark 6:13 and James 5:14 they anointed. It seems like God responds to the obeying of His Word.God said it that settles it. |
| |
Does anointing with oil heal? |
|
|
|
Mark 6:13
|
| |
Jim: Thank you once again for your interest and your Note. In all humility, may I point something out to you?
Mark 6:13 (NASB) And they were casting out many demons and were anointing with oil many sick people and healing them.
Please notice: It says, "and were anointing with oil many sick people and healing them." Anointing and healing *many* sick people, not *all* the sick people.
As far as the meaning of James 5:14 in the context, I believe I have already discussed that.
Please remember this principle of Bible interpretation: "One of the basic principles of biblical interpretation is the *analogia scriptura*, the analogy of Scripture. In other words, we must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to understand its full and proper sense. And SINCE THE BIBLE DOESN'T CONTRADICT ITSELF, ANY INTERPRETATION OF A SPECIFIC PASSAGE THAT CONTRADICTS THE GENERAL TEACHING OF THE BIBLE IS TO BE REJECTED." (Emphasis by capitalization is mine.)
Jim, I say again, nothing I write to you is meant to be taken as a putdown in any way. I want you to be encouraged, not discouraged. I welcome your questions and answers. Thanks again for your note. God bless.
--JVH0212
|
| |
| To See More, Click Here... |
|
|
