Featured The Blood covenant....so much more...

1. The Bible commands us to be content with what we have. Hebrews 3:5: “Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.”

2. The Apostle Peter had to say to a poor beggar that he didn’t even have any money to give him (Acts 3:6). Surely Peter wasn’t lying. He actually had no money!

3. If the Apostle Paul was saying that we should be physically, financially rich, then he miserably failed to practice what he preached. Paul himself was an extremely physically poor man (Paul says that he didn’t even have proper food and clothing a lot of times, and that he was homeless; see 1 Cor. 4:11). If Paul meant that we should all be financially rich because Jesus became poor, why wasn’t he rich? Why was he so poor? And why did he suffer so much (as he says a few chapters later in 2 Cor. 11:23-28).

 

AWAKEN, I'm going to say this as kindly, but firmly as I can:

1. Taking this verse to teach that God has said he wants us to prosper financially, and has actually promised to prosper us if only we ask in faith for financial prosperity, is a demonstrable error that completely ignores the context and intent of the author.

2. If you truly believe that God has promised financial prosperity and health to all his children, you are headed for a life of disappointment and frustration, of soul-searching in yourself for some sin that must have caused your hardship, and frustration with God when he allows you to remain in a difficult financial or health situation for longer than you would like. We disagree on exact expressions of manifestations of the Spirit, and that's fine...but on this issue and you really need to go back and look at the lives of some Biblical characters and historic Christians to see that Following God faithfully simply DOES NOT equal financial prosperity, or even good health. You are by implication saying that American Christians are the most faithful, because we are the most prosperous, and you are saying by implication that those Christians in Haiti and Zimbabwe must not trust God, or they would be better provided for.

 

Can you see:
"Timothy take a little wine for thy stomach sake and for thine oft infirmities."
--Timothy was often sick, probably from impure water or water related ailments, so common around the world.

"Trophimus have I left sick at Miletus.
--Paul was unable to heal him either.

Philippians 2:25 Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labour, and fellowsoldier, but your messenger, and he that ministered to my wants.
26 For he longed after you all, and was full of heaviness, because that ye had heard that he had been sick.
27 For indeed he was sick nigh unto death: but God had mercy on him; and not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow.
--Paul was unable to heal Epaphroditus. He remained sick for some time. In fact he almost died from his sickness causing much sorrow among the believers.

According to Galatians, the Lord never did heal Paul's infirmity of poor eyesight.

What is the saying that Jesus gave:
Physician heal thyself.
Paul was unable to heal himself, and unable to heal all these others as well.

 

Let me just say this as concisely as I can.
The above opinion posted is wrong.

It is wrong for the following reasons.
1. Paul rarely, if ever, wrote his own letters. He used an amanuensis, someone else that would write for him.
Example:
1 Corinthians 16:24 My love be with you all in Christ Jesus. Amen. [SIZE=-1]The first epistle to the Corinthians was written from Philippi by Stephanas, and Fortunatus, and Achaicus, and Timotheus.[/SIZE]
--He had a lot of help with that one.

2. Most scholars throughout the centuries believe that his poor eyesight to be his thorn in the flesh.

3. He begins to refer to it here:
Galatians 4:13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.
--He was weak when he preached to them. The infirmity of the flesh was his eyesight, for it fits the context.

4. Galatians 6:11 Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand.
(ESV) See with what large letters I am writing to you with my own hand.
(MKJV) See in what large letters I write to you with my hand.
--It is evident that Paul was using "large letters" as the Scripture says he was. This was because of his infirmity, the thorn in the flesh God had given him. His eyesight was poor. He was doing this himself without the help of an amanuensis.
--This is one of his shorter epistles, not his longer ones. Unlike Romans, 1Corinthians, 11Corinthians, this had only six short chapters.

5. Read the context. From that verse (6:11) onward, he speaks of suffering, especially in the body, in the light of those who oppose the gospels such as the Judaizers who would oppose the very gospel of Christ. Were they also willing to suffer afflictions as Paul had, and still continue to travel and preach the gospel?

Galatians 6:18 Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen. [SIZE=-1]Unto the Galatians written from Rome.[/SIZE]
--There is no mention of anyone else writing this epistle for him, as in other epistles. He wrote it himself, under the hardship of weak eyes, out of his love for the Galatians.

 

I apologize, I meant to delete the public comment, but by the time I saw I had failed it was too late to edit.

 

They said it in a derogatory way. The will of the Father was for Jesus to suffer, and so he did?
If the prosperity gospel was true, why didn't Jesus heal himself, and enjoy life to the fullest? Why did he say: "Foxes have holes, the birds of the air have their nests, but the Son of man has no place to lay his head for rest."
He walked this earth, penniless. He owned no lands, had no riches, lived in other peoples' homes, was mocked by others, etc.
But this gospel that you preach ought to say that Jesus should have been rich with monetary goods. Something doesn't fit, does it?

They said it to Jesus as a common idiom. But that common idiom is still applicable. What good is a doctor who is constantly sick and unable to take his own advice to get well? If Paul had the power to heal others then why not the power to heal himself?

Would you take your car to a mechanic who didn't know how to fix his own car?

 

So you will accept that in some circumstances, God might allow his children to suffer, even for extended periods of time, for some greater purpose, if it is their calling? Even if they pray in faith for God to remove the suffering?

 

You missed the point.

1. You failed to answer about the OTHER people who remained sick in the NT that DHK mentioned. (Trophimus, Epaphroditus). You have conveniently left them out of your response.

2. In this case, you are merely speculating as to whether Timothy was ever healed of his illnesses. The Bible doesn't say.

3. The main point is not about healings dying out, but that even in the NT era, God did not ALWAYS heal everyone who wanted healed.

 

You conveniently took an idiom I used and derailed the entire thread. I wasn't talking about Jesus. I was talking about Paul, Timothy, Trophimus, Epaphroditus, and others that did not receive healing. Not everyone was healed. It is not God's will that everyone is healed. I don't like to get personal but you should know this fact from personal experience. We all do. I also have a mother that died of cancer. I have a father who died of pneumonia. Sickness took them both. Why didn't God heal them. There is one sickness that God never heals us of. That is death.
It is appointed unto man once to die, and after that the judgment.
We all face death; the time and place appointed is up to God.

 

You manage to reply to the parts of the post that you know we agree on. I will copy and paste this so you will have it for the third time to reply to:

Do you agree?