http://newageofreason./2010/07/24/why-stevie-wonder-is-still-blind/

Just a food for thought.

Has Stevie Wonder come forward to say he wants to be healed?

Do you know that people who do not wish to be healed will not be healed no matter how much you pray for them?

Pastor Obadare probably knows that God wants to use him in his state of blindness (and he is working mightily through him). When you know what God's plans are for you, why would you go chasing something you don't need to get to where he is taking you?

My sister, Seyibrown, I love it when uncertainties, unknowns, and probabilities are employed as evidence to prove a case, or support an argument.  If you know, for a fact, that Stevie never wanted to be healed, present it.  By asking:

Do you know that people who do not wish to be healed will not be healed no matter how much you pray for them?

you, in effect, imply that he refused to be made whole, and that is why his condition persists.

Secondly, Mr. Stevie Wonder is used here as a sample of the blinds of the world.  There are many Stevies out there, many of whom I have personal knowledge of, who have scoured the four corners of the earth, in search of relief.  You may do well to present someone you personally know, who has been blind or crippled from birth who now has sight, or is not lame again, as a result of the faith healer's work. 

It also makes my day when "healers" pull the faith or belief card.  Many a times, when the self-styled healer fails, he blames the faith of the one requiring healing.  I’ll have you know that it is not the faith of the afflicted that is tried in any healing procedure, but that of he that intercedes, or the supplicant.  In this case, it is the minister himself.  Matt. 17, verses 19-20 read: “Then came the disciples to Jesus apart, and said, Why could not we cast him out?  And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief:” The unbelief of his disciples, not the afflicted.

Recall that Lazarus’ faith was not required because he was already dead. Yet, he received life. It was the faith of his sister that mattered. The Centurion’s servant who was healed was not there to demonstrate his faith. Rather it was the supplicant, the Centurion’s faith that counted. How about Jairus’ daughter? Did Jesus not resurrect her even though she was not the supplicant?

Again, you use probability to explain Pastor Obadare’s persistent blindness, and his continued service of the Lord.  You wrote:

Pastor Obadare probably knows that God wants to use him in his state of blindness (and he is working mightily through him). When you know what God's plans are for you, why would you go chasing something you don't need to get to where he is taking you?

Can you verify any of the above assumptions?  Do you know, for a fact, that God intends to use the pastor’s blindness?  Is the pastor certain the Lord sent for him?  We sometimes mistake our desire for God’s calling.

What I have to write next may appear insensitive but it is the bible truth.  Remember from the pages of the bible that God is not a God of confusion.  Once any words have come out of his mouth, they are never rescinded.  He is the God of yesterday, today, and tomorrow.  There is no need citing these facts.  In the light of that, why would God require Pastor Obadare’s services?

The 21st chapter of Leviticus reads:
“16] And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
[17] Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.
[18] For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous,
[19] Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded,
[20] Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken;
[21] No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God.
[22] He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy.
[23] Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I the LORD do sanctify them.”

Not everyone who preaches the word of God serves the Lord.  Remember the Lord’s instruction regarding the time of the end.  
“Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them” (Luke 21:8}.

People can do what they want in the name of serving God.  But he all-important question is: Did God send them? Jer.27 instructs:
[14] Therefore hearken not unto the words of the prophets that speak unto you, saying, Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon: for they prophesy a lie unto you.
[15] For I have not sent them, saith the LORD, yet they prophesy a lie in my name; that I might drive you out, and that ye might perish, ye, and the prophets that prophesy unto you.

See also Jer.29:
8] For thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Let not your prophets and your diviners, that be in the midst of you, deceive you, neither hearken to your dreams which ye cause to be dreamed.
[9] For they prophesy falsely unto you in my name: I have not sent them, saith the LORD.

There are many such Divine utterances, but I trust you get the picture.  As you can see, the fact that those prophets teach not to serve the King of Babylon is not enough to make them servants of the Lord.

@PrinceEmek

My second sentence is seperate from the first, hence my not joining them together and not leaving them in the same paragraph. I do not imply that Stevie wonder does not want to be made whole. I do not know what spiritual efforts he has made as regards his disability.

Will come back to the rest of your response shortly.

Can you verify any of the above assumptions? Do you know, for a fact, that God intends to use the pastor’s blindness? Is the pastor certain the Lord sent for him? We sometimes mistake our desire for God’s calling.

What I have to write next may appear insensitive but it is the bible truth. Remember from the pages of the bible that God is not a God of confusion. Once any words have come out of his mouth, they are never rescinded. He is the God of yesterday, today, and tomorrow. There is no need citing these facts. In the light of that, why would God require Pastor Obadare’s services?

The 21st chapter of Leviticus reads:
“16] And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
[17] Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.
[18] For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous,
[19] Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded,
[20] Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken;
[21] No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God.
[22] He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy.
[23] Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I the LORD do sanctify them.”

Jesus Christ is the only high priest who is without 'blemish' and who entered into the veil on our behalf, Pastor Obadare and any other physically disabled Ministers of God are only vessels.

Hebrews 7 vs 11-28 :
11 Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? 12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. 13 For the one concerning whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. 15 And this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, 16 who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is attested of Him,  “[b]YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER  ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK.”[/b]18 For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness 19 (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. 20 And inasmuch as it was not without an oath 21 (for they indeed became priests without an oath, but He with an oath through the One who said to Him,  “THE LORD HAS SWORN  AND WILL NOT CHANGE HIS MIND,  ‘YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER’”);
22 so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.
23 The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, 24 but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently. 25 Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.
26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; 27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. 28 For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath, which came after the Law, appoints a Son, made perfect forever.

Previous post continued . . . .

Not everyone who preaches the word of God serves the Lord. Remember the Lord’s instruction regarding the time of the end.

Matthew 7 v 16: 'Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?'

People can do what they want in the name of serving God. But he all-important question is: Did God send them? Jer.27 instructs

There are many such Divine utterances, but I trust you get the picture. As you can see, the fact that those prophets teach not to serve the King of Babylon is not enough to make them servants of the Lord.

Luke 8 v 17 : 'For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light.'

Stevie Wonder is still blind because all faith healing is fake. Simple.

manmustwac:

Stevie Wonder is still blind because all faith healing is fake. Simple.

this is absolutely incorrect. I dnt know y hes still blind,that 'all' faith healing is fake is totally false. Unless u gona prove it reasonably.

manmustwac:

Stevie Wonder is still blind because all faith healing is fake. Simple.

Good to post the whole article here so people dont confuse it with being all about stevie wonder

Of Oyakhilome and Prof.
For quite some time, I’ve wondered in a rather amused (or amazed) way why a lot of known people walk (except the paralyzed) around with disabilities. Think about this: A lot of televangelists and miracle working pastors promise healing and even show us healing scenes on TV.Right? Some days back, Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU) witnessed a clash whose politics bothers me not. The story: The President of the Students’ Union,Prof. an avowed Christian lay on a sick bed, afflicted allegedly with a magical spell. I wasn’t at all surprised that all the Christian prayers did him no good. I wasn’t at all surprised that all the Christian prayers did him no good. I wasn’t surprised that for weeks, no church was able to heal him.
OAU has close to 50 christian fellowships including those with well known “miracle-producing” parent bodies- Reedemed Christian Church of God(RCCG), Winners’ Chapel, Mountain of Fire and Miracles (MFM) etc. They all couldn’t do anything simply because there was/is nothing they could/can do. The same reason why Ray Charles, Stevie Wonder and Zohar Sharon are still blind. The same reason why Bernard Braggs and Marlee Martin are still deaf. The same reason why Teddy Pendegrass and Joe Eareckson Tada, herself an evangelist are still confined to the wheelchair.
Nigeria has an amazing perspective with a well known Pastor Obadare, a blind man who “heals” the blind. Yinka Ayefele is a gospel singer who is paralyzed from the waist down. These people will never get what they want simply because: They are well known. They are not the boy who was blind from birth but can now recognize the Pastor’s blue tie or his three fingers. Not the woman who has had polio since infanthood but can now dance with Pastor Chris Oyakhilome on stage. Not the one-in-the-thousand “woman at the Redemption camp today who is barren and the Lord says she will have children soon”.
Pastor, heal Stevie Wonder and please let’s stop having paralympians.

Seyibrown, when I engage in a debate, I do so making certain that the subject of the discussion does not run away.  The subject of this discussion is the authenticity of present-day healers.  The initiator of this thread, Abulbanaat, buttressed his opinion by saying that even a famous figure is yet to receive his sight, implying that if these healers were legit, somebody would have helped Stevie Wonder.

I agreed with him, pinioning that it was their chance to hit the mother lode on the wealth and power they crave.

You seemed to have an opposing view.  You injected the possibility that Mr. Wonder’s condition may be as a result of choice.  You appeared to blame the afflicted for the persistent condition.  It was you who introduced Pastor Obadare airing on the side that God wanted to use him in his work.  Even then, you weren’t so sure, as your position hinged on uncertainties.

I attempted to impress upon you that given the abundance of false prophets and teachers, how are we certain that these preachers are servants of the lord?  I used the scriptures to establish that God had rejected some of those.  You either agree with me, or you don’t.  If you don’t, refute my argument; don’t throw scriptures at me.  Use them. 

I asked a couple of questions that came back unanswered.  How can we engage in a discussion if you don’t answer questions?  I asked the following:

Can you verify any of the above assumptions?  Do you know, for a fact, that God intends to use the pastor’s blindness?  Is the pastor certain the Lord sent for him?  We sometimes mistake our desire for God’s calling.

You may do well to present someone you personally know, who has been blind or crippled from birth who now has sight, or is not lame again, as a result of the faith healer's work.

 
Instead, you came back with bible citations of your own.  I’d prefer you state an opinion, which you can then support with bible citation.  That would tell me what I’m going after.  This is not a show of who can cite the scriptures more.

I’ve read through your bible quotations and could have taken it any which way.  But how do I know what your point is.  The first rule in an argument is never to make your opponents case. So, state your position, and then support it with the Lord’s word.  Then we can go from there.

On that note, I’ll defer my response to your scripture until you’ve done justice to my questions and made clear what your point is so we don’t go down a different road.

No one could say it straighter or simpler than Manmustwac who wrote:

Stevie Wonder is still blind because all faith healing is fake. Simple.

And nothing could illustrate it more vividly than Mudley313’s post (see above).

@ Toba, you are not gonna turn the table.  The onus of a proof is on you or any peddler of faith healing.  I can produce at least 20 people, including two of my uncles, who have gone far and wide— from Father Ede to Sister… (I’ve forgotten her name) to Pastor Obadare, and are still no better than they were.

But all I ask you to do is produce just one person you personally know, who was blind, or crippled from birth, who can now see or walk, complements of Pastor this or Prophet that.

For these false ministers, this is a classic case of put up or shut up.  Let the healers show a known paraplegic or so who, sans the magic of modern medicine, walked again, by virtue of their healing power.  Let them show us one verifiable miracle, or pull tent.  Maybe, it’s time for a showdown, the kind that Elijah championed atop mount Carmel, when he stared down the prophets of Baal, as recorded in 1Kings 18: 20-46. 

Nigerian healers go all over the world preaching and healing, and they stood there and watched the only President who gave us direction, die.  There is not doubt that these evangelists crave power and wealth.  Can anybody tell me a shorter and easier way of achieving this than to have healed President Umaru Yar Adua?  The entire nation would have been his, served on a golden platter.

Has anybody asked why healing is now called faith healing.  There was no such term when Jesus walked the earth.  Contemporary Evangelists injected faith so they can impugn the afflicted for their failure.  But my post above debunks that tactic, as it is the faith of the one asking the favor from Christ that is relevant.

Is man the miracle worker or God? Have u ever seen any minister who claims h/she can heal without God doing the work through hm/her?
If u presented the case a of a relative,i know of a neighbour who got healed of a disease recently through same process. What about that?

I was dumbfounded when the president was allegedly hit with charm. Our educational institutions are meant to be places where moral and intelligence will be of utmost importance.

@ PrinceEmek

I wonder why you twist my words and sort of say what I do not say. It can be easily deduced my responses to this post that I do not believe that God does not heal, he did, is doing and continues to do. While I agree their are 'wolves in sheep's clothing out there, there are also true men of God and we can tell which is which by what they do; those who we cannot yet tell whether they are of God, we will find out the truth about them in time . You seem to say that since Pastor Obadare has a 'blemish in his eye', God is not using him, citing scriptures. I cited scriptures in response concerning Jesus being our only high priest 'without blemish'. No pastor on earth stands enters into the veil on our behalf, Christ did it once and for all. Children of God are vessels that carry the power of God, they do not work miracles, God works it through them.

Darling, God heals; I have prayed for someone with a mental problem and they got healed. I have other people I am praying for and I know God will heal them too.

You seem to know a lot of scripture but do you truly understand the scriptures? Do you let the Holy Spirit interpret the scriptures to you?
Those who seek understanding will find it.

I do not agree that all healing is fake! I hope this one line helps you understand my opinion!

If healing miracles are true then why does God not heal amputees and restore their amputated limbs?. . . . .

seyibrown:

I do not agree that all healing is fake! I hope this one line helps you understand my opinion!

So how can you tell the difference between genuine faith healing and fake faith healing because as far as am concerned its all fake. Some people have even been paid to act on stage.

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

I Thessalonians 5 v 21: 'But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good'

I John 4 v 1: 'Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.'

INVESTIGATE FOR YOURSELF. DON'T LET OTHER PEOPLE TELL LIE TO YOU THAT IT IS TRUE OR NOT TRUE! Also what are you looking to find? Is your mind already made up that it is a lie? Or do you want to find out the truth?

If healing miracles are true then why does God not heal amputees and restore their amputated limbs?.

@Mazaje
If you are asserting that God does not heal amputees, do you know any amputee who has come to God (with faith) to ask for his amputated limb to be restored and wasn't healed?

With such a generalizing,conclusive,sentimental,biased,myopic&stereotyped view of yours on this subject,if u re shown real/true healing, would u believe/have believe?

manmustwac:

So how can you tell the difference between genuine faith healing and fake faith healing because as far as am concerned its all fake. Some people have even been paid to act on stage.

Seyibrown;

There are a couple of things you wrote that rubbed me the wrong way, which I’d prefer to let slide, as the contrary would derail this discussion.

I don’t see myself as twisting your words.  You cannot write things and expect readers not to paraphrase, or even bring in converse interpretation.  I’ll give you an example.  You wrote:

Any intelligent person can tell from my responses to this post that I do not believe that God does not heal

Are you not, in effect, saying that only intelligent people can tell your belief?  Conversely, anyone who is incapable of telling your belief is unintelligent; or plain silly.  A hundred people would report it a hundred different ways.  That is the nature of the language. This is the reason why ambiguity is a no-no in the literary world.  You must leave no room for unintended interpretations.

There are things you mentioned that have no bearing to the issue at hand.  I have not said that God does not heal.  And neither have I impugned your belief in the healing ability of God.  And for goodness’ sake, why would you bring in spiritual purity when you fully understand that I was making reference to physical impairment?

And how does the order of priesthood fit in?  Whether a priest is of the line of Aaron and Levi, or whether the priesthood is after the order of Melchizedek, as Jesus was and still is, does not change the rules.  A priest must not have physical impairment, period.  You, yourself, stated that God’s words are irrevocable.  I know you are not saying that God didn’t order these physical requirements.  If we both agree that those were God’s words, how can he change them, if he said he wouldn’t rescind his words?  He is either a liar, or he is not.  You tell me.

This is where one’s ability to understand scriptures comes into play.  You can question my understanding of the scriptures to your heart’s content.  It’s your prerogative.  This is how I read and understand the bible.  I believe that the bible is the word of God.  I also believe that God’s pronouncements are irrevocable.  I also know that the bible cannot contradict itself.  You’ll agree with me that some scriptures appear to contradict each other.  It’s only that, appearance.

So, what do I do?  Armed with the foregoing conviction, I scour the bible, using all the tools at my disposal, including the prophecy of Isaiah: “Whom shall he teach knowledge? And whom shall he make to understand doctrine? Them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the bosoms.  For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little” (Isaiah 28:13).

So, let’s take our earlier disagreement as a guinea pig.  I cited God’s physical restrictions for priests.  Then you cited Paul’s epistle, which appeared to say that the Law had changed.  But we know that the Law, which God had pronounced, cannot change or be broken.  It cannot be taken back.  I see no need to cite the bible.  I believe you are aware of these provisions.  So, is there a conflict?  Does one scripture nullify the other?  My answer is no.  Paul’s statement of change coming with the Priesthood of Christ was not targeted at the priesthood requirement.  So, what was Paul talking about?

Remember that Paul was hot honored with the presence of Jesus.  He came in the game during overtime.  He never wrote Gospels.  He wrote letters; hence his writings were called epistles.  That particular letter was addressed to the Hebrews.  These were new converts, who were heretofore entrenched in the rudiments of the old.  You well know that old habits resist change.  Those Hebrew still held on to the old traditions that Christ sought to change.  Paul was admonishing them to let go of traditions of men and hang on to the commandments of God.

Before the coming of our lord, people sacrificed animals, by the medium of High Priests, to curry God’s favor, or gain remission of sin.  Getting them to forgo those personal efforts that they had latched onto for millennia and get under the umbrella of Christ’s sacrifice was a tough sale.

It’s like telling contemporary Christians to abandon Christmas observation.  The priesthood of Jesus did not change the requirements of priesthood, but the once all-important sacrifice.  Paul was trying to impress upon them that the sacrifice that was performed by the priests of Aaron and Levi of limited office had been suspended in favor of the of Christ’s sacrifice, which endures forever. 

Paul couldn’t have meant the law was abolished because Christ himself said he did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill.  And his letter to the Hebrews had nothing to do with the requirements of priesthood or the qualification of aspirants.  He only sought to encourage them to leave those scarifies and accept the new.

To reiterate, this topic is not about you, your belief, your practice, or your power.  It’s about those who say they are healers when all they do is perpetrate fraud on the people.  You cannot say you have no knowledge of self-styled Evangelists, crusaders, prophets, ministers, who go about preying on the naivety of the people.  They coined such terms as faith healing, love gift, point of contact etc.  Anybody, who does not see them for the fraud that they are, has himself to blame. 

As for me, I’ll exercise, to the fullest, my mandated right to prove every spirit, and doctrine, as passed on to me by Paul and John.  But since you have interjected yourself in the debate, I’ll tell you the same thing.  If you have the ability to pray a sick person to health, you must prove it, to be believed.  Pick out a person of your own choosing, but known by people to have a chronic or permanent disability.  Pray that person to health.  My preference would be a blind, paraplegic, or quadriplegic, since any improvement in their condition would be more readily verifiable.  Do that, and you will have my undivided attention and loyalty.

God heals, NO earthly man/woman heals by placing hands on people and proclaim to be a healer, Stop being duped!

I still await the name of the MOG that ever claimed to be the healer without referencing God

Manmustwac,

Yours is a very pertinent question:

So how can you tell the difference between genuine faith healing and fake faith healing because as far as am concerned its all fake. Some people have even been paid to act on stage.

Yes, we’ve been told to test, prove, and investigate all spirit and doctrine.  It’s not an easy task.  I’m sure you are familiar with the saying, “To be fore warned is to before armed.”  The fore knowledge that these frauds would unleash untold deception is something to hold on to.

You may want to know that the litmus test is not whether they recite the bible verses, call the name of God, of even effect the miracles they purport.  The Master himself warned us that these would even preach and proclaim the name of Christ. Luke 21:8 warns: “And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.”

They may even perform miracles.  But Jesus had these frauds in mind when he said: “Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?  [23] And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (Matt.7:22-23).

To compound matters, we were warned that these fellow would be so good in their trade that they would deceive the very elect.  In other words, the only ones immune to their deception would be the elect.  The funny thing is: when you exercise your right not to be deceived, they call you’re an unbeliever or faithless.  Go figure.

You must be ware of anyone who tells you that he is closer to God than you.  They may not put it that directly, but when a man told you to come to his church, revival, crusade or whatever, to be healed, be prayed for, or obtain salvation, what did you think he meant?  Some may say that you need to establish a point of contact.  You may be asked to touch the screen of your TV, buy a hankie, oil, soap, etc.  It’s like saying they know where Christ is and they would take you there.  The 24th chapter of Matthew gives off a solid, unmistakable alarm: “ [23] Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.  [24] For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.   [25] Behold, I have told you before.  [26] Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.  [27] For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.  There is no hiding where the Son of God is.

And old saying goes: “When you are in doubt, don’t.”  According to Jesus, the best place for effective prayer is in your home, in secret.   “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly” (Matt 6:6).

The most important question is: Why would we go to another human for anything if the Master himself, the creator of life, and the source of good health had empowered us with the ability to work wonders?  The only prerequisite is faith and steadfast belief.  And if you spruce things up with prayer and fasting, you are in.   “And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.  Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting (Matt. 17: 20-21).

“Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.  And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive” (Matt. 21:21-22).

What other authorization do we need?  Running to another for a favor from God is tantamount to conceding our God given certificate to another who may not know the way.

@ PrinceEmek,

There are a couple of things you wrote that rubbed me the wrong way, which I’d prefer to let slide, as the contrary would derail this discussion.

I don’t see myself as twisting your words.  You cannot write things and expect readers not to paraphrase, or even bring in converse interpretation.  I’ll give you an example.  You wrote:
Quote
Any intelligent person can tell from my responses to this post that I do not believe that God does not heal
Are you not, in effect, saying that only intelligent people can tell your belief?  Conversely, anyone who is incapable of telling your belief is unintelligent; or plain silly.  A hundred people would report it a hundred different ways.  That is the nature of the language. This is the reason why ambiguity is a no-no in the literary world.  You must leave no room for unintended interpretations.

I have re-worded the offending bit. I sincerely apologise, I meant no offence.

So, let’s take our earlier disagreement as a guinea pig.  I cited God’s physical restrictions for priests.  Then you cited Paul’s epistle, which appeared to say that the Law had changed.  But we know that the Law, which God had pronounced, cannot change or be broken.  It cannot be taken back.  I see no need to cite the bible.  I believe you are aware of these provisions.  So, is there a conflict?  Does one scripture nullify the other?  My answer is no.  Paul’s statement of change coming with the Priesthood of Christ was not targeted at the priesthood requirement.  So, what was Paul talking about?

Remember that Paul was hot honored with the presence of Jesus.  He came in the game during overtime.  He never wrote Gospels.  He wrote letters; hence his writings were called epistles.  That particular letter was addressed to the Hebrews.  These were new converts, who were heretofore entrenched in the rudiments of the old.  You well know that old habits resist change.  Those Hebrew still held on to the old traditions that Christ sought to change.  Paul was admonishing them to let go of traditions of men and hang on to the commandments of God.

Before the coming of our lord, people sacrificed animals, by the medium of High Priests, to curry God’s favor, or gain remission of sin.  Getting them to forgo those personal efforts that they had latched onto for millennia and get under the umbrella of Christ’s sacrifice was a tough sale.

It’s like telling contemporary Christians to abandon Christmas observation.  The priesthood of Jesus did not change the requirements of priesthood, but the once all-important sacrifice.  Paul was trying to impress upon them that the sacrifice that was performed by the priests of Aaron and Levi of limited office had been suspended in favor of the of Christ’s sacrifice, which endures forever. 

Paul couldn’t have meant the law was abolished because Christ himself said he did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill.  And his letter to the Hebrews had nothing to do with the requirements of priesthood or the qualification of aspirants.  He only sought to encourage them to leave those scarifies and accept the new.

You will find that blemished priests are still not allowed in Judaism. Pastor Obadare is not a Jew and was not chosen as a priest in that order. Given your opinion on  this disqualification, what is your opinion on circumcision as was commanded Abraham and his descendants? Any Minister of God not circumcised is not consecrated to God?

Do you remember the vision Peter saw before Cornelius' men arrived?

Acts 10 vs 9 - 15
9 On the next day, as they were on their way and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour to pray.
10 But he became hungry and was desiring to eat; but while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance;
11 and he saw the sky opened up, and an object like a great sheet coming down, lowered by four corners to the ground,
12 and there were in it all kinds of four-footed animals and crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the air.
13 A voice came to him, “Get up, Peter, kill and eat!”
14 But Peter said, “By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean.”
15 Again a voice came to him a second time, “What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy.”

Please consider what Peter was being told in that vision to your theory about blemishes disqualifying a follower of Christ from being a minister.

To reiterate, this topic is not about you, your belief, your practice, or your power. It’s about those who say they are healers when all they do is perpetrate fraud on the people. You cannot say you have no knowledge of self-styled Evangelists, crusaders, prophets, ministers, who go about preying on the naivety of the people. They coined such terms as faith healing, love gift, point of contact etc. Anybody, who does not see them for the fraud that they are, has himself to blame.

I stated in an earlier post that 'I do not believe that all healing is fake'. There are unscrupulous people who claim to be able to heal just for worldly gain.

Seyibrown;

Your apology is accepted.  Thanks for being magnanimous.

Regarding the rest of your post, I wasn’t certain I wanted to respond, in the light of the fact that this exercise is no longer about bringing out the truth, bible truth.  Rather, it’s taking the shape of “anything to win an argument.”  I will indulge you, lest some feeble mind believes that your citations support your argument.

Yes, you said:

I stated in an earlier post that 'I do not believe that all healing is fake'. There are unscrupulous people who claim to be able to heal just for worldly gain.

I never accused you of believing so.  Firstly, if there were an actual healing, how can it be faked?  OK, let’s get a handle on this thing.  We are dealing with two categories here: Those who pretend to heal.  They are among those you correctly tagged as unscrupulous.  We both agree they are frauds.

That leaves us with those who say they actually heal.  That is why they ask people to come to, or call, them.  The problem is: I have not seen any of these, and neither has anybody I know.  Hence my challenge, which nobody is eager to pick up, not even you (no offence intended).  So, until somebody picks up my challenge and proves me wrong, there are no faith healers, and any body purporting to be that is a liar.  It’s my challenge or nothing.

It gets worse.  Even in the unlikelihood that one can actually pray to God and a third person is healed, the question remains.  Is such a one a true servant of God?  I wrote this:

They may even perform miracles.  But Jesus had these frauds in mind when he said: “Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?  [23] And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (Matt.7:22-23).    

 
As you can see, the working of a miracle does not make one a servant of God.  These people actually prophesied, worked miracles, and even cast out devils in the name of Christ, enough to indict the Lord with their work.  Notice that Christ did not argue with their claim.  They may have actually done those things.  Nonetheless, he still denied them.  What does that tell you?  You can go on measuring a minister’s genuineness by his teaching, prophecy, and healing.  But Jesus is not impressed.

That leaves us with one question: How do we know or identify the real servants of God.  Somebody asked that question.  I believe it was Manmustwac who asked:

So how can you tell the difference between genuine faith healing and fake faith healing because as far as am concerned its all fake? Some people have even been paid to act on stage.

That should be the main focus of every believer.  Who among the preachers out there are true or false?  The Master himself testified that these false prophets would preach the name of Christ and even proclaim that he (Jesus) was the Christ, and would be so crafty and brilliant in their deceit that they should deceive many.  As a matter of fact, the only people immune to such deception are the elect.  Every other person is prone to deception.  This is where self-examination comes into play.  Implications?  Am I an elect?  If yes, I’m immune to their deception.  If not, I can be deceived.

I shall respond to your argument on the physical qualifications of a priest in the next segment.

Steve Wonder Is Still Blind because he has not taken the Mark of the Beast in the eye to enable him to see, that he is in hell for seeing.

Steve wonder is still blind because he has not believed, Even Jesus required peoples faith to heal them.
If he believe, He would have come to nigeria

[/quote][quote author=mazaje link=topic=484857.msg6487088#msg6487088 date=1280599773]
If healing miracles are true then why does God not heal amputees and restore their amputated limbs?. . . . .

Amputees dont need healing. Healing is a repair, What the amputee needs a a recreation!.

Seyibrown;

You wrote:

You will find that blemished priests are still not allowed in Judaism. Pastor Obadare is not a Jew and was not chosen as a priest in that order. Given your opinion on this disqualification, what is your opinion on circumcision as was commanded Abraham and his descendants? Any Minister of God not circumcised is not consecrated to God?

You keep bringing up Obodare’s priesthood.  Something tells me that you don’t even read my post.  If you did, you would read this:

Whether a priest is of the line of Aaron and Levi, or whether the priesthood is after the order of Melchizedek, as Jesus was and still is, does not change the rules.  A priest must not have physical impairment, period.  You, yourself, stated that God’s words are irrevocable.  I know you are not saying that God didn’t order these physical requirements.  If we both agree that those were God’s words, how can he change them, if he said he wouldn’t rescind his words?  He is either a liar, or he is not.  You tell me.

  God set the guidelines for choosing his priests, and he said he would never rescind his orders. That should be clear.  This is not about lineage or heritage.  It’s about the office.  For example, let’s say there is some ordinance regarding the conduct of a king.  Once one is made a king, one is expected to abide by those rules, irrespective of the fact that he may have been a pauper, or royalty.  His lineage or prior position does not change anything.

Same thing goes for the game of football.  The league established the rules of the game and the conduct of players.  Once you are signed up as a member of a team, you must abide by the rules.  It would not matter if you were drafted, traded, picked up from the streets, or promoted from the position of a water boy.  Once you become a member of a team, you play and act according to the dictates of the league.  You will put on approved uniform, and obey the referees etc.  If you don’t, you get axed, period. 

Same thing goes for priesthood.  It doesn’t matter through which priesthood one is called under, Melchizedek, Aaron, Levi, or of gentile extraction.  Jesus himself had no physical deformity.  Does Jesus not lead and teach by example?  How many of Jesus’ apostles and disciples, 120 total, do you know had physical impairment?  Not a one.  If he had scrapped the regulation he put in place thousands of years before, wouldn’t he have demonstrated it by selecting a cripple or a hunchback as one of his apostles?

In the words of President Ronald Reagan, “There you go again.”  Once again, you pull scripture that has no connection with the issue at hand.  Yes I remember Peter’s vision, but it has nothing to do with the physical qualification of priests.  I’ve seen people use it to justify eating unclean food, now you use it to strike down God’s priesthood requirement?

For starters, the vision was not a commandment; it was an illustration.  Jesus used it to prepare Peter for a mission ahead.  Secondly, the issue at hand was not food or diet.  Thirdly, Peter’s instruction was to facilitate the conversion of Cornelius, not to ordain him.  Cornelius was a just and righteous man, but he did not know Jesus.  He was to be taught about Christ and be baptized, not made a minister.

God does not wish any soul to be lost, but that doesn’t mean that every believer should be a priest.  If you read to the end of the chapter you’ll find that he was not yet a Christian.  It was Peter’s mission to make him one.  By contrast, Paul’s conversion and priesthood happened at the same time.  He was not a cripple either.  So, conversion has nothing to do with ordination, or consecration.   

That makes the hereunder statement, which you made, biblically inaccurate.

Please consider what Peter was being told in that vision to your theory about blemishes disqualifying a follower of Christ from being a minister.

Cornelius was not a follower of Christ, and neither was he minister, in a priestly capacity.  Should God have required his services as a priest, be assured he would have to satisfy the physical requirements, first.

One thing is for sure: God does not have two sets of commandments, one for the Jews and another for the gentiles.  Remember: one Lord, one doctrine, and one faith.

Regarding circumcision, all I can say is this: If it’s God’s priestly requirement, then, it is in effect, and ought to be observed.  God makes the rules, not me.  I obey and teach them.  As a bible investigator, your job is to research and find out what God commanded, not look for ways to circumvent his laws.  That was the downfall of King Soul.  Adam was guilty of the same sin.  Rather than obey God’s commandment, he flunked it and then blamed God for his failure.

To the best of my knowledge, only two ordinances have been modified, not changed or abolished, but modified.  The first was our diet.  Adam and Eve had the instructions to eat only herbs.  So, man was herbivorous.  He remained that way until after the deluge, when God modified our diet and included meat, thus making man omnivorous.

The second was the ritual of burnt sacrifice.  That ordinance was observed until the live sacrifice of our High Priest, Jesus Christ, suspended the former.  Note that I said, suspended, not abolished or cancelled.  Christ had paid up for our transgressions to the end of this system. Burnt sacrifice will return to God’s temple at the coming of Our Lord. 

I have always wondered why all these healers never managed to heal a hunchback.