Praying for the Sick

souldier2 · Apr 5, 2015

Messy said:
Yes He said those things to His disciples. It was to heal the sick. He blamed them when they couldn't help that man's son.

Who was he saying needed to fast and pray? Was it the disciples who needed to fast and pray or the possessed man?

Messy · Apr 5, 2015

souldier2 said:
Who was he saying needed to fast and pray? Was it the disciples who needed to fast and pray or the possessed man?

The disciples. He faster and prayed Himself too. He didn't tell the sick to do that.

souldier2 · Apr 5, 2015

Messy said:
The disciples. He faster and prayed Himself too. He didn't tell the sick to do that.

Thats what i believe too. It seems to make more sense.

Presbyterian Continuist · Apr 5, 2015

souldier2 said:
Who was he saying needed to fast and pray? Was it the disciples who needed to fast and pray or the possessed man?

Some think that Jesus never said it but the phrase fast and pray was added later by a scribe who believed that this was the way to cast out demons.

Alithis · Apr 5, 2015

Oscarr said:
Some think that Jesus never said it but the phrase fast and pray was added later by a scribe who believed that this was the way to cast out demons.

iv never heard that before .. and do not believe it as per brother Yun's testimony ( the heavenly man -book reference )- where after their evangelist group had tried to cast out a mocking demon from a man all day to no avail .. then they fasted and prayed and could do nothing.. the spirit of God moved upon that man and the demon was driven out .)

but it seems another trend these days to discredit the scriptures with theories of added in text ,, the problem with this is ..it contradicts the sovereignty of God in his power to preserve truth.
i'm just wary .. next some one will come up with a theory that the lord Jesus didn't really say john 3 16..it was just added in .. or you need not be born again, it was just added in..
again.. i just so very wary of such reports -they seem to be growing in number

Rose_bud · Apr 5, 2015

But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting

The fasting and prayer was not to cast out the demon per say, but the "kind" that needed to come out.. was there unbelief...IMO

Presbyterian Continuist · Apr 5, 2015

Alithis said:
iv never heard that before .. and do not believe it as per brother Yun's testimony ( the heavenly man -book reference )- where after their evangelist group had tried to cast out a mocking demon from a man all day to no avail .. then they fasted and prayed and could do nothing.. the spirit of God moved upon that man and the demon was driven out .)

but it seems another trend these days to discredit the scriptures with theories of added in text ,, the problem with this is ..it contradicts the sovereignty of God in his power to preserve truth.
i'm just wary .. next some one will come up with a theory that the lord Jesus didn't really say john 3 16..it was just added in .. or you need not be born again, it was just added in..
again.. i just so very wary of such reports -they seem to be growing in number

It is not to say that Jesus didn't believe in the power of fasting and prayer, but the statement contradicts what He said previously, that His disciples do not fast while He is with them, but will fast when He is no longer with them. Also, the reason why they could not cast out that demon was their lack of faith, according to Jesus. It seems strange that these were the ones who were sent out by Jesus and successfully cast out demons to the point where they came back rejoicing that demons were subject to them, and yet, straight afterwards they could not cast out this particular demon. If Jesus had stipulated fasting and prayer as a means of casting out demons, He would have instructed His disciples and the 72 others who went out to prepare themselves with fasting and prayer before, but we don't see that. Demons are cast out through the authority of the Name of Jesus and our faith in that Name.

The concept of fasting and prayer to prepare to do the supernatural works of Christ came into prominence during the time when the Church developed a mystical perception of approaching God and sensing His presence. There are echoes of this in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements today. But there is no record that any of the Apostles, Church fathers, or anyone else who prayed successfully for sick people were ever recorded as fasting and praying first. Can you imagine being confronted with a acutely sick person needing prayer and you said, "Oh, I will need to go and have a few hours fasting and praying first"? What about Smith Wigglesworth, riding on a Tram and seeing a guy lying in agony on the sidewalk. When he jumped off the tram and went to pray for him, did he tell the man to wait while he had a time of fasting and prayer? You can answer that one for yourself.

It is quite true that portions of the Biblical text were added by subsequent scribes. This is shown through the study of the different Greek texts, but none of these additions or editing have ever significantly changed the message of the Gospel. The most notable one is in Mark 16:9:20. Some have doubted the true of that reading because the original Greek manuscripts don't have it. But as an eminent commentator said, "It doesn't matter who the author of that section was, it is totally consistent with the ministry and practice of the Apostles and therefore it can be relied upon as being genuine."

It is quite true that in later manuscripts, bits were changed to suit the theology of the time. That is why researchers, when compiling a new translation of the Bible, study all the available manuscripts so they can get the best view of what the original authors wrote and meant. In their translations they will put the different meanings in notes or in the margin. The concern with some about the printed sermons of John G Lake was that they were not the full originals. Editors cut bits out that did not suit their theology. When you are reading reprinted sermons of famous men of God, look to see if there is an entry "edited by..." and you will see that what you are reading may not be the full version of what was actually preached. Fortunately with Lake's sermons, the genuine originals were preserved because his second wife was a shorthand secretary and took all his sermons down verbatum.

Souldier · Apr 5, 2015

Oscarr said:
It is not to say that Jesus didn't believe in the power of fasting and prayer, but the statement contradicts what He said previously, that His disciples do not fast while He is with them, but will fast when He is no longer with them.

How does it contradict it? It actually seems to support it even more because the disciples could not cast the demon out because they were not fasting and praying, so it actually seems to support the other scripture. BTW, im not sure what scripture you are referring to, my understanding is based on what you have said concerning that other scripture. If i misunderstand then please forgive my mistake.

Presbyterian Continuist · Apr 5, 2015

Souldier said:
How does it contradict it? It actually seems to support it even more because the disciples could not cast the demon out because they were not fasting and praying, so it actually seems to support the other scripture. BTW, im not sure what scripture you are referring to, my understanding is based on what you have said concerning that other scripture. If i misunderstand then please forgive my mistake.

Then the disciples of John came to Him, asking, "Why do we and the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?" And Jesus said to them, "The attendants of the bridegroom cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them, can they? But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast (Matthew 9:14-15).

This clearly indicates that the disciples of Jesus did not fast while He was still with them in the flesh. So, if it is true that some demons don't come out except by prayer and fasting, does this mean that the disciples were not able to cast out some demons because they did not fast? This seems to contradict the statement of Jesus to them when He said, "I give you authority over all the power of the evil one" (Luke 10:19). Jesus never said that He gave them authority over the evil one, except those demons where they need to fast and pray.

I have the interlinear Greek-English New Testament, and verse 21 of Matthew 17 which refers to the prayer and fasting is missed out completely. The footnote says that it has been omitted in the Nestle text of the Greek New Testament which is a rendering of the original and most reliable manuscripts. The synoptic verse in Mark 9:29 does not mention fasting at all, it says that this kind of demon can only come out by prayer alone. I say that it would be the prayer of faith consisting in the command to "come out of him", using our authority in the Name of Jesus which demons have to obey. So, if a demon does not come out, it is more likely because of our lack of faith in the Name to cast it out.

Messy · Apr 6, 2015

Oscarr said:
The concept of fasting and prayer to prepare to do the supernatural works of Christ came into prominence during the time when the Church developed a mystical perception of approaching God and sensing His presence. There are echoes of this in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements today. But there is no record that any of the Apostles, Church fathers, or anyone else who prayed successfully for sick people were ever recorded as fasting and praying first. Can you imagine being confronted with a acutely sick person needing prayer and you said, "Oh, I will need to go and have a few hours fasting and praying first"? What about Smith Wigglesworth, riding on a Tram and seeing a guy lying in agony on the sidewalk. When he jumped off the tram and went to pray for him, did he tell the man to wait while he had a time of fasting and prayer? You can answer that one for yourself.

Smith Wigglesworth always prayed. He never prayed more than 15 minutes, but 15 minutes couldn't pass without him praying. He didn't have to first go fast and pray, he was always ready.
They couldn't even come with Him to the mountain of transfiguration, I think that was the problem.

ByTheSpirit · Apr 6, 2015

There are biblical examples of the Apostles and even Jesus praying before they healed people. now I believe Matthew 17:21 to be an addition to the text, but Mark 9:29 is legit I believe. anyways, fasting is just one part of an effective prayer life, so Jesus saying this kind comes out only by prayer (Mark 9:29) really includes as an implied task, fasting.

That being said, I don't believe it means before we heal we need 2 hours in prayer. Though again, there is New Testament evidence that it can be useful to pray before ministering. I rather believe Mark 9:29 refers to a way of life.

Those who live in, continue in, never cease to pray will have power to cast out even this kind of demon.

By the way, the scripture references for what I said are:

Jesus in John 11:41-43
Peter in Acts 9:40
Paul in Acts 28:8-9

Frogster · Apr 6, 2015

Messy said:
Yes He said those things to His disciples. It was to heal the sick. He blamed them when they couldn't help that man's son.

Well, than we can stop blaming the sick, and wonder where the faith is, of those who blame the sick.

In other words, a classic scenario today is, if a preacher prays over the sick, and the sick don't get healed, somehow it is a lack of faith by the sick person, all while the preacher/pastor etc, who is also in the equation, gets away without blame. But if the person is healed, he, the pastor, shares and gets credit for that!

So some verses work both ways. So according to the verse, the disciples did not need the faith of the recipient, and Jesus did not blame the sick. Thanks, frog.

Messy · Apr 6, 2015

Frogster said:
Well, than we can stop blaming the sick, and wonder where the faith is, of those who blame the sick.

In other words, a classic scenario today is, if a preacher prays over the sick, and the sick don't get healed, somehow it is a lack of faith by the sick person, all while the preacher/pastor etc, who is also in the equation, gets away without blame. But if the person is healed, he, the pastor, shares and gets credit for that!

So some verses work both ways. So according to the verse, the disciples did not need the faith of the recipient. Thanks, frog.

A pastor who blames a sick person for being sick shouldn't be a pastor. The elders are to anoint the sick with oil and they shall recover. If it doesn't happen straight away my pastor just keeps on praying for you until it does. To be honest, lately someone wasn't healed, but he lead him to the Lord and he went to heaven. I didn't hear anyone blaming anyone.

Frogster · Apr 6, 2015

Messy said:
A pastor who blames a sick person for being sick shouldn't be a pastor. The elders are to anoint the sick with oil and they shall recover. If it doesn't happen straight away my pastor just keeps on praying for you until it does. To be honest, lately someone wasn't healed, but he lead him to the Lord and he went to heaven. I didn't hear anyone blaming anyone.

well, yes, they don't all (shall) recover.

Souldier · Apr 6, 2015

Oscarr said:
Then the disciples of John came to Him, asking, "Why do we and the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?" And Jesus said to them, "The attendants of the bridegroom cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them, can they? But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast (Matthew 9:14-15).

This clearly indicates that the disciples of Jesus did not fast while He was still with them in the flesh. So, if it is true that some demons don't come out except by prayer and fasting, does this mean that the disciples were not able to cast out some demons because they did not fast? This seems to contradict the statement of Jesus to them when He said, "I give you authority over all the power of the evil one" (Luke 10:19). Jesus never said that He gave them authority over the evil one, except those demons where they need to fast and pray.

I have the interlinear Greek-English New Testament, and verse 21 of Matthew 17 which refers to the prayer and fasting is missed out completely. The footnote says that it has been omitted in the Nestle text of the Greek New Testament which is a rendering of the original and most reliable manuscripts. The synoptic verse in Mark 9:29 does not mention fasting at all, it says that this kind of demon can only come out by prayer alone. I say that it would be the prayer of faith consisting in the command to "come out of him", using our authority in the Name of Jesus which demons have to obey. So, if a demon does not come out, it is more likely because of our lack of faith in the Name to cast it out.

Here is the problem. YOu seem to be suggesting that the two scripture may contradict each other and that the one scripture may not even be from the original text, you say it may be added by man. YOu say this may explain why they contradict each other. However they dont contradict each other but actually seem to suggest the same thing, which is that the disciples were not fasting/praying, and both scriptures both say they didnt fast, so they actually agree in that way.

However, now you are theorizing that the scripture may be suggesting a lack of faith. We must first establish whether we think this scripture is legitimate. Is the scripture legit, or is it instead something man has added later on? If its legit then we must take it as its stated, which says that the reason was a lack of fasting/praying. But if its not legit then we cannot say the reason was a lack of faith, because we have already established the scripture is not legit in the first place.

I suppose that the whole things seems like speculation on our part. Im not sure i want to use it as evidence of anything.

Souldier · Apr 6, 2015

Frogster said:
Well, than we can stop blaming the sick, and wonder where the faith is, of those who blame the sick.

In other words, a classic scenario today is, if a preacher prays over the sick, and the sick don't get healed, somehow it is a lack of faith by the sick person, all while the preacher/pastor etc, who is also in the equation, gets away without blame. But if the person is healed, he, the pastor, shares and gets credit for that!

So some verses work both ways. So according to the verse, the disciples did not need the faith of the recipient, and Jesus did not blame the sick. Thanks, frog.

Maybe its not necessarily a problem with their faith but instead their doctrine. Maybe they just need to prove all things as paul says. We all have problems with our doctrine, we all need to learn more i think. I think when we follow preachers and theologians then we will be following fallible men. WE sometimes think that a book written by some famous theologian or some famous preacher who started some denomination or movement, is infallible. However those books do contain some error and the only infallible book of doctrine is the scripture itself. If we learn from a fallible book that teaches us what the bible says then we are learning from a fallible man. But if we learn from the bible itself then we have a pure source. We may misunderstand the bible too at times but at least we know that its not the scriptures fault, but instead its our fault. However if we follow the misunderstandings of other men by following their books then its our fault or perhaps the fault of the author. My point is that if we learn from the bible then perhaps our misunderstanding will be diminished, but if learn from other fallible men then our misunderstanding may be multiplied rather than diminished.

Merlin · Apr 6, 2015

ByTheSpirit said:
Well not even Jesus healed everyone, so you are setting up a double standard that not even the Lord kept.

That is because many would not accept the healing.
Jesus can not heal if you are unwilling to accept the healing.

His hometown people rejected him and would not accept him as one who heals.
They wanted nothing to do with him or the idea of healing from him.

Rose_bud · Apr 6, 2015

What is very clear in the text is that the father of the boy had no faith. He is the one that was requesting the healing albeit for his son. He didnt even believe Jesus could. He said IF you can do anything. As opposed to YOU CAN DO ANYTHING!.. No servant is greater than his master. If he couldnt believe Jesus could, why would he believe his disciples...

Merlin · Apr 6, 2015

Rose_bud said:
What is very clear in the text is that the father of the boy had no faith. He is the one that was requesting the healing albeit for his son. He didnt even believe Jesus could. He said IF you can do anything. As opposed to YOU CAN DO ANYTHING!.. No servant is greater than his master. If he couldnt believe Jesus could, why would he believe his disciples...

He had enough faith to come to Jesus. That is all that is needed.

Messy · Apr 6, 2015

Merlin said:
He had enough faith to come to Jesus. That is all that is needed.

Yes, the unbelievers and muslims on the street all get healed on outreaches.

Praying for the Sick

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Senior Veteran

Disciple of Jesus .

Great is thy faithfulness, O God my Father...

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Come Lord Jesus

Galatians is the best!

Well-Known Member

Galatians is the best!

Regular Member

Regular Member

Paradigm Buster

Great is thy faithfulness, O God my Father...

Paradigm Buster

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency