Thursday, March 11, 2010

Jeffrey and Marci Beagley sentenced to 16 mo each in Son Neil's Prayer Death


The game is over and the sentence passed out. The Beagleys get 16 months sentence each in their son's prayer-death.
Click on title to view video of the sentencing and read the transcript.

The judge said:
""There needs to be respect for religious freedom, accompanied by personal accountability and responsibility," Campbell said.

Maurer said the Beagleys and the congregation knew about medical care but refused it.

"These two cases illustrate a crime that was a product of an unwillingness to respect the boundaries on freedom of religious expression," Maurer said. "They've continued to use spiritual treatment practices in exclusion of medical treatment, even when their children were in extreme harm's way."

It would appear that the courts are no longer turning a blind eye to the needless and cruel prayer deaths, when parents foolishly neglect to get their children needed medical treatment in the face of their child's imminent death. If a team of elders, and the parents and 200 church members can't move the hand of God to obtain a healing for a boy on the brink of death, something is wrong with this picture, and I don't think it's God.

Saturday, February 27, 2010

The Harlot Church System




This excellent book is not targeting the GAOTCB, but the condition of the overall condition of churches in general-however-not excluding the Church of the First Born.
The Harlot Church System
"Come Out Of Her, My People"

Charles E. Newbold, Jr.

"Show the house to the house of Israel that they may be ashamed of their iniquities, and let them measure the pattern." Ezekiel 43:10

"The trumpet of the Lord is sounding an alarm to God's holy remnant to 'come out of her My people, that you be not partakers of her sins and that you receive not of her plagues.'" Revelation 18:4

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Spiritual Abuse: An Introduction




Course: Spiritual Abuse: An Introduction

Presenter: Jeff VanVonderen

Lecture 1 of 3: Healthy and Abusive Spiritual Dynamics

These presentations are part of a 10-part course entitled "Breaking the Silence on Spiritual Abuse". The series includes presentations by Dave Johnson and Lynn Heitritter.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Could There be Spiritual Abuse in the COFB?

How to recognize spiritual abuse
Could there possibly be spiritual abuse
in the COFB?
According to all the earmarks of a cult,
the answer is definitely yes!

Monday, February 8, 2010

The Truth About Healing




Should a Christian use the services of medical doctors? Does the Bible forbid the use of medicines? Even more importantly, if God has allowed a sick person to remain ill and if it is not God’s will to heal the person miraculously right now, would it be wrong to seek medical aid? Would seeking such aid be interfering with God’s will?

These are important questions, because the answers have serious implications — implications of suffering or relief, life or death. They are also questions that may not even occur to most people, and may seem unnecessary to some. But the questions do occur to sincere persons who are laboring under certain false impressions about divine healing and the Bible position on it.

What the Bible says about doctors and medicine

The Bible is the basis for a Christian’s faith. We should seek the basis of our answers there.
Since the Bible is the basis for a true Christian’s faith, we should seek the basis of our answers there. When we look into the Bible, we find this: God has nowhere in his Word commanded Christians to avoid doctors or checkups, nor to refuse medicines, blood transfusions, inoculations or surgery.

Certain verses that are misunderstood as dictating against medical aid will be reviewed shortly. But many other scriptures either show God’s neutrality toward medicine, or even lean toward the use of medicines as appropriate.

Genesis 17:10-14, for example, commands the procedure of circumcision to Abraham. God ordained this minor surgery, so there is obviously nothing sacrosanct about human skin; cutting into the flesh for medically related purposes is not inherently defiling.

Physicians are called Joseph’s "servants" in Genesis 50:2. And the word for physicians here is the same word used for God as healer in Exodus 15:26.

Proverbs 17:22 states, "A merry heart does good like a medicine." This verse does not cast medicines in a negative light. To the contrary, the metaphor is a positive one.

In Isaiah 38:21 we find the prophet Isaiah (upon God’s directive) prescribing a poultice for Hezekiah’s boil. While the healing may have been supernatural, with the poultice only symbolic, clearly such a self-help procedure was not considered wrong. If the healing was not supernatural but the result of the poultice, then we find God prescribing a helpful medicinal technique that worked! If the healing was supernatural, here is strong proof that one may be healed by God even though he or she uses a self-help procedure as well!

In Jeremiah 8:22 the statement about Gilead approves of physicians, albeit metaphorically. Jeremiah 30:13 equates the lack of medicine with a consequent lack of healing, and Jeremiah 51:8 says medicine is the way for Babylon to be healed. Although these examples are metaphors, they imply that medicines are useful. One can hardly conclude that God is against physicians or medicines by such neutral or positive usage.

Ezekiel 30:21 speaks of Pharaoh’s arm being broken and not being healed because it was not bound up. This is metaphorical language, but it logically follows, without the slightest contrary indication of it being wrong, that Pharaoh’s arm might have been "healed" if had it been bound — that is, the healing could come through a physical procedure.

One final verse from the Old Testament is especially telling. Ezekiel 47:12 shows healing medicine will be made from the leaves of trees that are nourished by waters from the new temple in the new Jerusalem. Revelation 22:2 echoes this scenario.

In the New Testament Jesus Christ said, "Those who are well do not need a physician, but those who are sick" (Luke 5:31). See also Mark 2:17 and Matthew 9:12. Further, in Luke 4:23 Jesus quotes the proverb, "Physician, heal yourself," and applied it to himself. In neither case does Christ give so much as a hint at disapproval of physicians.

Luke was a physician. The Bible nowhere states that he stopped using all his skills after his conversion.
Colossians 4:14 refers to Luke as the "beloved physician," showing that Luke was a physician and was well thought of. The Bible nowhere states that Luke stopped using his skills after conversion, and it would not be proper to conclude that he did merely from the Bible’s silence on the subject.

Although our survey has been brief, taken as a whole, no one can conclude from these verses that the Bible in any way condemns doctors or medicines. On what grounds, then, do some conclude that medicines and doctors are wrong? The answer is that this misconception arises both from 1) misunderstanding certain verses that at first reading can appear to urge against the medical profession but that in reality do not, and 2) faulty conclusions of reasoning.

Misunderstood verses

The verses cited most often in supposed proof against the use of physicians or medicines are 2 Kings 1:1-4 and 2 Chronicles 16:12-13.

2 Kings 1:1-4 cites the example of King Ahaziah of Israel, who was sick and sent to Baalzebub, the god of Ekron, to see if he was to recover from the disease. God’s response through his prophet Elijah in verse 3 was, "Is it because there is no God in Israel that you are going to inquire of Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron?"

The Bible condemns ancient practitioners who relied on pagan gods, amulets, incantations or other forms of magic or superstition. King Ahaziah sent to Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron, to find out if he would recover from a sickness, in much the same way King Saul inquired of the witch of Endor before his final battle. Ahaziah should have inquired of God. But he was asking about the future from a false god. This passage is about idolatry; it has nothing to do with getting medical help.

In another example, near the end of his life King Asa was reprimanded by God because in a very serious disease he did not seek God, but sought the physicians (2 Chron. 16:12-13). These physicians may or may not have been priests or magicians of some false religion. But even if they were just plain physicians, the problem was that Asa did not seek God!

Certainly, no Christian should ever seek humans instead of God, nor trust in the medical profession as if it were a god. Jeremiah 17:5 states, "Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart departs from the Lord."

In summary, the Bible simply does not condemn people for seeking practical and scientific help with their illness if they first have their trust resting on God. God wants us to examine any health problem and make wise decisions, while looking to him to lead and guide us in those decisions. That is what God expects us to do in all aspects of this life. Notice Proverbs 3:5-6: "Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct your paths." Yes, in any decision of any consequence we have to make, it should be our way of life and our habit to go to God for help and wisdom — and this applies when seeking medical attention or health advice for illness as well as in any other aspect of life.

Illogical arguments

The supposed proofs against the use of medicines or doctors do not all rest upon misused specific scriptures. Some rest on confused thinking.

One view is that to use doctors is a sin because doing so denies the sacrifice of Christ, who was beaten and carried upon himself our sicknesses. This view is founded on the misconception that sickness is the result of "physical sin" and the belief that healing is the forgiveness of such "physical sin" through Christ’s beating. These misconceptions were shown to be wrong in chapter 1.

We saw that supernatural healing is an answer to prayer linked to Christ’s sacrifice in the same way as all other answered prayer. When we understand this, we can see that seeking physical help in sickness is no different than seeking financial help when you lose your job.

Another view is the statement quoted at the beginning of this chapter: if it is God’s will not to heal us, then we shouldn’t contravene his will by trying to heal ourselves with medicines.

But this reasoning is wrong! It assumes that if it is God’s will not to heal us supernaturally, it must also be God’s will that we stay sick. On what ground is this assumption made? Certainly not on biblical ground. The Bible does not say God wants us to stay sick. It would be like saying that if God doesn’t supply us food supernaturally, then he wants us to go hungry.

God wants you to learn how to handle the trial of illness as wisely as any other kind of trial.
Is it sensible to believe that just because God does not decide to supernaturally intervene, he doesn’t intend your body to get better? The Bible teaches that God wants you to learn how to handle the trial of illness as wisely as any other kind of trial. He wants you to use judgment and wisdom in taking advantage of all lawful means at your disposal to help yourself, while trusting ultimately in him. This is the purpose of any trial — to learn lessons and wisdom as you help yourself all you can while trusting in him.

Nor can a person conclude that just because God hasn’t healed a person of a life-threatening illness that God wants this person to die. The presumption is the opposite — namely, that God has given you life and that it is your duty to safeguard that life by whatever reasonable and wise course is open to you that does not contravene his law.

Obviously, there is a time to die, and there is a time when more medical treatment merely prolongs agony. Everyone must make his or her own decision about such things in a spirit of prayer and meditation. But because you may die if you do nothing does not mean God wants you to do nothing. He may want you to learn to take some responsibility for yourself, learn to manage the trial of illness with all lawful means, and live for many years in service to him and in good health!

To teach you lessons, it is possible that God will intervene to heal you slowly — perhaps even through various circumstances he leads you into — rather than supernaturally and all at once. Some of the circumstances he might use could include medical procedures. Certainly God is in no way stopped from intervening any way he sees fit, even while one is in a hospital bed or during surgery. God’s hands are not tied!

This does not mean he cannot heal immediately, only that he alone can choose the time and type of his intervention. But for you to refuse medical aid since God did not heal you immediately is to eliminate one of the avenues through which God might help you — to say in effect, "Heal me my way or not at all." On what logical grounds would you do that?

To repeat, just because God doesn’t heal you doesn’t mean he wants you to be sick. He may have allowed the illness, but he probably didn’t cause it (although in some rare cases he may have). You may have caused it — although perhaps in ways you don’t realize. Or your environment might be to blame. But no matter what caused it, God may want you to get well, although he may want you to learn how to deal in wisdom with the self-help measures at hand so you learn wisdom and judgment.

In most cases God uses illness as he uses any trial humans face in life. He uses it to test and try our faith and our wisdom in seeking solutions. To become sick and then refuse to do anything about it because it might not be God’s will to supernaturally heal you — that is, to freeze in your tracks and do nothing — is as childish as refusing to look for a job when you are out of work and God doesn’t supernaturally send someone to your door with money! It makes no sense. God wants us to do what we can.

Again, not to seek medical aid because God hasn’t healed you is to conclude that because he hasn’t chosen to intervene supernaturally, he wants you to stay sick or wants you not to help yourself by medicines or any other way. The Bible nowhere states or implies this.

Trusting in humans?

Another view against the use of doctors is the belief that one who uses them is trusting in humans instead of God. Of course, it is possible to have no faith in God and almost superstitious faith in human scientific knowledge. A person can trust humans instead of God (not just in healing, but in any area of life). This can be true, but it need not be true.

One who seeks medical aid does not by definition trust humans instead of God, just as a person who uses an employment agency is not by definition refusing to trust God. It is simply a matter of one’s internal attitude. We should always trust in God even though we seek human help (in health, in finding a job, or in any other trial). True faith in God and using self-help are not mutually exclusive. We can use doctors’ help without treating them like gods and placing faith wrongly in them.

Physicians are only mortal humans and can work only with the laws God designed to speed, enhance or aid recovery. God has never condemned that. Healing is not a "test of righteousness"; neither is going to a physician a "test of righteousness." It does not show a lack of faith in God’s ability to heal and it does not prevent God from performing a miracle. (Of course, if a person holds an almost superstitious awe for doctors, as some people do, then his or her attitude is not one of faith in God.)

Another perspective is that using a physician is "throwing faith out the window." This statement assumes that faith in God and use of a doctor are opposites. In this sense the statement is merely another way of saying that if you have some confidence in science, such as trusting that an airplane can fly, you don’t have faith in God.

Faith in God is a matter of the heart, between a person and God, and is not interrupted by seeing a doctor. If a person thinks his or her faith is hurt by seeing a doctor, then that person simply has confused some other attitude of mind with faith.

A person needs to understand what faith is and how faith relates to healing. A person who knows that faith is trust in God to do what is best — a person with real faith — never throws it away.

Another view is that the medical profession is one of this world’s humanly devised sciences made by a civilization cut off from God. This is true, but it is also true of virtually every other aspect of civilization — including the automobile, airplane, computer and telecommunications! The fact that humans have done something without God does not in itself condemn it. The Bible must be our guide for what is sin and what is not. The Bible simply does not label doctors, medicines and surgeries as sin.

Two final arguments

Two more arguments are sometimes offered to argue that a Christian should never use the medical profession. The first is that medical science attempts to stop basic health laws from exacting their penalty. Of course, this would apply to setting broken bones just as much as it would to other medical procedures. This argument loses most of its force once we remember that breaking a basic health law is not in itself a sin. Since it is not a sin, applying the term penalty to sickness is not appropriate in a spiritual sense.

Further, no one can stop any law of God — even a natural law — from working. If you drop a glass, it falls and it may break. You can glue it together again and it may hold water, but it is not a new glass. In like manner, medical procedures use one set of natural laws to control other natural laws. Medicines work within the physiological laws God has created.

The final and related argument against the medical profession is that medicines are wrong since they deal with effects instead of causes. This is often, but not invariably, true. The reason medical science usually deals with effects and not causes is that the causes are often not plain, and even if they are plain, they are often not controllable by the doctor (they may or may not be controllable by the patient). It makes no sense to blame the doctors for what they don’t know or can’t control. Even so, the medical community today does tend to advocate a preventive approach to illness through proper diet and exercise.

Though it can be argued that the medical profession should look harder for causes, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t treat the effect. If a bone is broken, it should be set, and repairing the damage does not in any way imply that we no longer care about the cause! It is good to help alleviate suffering, that is, to help alleviate effects. It is ludicrous to ignore the suffering of effects just because they are effects. Both the causes and the effects should be dealt with. Finding a cause can help a future patient, but it may do nothing for the one suffering now. Treating the illness — the effects — does.

This chapter has concentrated on proving that the Bible does not condemn doctors, medicines or other scientific methods of helping oneself in illness. But remaining are the practical matters of what a sick person should do when sick. Is it always best to see a doctor? If one does so, what kind of doctor should one see? Are natural remedies to be preferred over medicines? Also, what position does the church take about illness and healing, and what advice and service does its ministry extend?"

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Doctors, Faith & Medicine



What the Bible says about Doctors & Medicine?
by Dale Brown

It is the conviction of many religious people that to use medicine or to rely on medical science one is failing in their faith toward God. As a result some endure much undue suffering, and at times die from ailments that might otherwise be cured through the most basic of treatments.
The awesome nature of the living being has been observed and studied since the beginning of creation. The psalmist wrote, "I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; wonderful are Thy works and my soul knows it very well" (Psm. 139:14). Physicians will acknowledge that regardless of their treatments the human body is quite resilient and will heal itself of most ailments whether treated or not. But when one experiences trauma do to a severe accident or when the immune system is compromised in some way a patient will more than likely die without medical or divine intervention. A broken limb might very well heal on it’s own but a little help from the X-ray machine will help the doctor to set the bone in the proper position.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses often carry a "no blood" card, a legal document declaring refusal to accept a blood transfusion. Christian Scientists often avoid medical treatment because of their belief in "mind over matter". Similar ideas are endorsed by well meaning but naive Christians who in effort to please God refrain from pain medication, vaccinations, and often even vitamins. Children are often the innocent victims of their parents convictions.

The chemistry of the human body is one which is in a constant and delicate balance. If the essential minerals and vitamins necessary for life are not received through normal food intake the body begins to break down. On the other hand, if there is an overload or unbalanced intake of these items the body’s internal organs go to work in effort to balance out the chemistry.
The social habits of both the religious and non-religious often set into motion events that sooner or later will manifest in some form of ailment. Long term smoking is understood by most to cause respiratory problems and those who rally around the social drink or the cookie-jar are likely to end up with diabetes. God causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. It is the simple law of reaping and sowing at work. Our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, and if we don’t take care of it we can only blame ourselves.


EVERY HERB OF THE FIELD IS FOR MAN
When God created man He blessed him and told him to rule and subdue every living thing on the earth (Gen. 1:26-28). In the very first chapter of Genesis God tells us that He created every herb of the field for man (Gen. 1:29&30). Some of these plants contain medicinal qualities. From the opium poppy comes a number of pain-killers including codeine and morphine. The prophet Ezekiel wrote of trees whose leaves are for healing, or medicine in the KJV (Eze. 47:12). From the bark of the willow tree came aspirin, an analgesic. From the plant foxglove came the heart drug digitalis. From the poisonous plant nightshade (belladonna) came atropine. Though not an herb, ordinary bread mold contains the antibiotic formula, penicillin, which helps the body to fight infection. Even wine has been observed to have some degree of medicinal qualities if not abused. Paul wrote to Timothy to "use a little wine for the stomach and your frequent ailments"(1 Tim. 5:23). Proverbs 31:6 says to give strong drink to him who is perishing, which seems to suggest a rather crude yet effective means of taking ones mind off the inevitable.
 
SO WHERE IS FAITH?

And in the thirty-ninth year of his reign Asa became diseased in his feet. His disease was severe, yet even in his disease he did not seek the Lord, but the physicians (2 Chr. 16:12). This passage is often cited as an indictment against physicians, but it is actually an indictment against Asa for not seeking God. He went to seek foreign gods (2 Kgs. 1:2&16) but never turned to the God of Israel.

Luke, the author of the Book of Acts and one gospel, was a physician and companion of Paul. When all is said and done, whether God uses a physician or not, ultimately it is He who should get the glory. If God does not give the ability to the doctor to diagnose the problem there is nothing he can do anyway. We should be prayerful about which doctor we go to because we might need a specialist. The story of a woman healed by Jesus who had spent all her money on doctor bills yet was not healed of a blood hemorrhage which plagued her for twelve years illustrates the point (Mk. 5:25).

"It is good for me that I was afflicted, That I may learn Thy statutes" Psm. 119:71
Affliction can have a positive result in that when we are weak we are more apt to do a bit of soul searching.

The scripture is clear that we should first of all examine ourselves (1 Cor. 11:28-32) and in an act of submission to each other confess our sins to one another and pray for one another that we would be healed (James 5:14-16). James even suggests anointing with oil as did the disciples in Mark 6:13. The oil in this case is not meant to be a medicinal application but rather a symbol of the Holy Spirit whom we are placing our faith in for the healing.

When King Hezekiah became ill, Isaiah the prophet instructed him to place a cake of figs on the boil and he would recover (2 Kgs. 20:7). Surely God could have healed him without the figs.
Faith healing is not positive thinking, though a good attitude is a healthy thing. As the psalmist wrote, a joyful heart is good medicine. God however, is able to heal us whether we think right or not. Healing resulting from a "mind over matter" technique is "us" doing the healing and not God. Doctors often get the same results with a sugar pill or placebo.

"And this is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us"(1 Jn. 5:14). It is God’s will that we often miss.

Sometime after Christ left this earthly plain Peter healed a lame man whom Jesus must have walked by a number of times, for the man had been left at the temple gate by his parents everyday to beg for alms (Acts 3:2-8). Why did Jesus not heal him? God’s will? The timing was not right. In this case God chose to glorify Himself through the church, thus validating the message being preached by Peter and John.

Should one end up going to the doctor he should not feel condemned, for the Bible tells us, "There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." (Rom. 8:1)
"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? Just as it is written, ‘For Thy sake we are being put to death all day long; we were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.’ But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."(Rom. 8:35-39)

There is one disease that no man can cure; that is our last one. But on the other hand, going to be with Christ might be considered to be the ultimate healing. Paul wrote, "To live is Christ, and to die is gain". (Phil. 1:21)

Wednesday, January 27, 2010


If one checks out all the references in the Bible concerning pastors, there are some very serious considerations to contemplate.
One of the things I've noticed in our New Testament teachings concerning the gifts of the Spirit and the order Jesus established in the Body of Christ relating to authority in the church settings, is that the pastor had an important responsibility as overseer of the flock of the LORD. Not one that rules the flock with a rod of iron. Also, I can't find a reference in the Word that the pastor was also supposed to be the main teacher or preacher in the assembly, ie; the boss. "First Apostles, prophets, teachers, and the responsiblity of the pastor was lower on the list than the others".
In doing a word study on "pastors" on Bible Gateway, this is what I found. As you can see, the LORD gives pastors a stern warning. This is not something to take lightly as we can see.

Jeremiah 23
1Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.

2Therefore thus saith the LORD God of Israel against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the LORD.

3And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I have driven them, and will bring them again to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and increase.

4And I will set up shepherds over them which shall feed them: and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall they be lacking, saith the LORD.

5Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.

6In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

7Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that they shall no more say, The LORD liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt;

8But, The LORD liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them; and they shall dwell in their own land.

9Mine heart within me is broken because of the prophets; all my bones shake; I am like a drunken man, and like a man whom wine hath overcome, because of the LORD, and because of the words of his holiness.

10For the land is full of adulterers; for because of swearing the land mourneth; the pleasant places of the wilderness are dried up, and their course is evil, and their force is not right.

11For both prophet and priest are profane; yea, in my house have I found their wickedness, saith the LORD.

12Wherefore their way shall be unto them as slippery ways in the darkness: they shall be driven on, and fall therein: for I will bring evil upon them, even the year of their visitation, saith the LORD.

13And I have seen folly in the prophets of Samaria; they prophesied in Baal, and caused my people Israel to err.

14I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness; they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah.

15Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts concerning the prophets; Behold, I will feed them with wormwood, and make them drink the water of gall: for from the prophets of Jerusalem is profaneness gone forth into all the land.

16Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.

17They say still unto them that despise me, The LORD hath said, Ye shall have peace; and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, No evil shall come upon you.

18For who hath stood in the counsel of the LORD, and hath perceived and heard his word? who hath marked his word, and heard it?

19Behold, a whirlwind of the LORD is gone forth in fury, even a grievous whirlwind: it shall fall grievously upon the head of the wicked.

20The anger of the LORD shall not return, until he have executed, and till he have performed the thoughts of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly.

21I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied.

22But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings.

23Am I a God at hand, saith the LORD, and not a God afar off?

24Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.

25I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

26How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart;

27Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal.

28The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD.

29Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?

30Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his neighbour.

31Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.

32Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD.

33And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest, shall ask thee, saying, What is the burden of the LORD? thou shalt then say unto them, What burden? I will even forsake you, saith the LORD.

34And as for the prophet, and the priest, and the people, that shall say, The burden of the LORD, I will even punish that man and his house.

35Thus shall ye say every one to his neighbour, and every one to his brother, What hath the LORD answered? and, What hath the LORD spoken?

36And the burden of the LORD shall ye mention no more: for every man's word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God.

37Thus shalt thou say to the prophet, What hath the LORD answered thee? and, What hath the LORD spoken?

38But since ye say, The burden of the LORD; therefore thus saith the LORD; Because ye say this word, The burden of the LORD, and I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of the LORD;

39Therefore, behold, I, even I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake you, and the city that I gave you and your fathers, and cast you out of my presence:

40And I will bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpetual shame, which shall not be forgotten. Jeremiah 23

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

What About Testimonies of People in Cults? CARM


We cannot deny that people in different and contradictory religious systems have equally strong testimonies of the truth of their beliefs. Mormons, for example, frequently appeal to a "burning in the bosom" as a way of knowing that Mormonism is true. Likewise, Jehovah's Witnesses "know" that their religion is correct. Christian Scientists, Christadelphians, and others each have countless members who sincerely believe in the validity of their religions and will testify to their truth. These groups emphasize "inner testimonies" to different degrees. But the fact remains: contradictory belief systems have members who testify to the truth of contradictory religious systems.

Christians likewise bear their testimonies concerning the truth of Christianity. We testify to the validity of monotheism (in opposition to Mormonism's polytheism),1 of salvation by grace alone (in opposition to Jehovah's Witnesses' teaching that obedience to Law requirements are necessary).2 2), of the reality of sin (in opposition to Christian Science's non-existence of actual sin)3 3), and, of course, that Jesus has saved us from our sins. Obviously, not all contradictory belief systems can be true. So, what can we conclude about these testimonies that affirm the validity of different and contradictory religious systems? We can conclude three things.

First, testimonies are subjective. They are not absolute. They are conveyed to us by people who have feelings about a religious experience or belief. In essence, it is an experience and experiences are, by nature, subjective. And feelings are often just that -- feelings, and not reality.

Second, the fact that people bear witness to contradictory belief systems means that testimonies are not proofs of the validity of any religion -- no matter how strong they might be. Someone who appeals to his testimony as proof of his religion can easily be countered by someone else stating he has an equally strong testimony of something to the contrary. Yet, both parties will still assert they are right.

And third, if we assume that at least one person (or group) is correct, then that would mean that all the other people who have a testimony of the truth are, in actuality, being deceived in some way. From this we can affirm that many people are being deceived who "know for a fact" that their religion is correct.

How would you know if you are deceived?
If it is true that people who sincerely believe in something can be deceived, how would they discover whether or not they are, in fact, being deceived? Simple. Turn to God's word.

I believe that in order to escape deception, a person would need an authoritative and reliable source of information outside his "testimony" by which he can judge spiritual truths and compare his experience. He must be willing to subject his "testimony" to something other than the grilling of his own subjective experience which he claims to be from God. Why? Because if the person used his own testimony to validate his experience then he could not determine whether or not he is deceived since that is appealing to that which is part of the deception to discover truth. It won't work.

Therefore, in order to discover if you are being deceived, you must appeal to God's word and compare your "testimony" to it. If what your testimony points to is in contradiction to God's word, then your testimony is not true.

Testing the Testimony
If someone had a testimony that a religious system was true and that system said it was okay to lie, we could easily conclude that his testimony was incorrect since it supports something that goes against God's revealed word. The person would be deceived. This is simple. However, applying this principle to people isn't easy because since they believe they are not deceived, they will find a way to adopt an interpretation consistent with their belief systems.

Some people will believe their testimonies (feelings) even if the Bible says something to the contrary. Why? Because they will subject God's word to their own testimony. This is commonly done by Mormons. For example, the Bible states that God does not even know of any other Gods (Isaiah 44:8). Yet, in Mormonism God has a goddess wife.4 So, Mormons reinterpret the verse to agree with their testimony. They will state that God knows of no other gods "of this world." They, in effect, add words to the text. We then can become locked in the horns of an interpretive dilemma which is sometimes difficult to overcome.

Nevertheless, among biblically based cult groups, it is almost unanimously agreed that a testimony comes from the Holy Spirit who, according to Scripture (1 John 2:27), resides within the true believer and bears witness of the truth (John 16:13). This testimony comes from the Holy Spirit who is supposed to testify of Jesus (John 15:26).5 This is what all cults claim in one form or another. Yet, there is one factor I've encountered that is an important part of the witness of the Spirit in a true believer.

Assurance of forgiveness of sins
"These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God," (1 John 5:13).
Because the cults serve false gods, they also have false gospels (Gal. 1:8-9). All these "other" gospels are works-oriented. That is, because the members of cults must cooperate with God in some form (obeying commandments, being baptized, etc.) in order to get or maintain the forgiveness of sins, they cannot have assurance of salvation. Yet, the Bible tells us that we can know we have eternal life.

I know that I have eternal life. I know that all my sins are forgiven right now. I know and testify that I am saved by the true and living God and that Jesus is my only Savior. My sins are forgiven and I know I have eternal life.

Of all the cult members I've spoken to, none have told me that they have assurance of eternal life. I can only conclude that they do not have the testimony that is from God. Therefore, they are wrong. They are deceived.

It becomes necessary for all of us to examine our beliefs in the light of God's word and to change our beliefs accordingly. Ultimately, we should come to that place where we have assurance of eternal life -- in agreement with God's word. Do you have this assurance?



This article is also available in: Espaรฑol

1. McConkie, Bruce, Mormon Doctrine, p. 163 and James Talmage, Articles of Faith, p. 443.
2. In the Watchtower magazine of Feb. 15, 1983, p. 12, four requirements for salvation are listed. The second one states, "Many have found the second requirement more difficult. It is to obey Gods laws, yes, to conform ones life to the moral requirements set out in the Bible. This includes refraining from a debauched, immoral way of life. 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10; 1 Peter 4:3, 4." Hence, JW theology denies salvation by grace through faith alone.
3. Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, 447:24.
4. Talmage, James, Articles of Faith, p. 443.
5. I recommend going to the Christian Doctrine section of CARM and reading about who Jesus really is. In cults, the definitions of who Jesus is are also contradictory.
Home
Jesus Saves
Videos
Radio
Forums
Schools
Store
About
Donate
A - B
Christianity
Answers for Seekers
Baptism
Bible
Bible Maps
Bible Online
Bible Studies
Christian Doctrine
Christian Issues
Creeds and Confessions
Devotions
Evangelism
Miscellaneous Topics
Parables
Prayer Ministry
Sermons
Testimonies
To the Christian Church
Apologetics
Apologetics
Apologetics Dialogues
CARM Radio
CARM Videos
Cut and Paste Information
Discussion Boards
Email and Responses
Evidence and Answers
Heresies
Lost Books
Objections and Answers
Online Schools
Research Links
Responding to Critics
Verses Examined
Women in Ministry
Women's Issues
Bible Difficulties
Genesis - Deuteronomy
Joshua - Esther
Job - Song of Solomon
Isaiah - Malachi
Matthew - Mark
Luke, John, and Acts
Romans - Philemon
Hebrews - Revelation
Dictionary of Theology
A - B
C - D
E - F
G - H
I - J
K - L
M - N
O - P
Q - R
S - T
U - Z
Religious Movements
About Cults
Christadelphianism
Christian Science
Emerging Church
How to Have Perfect Faith
International Church of Christ
Islam
Jehovah's Witnesses
Kabbalah
Mormonism
New Age Movement
Oneness Pentecostal
Open Theism
Religions List
Roman Catholicism
Seventh Day Adventism
Shepherd's Chapel
Universalism
Wicca
Secular Movements
Abortion
Atheism
Creation Evolution Debate
Evolution
Raelians, The
Relativism
Questions
About Baptism
About the Bible
About Bible Verses
About the Church
About Demons
About Doctrine
About Evangelism
About God
About The Holy Spirit
About Jesus
About Marriage
About Morality
About Pastors
About People
About Philosophy
About Religions
About Salvation
About Sanctification
About Sexuality
Other Questions
Skeptics Ask
Submit a Question
More Stuff
About CARM
Book and Movie Reviews
Book Recommendations
CARM Needs Your Help
Even More Stuff
Features
Food Recipes
Newsletters
Tracts
Languages
Chinese
Dutch
French
German
Indonesian
Japanese
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Spanish
Part of a series on
About Cults
Cults! An outline analysis
What makes a church or group non-Christian?
Cult Comparison Chart
Justification and Sanctification: What is the difference?
Do we have the right to make these judgments?
What is the truth?
A Test: Do you have the True Jesus?
edit portal Advertisement
25% off Logos Bible Software through CARM. This is what CARM uses for serious Bible study and research. It is well worth the investment.
Home | Contact | Donate | Copying and Linking | Report an error | Statement of Faith
Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry © Matthew J. Slick, 1995 - 2010

Monday, January 25, 2010

Paul's "Thorn in the Flesh? Sickness, or a Messenger of Satan?



It's of vital importance that Christians aren't blown about by every wind of doctrine. Some doctrines have become part and parcel of man's traditions in the church because they "sound" reasonable to the natural mind. But on closer examination of scripture we may find they are in error, and have been passed down by tradition so often, they become taken for granted, and merely assumed they are correct.

Take "Paul's thorn in the flesh" for example:

When taken into context, and examining the meaning of the words in these verses by Apostle Paul, it is apparent they have nothing to do with healing.

For example, the word "buffet" means to to strike, a blow, to box, slap, hit, etc;
(in those connotations).

To further explain, Paul said this "thorn in the flesh" was a messenger of Satan sent to "buffet" him, ie; to battle, contend with, box around, etc.

In other words to interfere with Paul's ministry, making it difficult for him.

A messenger of Satan is a spirit, not a sickness or disease.

Also, there is no place in scripture where a "thorn in the flesh" has to do with sickness. It is a fairly common expression used today, even by unbelievers to mean something that is irritating in some fashion.

In Paul's case, when told by the LORD His grace would be sufficient, it simply meant that Jesus would give him the power to endure, and overcome the attempts by this messenger of Satan to hinder his ministry and life.

I've heard many Christians refer to Paul's "thorn in the flesh" as some sort of sickness or infirmity, but again, there is nothing in these verses to indicate that whatsoever.

All Christians have "thorns in the flesh" sent as the trials of life intended to test us. However, again, to use these verses in conjunction with healing only, is not accurate.

When we are sick, the LORD'S grace is there to help strengthen us. In the flesh, we are all weak. Therefore, God's grace is made perfect in weakness, but these verses were never intended to mean that God's grace, in our weakness meant that we were supposed to suffer the pains of sickness and death without any sort of medical care and relief. That's where some folks have added onto, and twisted these verses to try and make them into something entirely different than what they actually mean, and then into a "tradition".
~~~~~~~~~
Paul gave the reason why the LORD allowed Satan's messenger to buffet him, to keep him from pride in his spiritual achievements.

"And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness." (2 Corinthians 12:7-9)
~~~~~~~~
Buffet:

–noun 1. a blow, as with the hand or fist.
2. a violent shock or concussion.

–verb (used with object) 3. to strike, as with the hand or fist.
4. to strike against or push repeatedly: The wind buffeted the house.
5. to contend against; battle.

–verb (used without object) 6. to struggle with blows of hand or fist.
7. to force one's way by a fight, struggle, etc.
~~~~~~~
Origin:
1175–1225; ME < OF buffe a blow +-et -et

Related forms:

buf⋅fet⋅er , noun

Synonyms:
3. slap, cuff, box, hit, sock, wallop.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Cults: Do We Have the Right to Make these Judgments?


"To pronounce another religious group to be false can seem a pompous undertaking, especially in a culture that preaches tolerance for everything from homosexuality to a mother's "right" to kill her unborn child. Tolerance is the banner that unites much of our culture and anyone who points a judging finger at someone or something is often ridiculed.

But Christians are told in the Bible to separate themselves from the sinful practices of man and to expose error. "Examine all things and to hold fast to that which is true" says God's word (1 Thess. 5:21). So we do.

What does it mean to examine if we do not judge what is right and wrong? Jesus judged the Pharisees as hypocrites. Peter judged Ananias and Saphira as liars (Acts 5:3-4). Paul judged the Galatians as fools (Gal. 3:1).

The reason something can be said to be right or wrong is because the Bible has laid out before us a moral and doctrinal standard that is clear. It is wrong to lie. So, we are able to say to someone who lies, "What you are doing is wrong." That is making a judgment.

Likewise, with the cults, as Christians we are commanded to be able to give answers to everyone (1 Pet. 3:15) and to contend for the faith that was delivered by the apostles (Jude 4). If we do not fight for the faith, the faith will be lost. If we do not expose the errors of the cults then the cults will move unchecked in the world and lead even more into eternal destruction.

To make a judgment means that we must recognize that there are absolutes. In a world that worships relativism, absolutes are not welcome and the cults that espouse their demonic doctrines beg tolerance.

CARM stands for the truth of God's word, not a compromising collection of beliefs that changes as people's whims change. The cults are cults because they deny the true God, add works to salvation, and corrupt a multitude of biblical truths. Their end and the end of all who follow them is damnation. To do anything other than warn people about them would be unloving."



This article is also available in: Espaรฑol
Home
Jesus Saves
Videos
Radio
Forums
Schools
Store
About
Donate
A - B
Christianity
Answers for Seekers
Baptism
Bible
Bible Maps
Bible Online
Bible Studies
Christian Doctrine
Christian Issues
Creeds and Confessions
Devotions
Evangelism
Miscellaneous Topics
Parables
Prayer Ministry
Sermons
Testimonies
To the Christian Church
Apologetics
Apologetics
Apologetics Dialogues
CARM Radio
CARM Videos
Cut and Paste Information
Discussion Boards
Email and Responses
Evidence and Answers
Heresies
Lost Books
Objections and Answers
Online Schools
Research Links
Responding to Critics
Verses Examined
Women in Ministry
Women's Issues
Bible Difficulties
Genesis - Deuteronomy
Joshua - Esther
Job - Song of Solomon
Isaiah - Malachi
Matthew - Mark
Luke, John, and Acts
Romans - Philemon
Hebrews - Revelation
Dictionary of Theology
A - B
C - D
E - F
G - H
I - J
K - L
M - N
O - P
Q - R
S - T
U - Z
Religious Movements
About Cults
Christadelphianism
Christian Science
Emerging Church
How to Have Perfect Faith
International Church of Christ
Islam
Jehovah's Witnesses
Kabbalah
Mormonism
New Age Movement
Oneness Pentecostal
Open Theism
Religions List
Roman Catholicism
Seventh Day Adventism
Shepherd's Chapel
Universalism
Wicca
Secular Movements
Abortion
Atheism
Creation Evolution Debate
Evolution
Raelians, The
Relativism
Questions
About Baptism
About the Bible
About Bible Verses
About the Church
About Demons
About Doctrine
About Evangelism
About God
About The Holy Spirit
About Jesus
About Marriage
About Morality
About Pastors
About People
About Philosophy
About Religions
About Salvation
About Sanctification
About Sexuality
Other Questions
Skeptics Ask
Submit a Question
More Stuff
About CARM
Book and Movie Reviews
Book Recommendations
CARM Needs Your Help
Even More Stuff
Features
Food Recipes
Newsletters
Tracts
Languages
Chinese
Dutch
French
German
Indonesian
Japanese
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Spanish
Part of a series on
About Cults
Cults! An outline analysis
What makes a church or group non-Christian?
Cult Comparison Chart
Justification and Sanctification: What is the difference?
Do we have the right to make these judgments?
What is the truth?
A Test: Do you have the True Jesus?
edit portal Advertisement
Please consider supporting CARM with $5 a month. Help us reach over 8 million visitors a year, provide solid biblical answers, and equip Christians. All you have to do is click here. Thanks.
Home | Contact | Donate | Copying and Linking | Report an error | Statement of Faith
Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry © Matthew J. Slick, 1995 - 2010

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Cults! An Outline Analysis of them


This is from the CARM-Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
It's a broad outline concerning the general characteristics of a cult. There may be some things listed here that are not true of one cult, but may be operational in another. Cults are not all the same. Most in fact have diversities in doctrine and beliefs. However, there will usually be more than just a few that fits into the general definition of being a cult
.

~~~~~~~~~

"Cults are everywhere. Some are mainstream and widely accepted. Others are isolationist and hide from examination at great expense. They are growing and flourishing. Some cause great suffering while others appear very helpful and beneficial. Which ever group it is, the ultimate end is their destruction when the Lord returns to claim His own.

What is a cult?
Generally, it is a group that is unorthodox, esoteric, and has a devotion to a person, object, or a set of new ideas.
New Teaching - has a new theology and doctrine.
Only True Teaching - often considers traditional religious systems to be apostate and it alone possesses the complete truth.
Strong Leadership - often an individual or small but powerful leadership group holds control of the group’s teachings and practices.
Asset Acquirement - often requires tithing and/or property transfer to the religious system.
Isolationist - to facilitate control over the members physically, intellectually, financially, and emotionally.
Controlling - exercises control over the members. Sometimes this is through fear, threatening loss of salvation if you leave the group. Sometimes through indoctrination.
Indoctrination - possesses methods to reinforce the cult’s beliefs and standards where opposing views are ridiculed and often misrepresented.
Apocalyptic - to give the members a future focus and philosophical purpose in avoiding the apocalypse or being delivered through it.
Experience - various practices including meditation, repetition of words and/or phrases, and ‘spiritual’ enlightenment with God are used as confirmation of their truth.
Depravation - sleep and food deprivation which weakens the will of the subject.
This is uncommon, though practiced by more severe cults.
Persecution - predictions of being persecuted, often combined with claiming any opposing views demonstrated against them as a form of persecution.
Many have non-verifiable belief systems;
For example, they would teach something that cannot be verified.
A space ship behind Hale-Bop comet
Or, that God, an alien, or angel appeared to the leader and gave him a revelation.
The members are seeded angels from another world, etc.
Often, the philosophy makes sense only if you adopt the full set of values and definitions that it teaches.
With this kind of belief, truth becomes unverifiable, internalized, and easily manipulated through the philosophical systems of its inventor.
The Leader of a Cult
Often charismatic and is considered very special for varying reasons:
The leader has received special revelation from God.
The leader claims to be the incarnation of a deity, angel, or special messenger.
The leader claims to be appointed by God for a mission.
The leader claims to have special abilities.
The leader is often above reproach and is not to be denied or contradicted.
Cult ethos
Usually seeks to do good works, otherwise no one would join them.
They are usually moral and possess a good standard of ethical teaching.
Many times the Bible is used or additional "scriptures" are penned.
The Bible, when used, is always distorted with private interpretations.
Many Cults recruit Jesus as one of their own and redefine him accordingly.
Cult groups vary greatly.
From the ascetic to the promiscuous.
From esoteric knowledge to very simple teachings.
From the rich and powerful to the poor and weak.
Who is vulnerable to joining a cult?
Everyone is vulnerable.
Rich, poor, educated, non-educated, old, young, previously religious, atheistic, etc.
General Profile of cult member (some or all of the following):
Disenchanted with conventional religious establishments.
Intellectually confused over religious and/or philosophical issues.
Sometimes disenchanted with society as a whole.
Has a need for encouragement and support.
Emotionally needful.
Needs a sense of purpose.
Financially needy.
Recruitment techniques
They find a need and fill it. One of the ways they do this is called...

"Love Bombing" - Constant positive affection in word and deed.
Sometimes there is a lot of physical contact like hugging, pats on the back, and touching.
Cult group members will lend emotional support to someone in need.
Help them in various ways...whatever is needed.
The person then becomes indebted to the cult.
Compliment them, reassure them, and make them the center of attention.
Many Cults use the influence of the Bible and/or mention Jesus as being one of their own; thereby adding validity to their system.
Scripture twisting
Those that use the Bible take verses out of context.
Then mix their misinterpreted verses with their aberrant philosophy.
Gradualism
Slow altering of thinking processes and belief system through repeated teaching.
People usually accept cult doctrines one point at a time.
New beliefs are reinforced by other cult members.
Why would someone join?
The cult satisfies various needs:
Psychological - Someone could have a weak personality, easily lead.
Emotional - Someone could have recently suffered an emotional trauma.
Intellectual - Someone has questions that this group answers.
The cult gives them approval, acceptance, purpose, and a sense of belonging.
The cult is appealing for some reason. It could be . . .
Moral rigidity and purity.
Financial security.
Promises of exaltation, redemption, higher consciousness, or a host of other rewards.
How are they kept in the cult?
Dependence
People often want to stay because the cult meets their psychological, intellectual, and spiritual needs.
Isolation
Outside contacts are reduced and more and more of the life of the member is built around the cult.
It then becomes very easy to control and shape the member.
Cognitive Reconstruction (Brainwashing):
Once the person is indoctrinated, their thinking processes are reconstructed to be consistent with the cult and to be submissive to its leaders.
This facilitates control by the cult leader(s).
Substitution
The Cult and cult leaders often take the place of mother, father, priest, teacher, and healer.
Often the member takes on the characteristics of a dependent child seeking to win the approval of the leader and or group.
Indebtedness
The member becomes indebted to the group emotionally, financially, etc.
Guilt
The person is told that to leave is to betray the leader, God, the group, etc.
The person is told that to leave would mean to reject the love and help the group has given.
Threat
Threat of destruction by God for turning from the truth.
Sometimes physical threat is used, though not often.
Threat of missing the apocalypse, or being judged on judgment day, etc.
How do you get them out?
The best thing is to try not to let them get trapped in the first place.
If you are a Christian, then pray.
But, to get a person out of a cult takes:
Time, energy, and support.
Teach them the truth.
Give them a true replacement for their aberrant belief system.
Show the cult group's philosophic inconsistencies.
Study the group and learn its history seeking clues and information.
Try and get them physically away from the cult group.
Give them the support they need emotionally.
Alleviate the threat that if they leave the group they are doomed or in danger.
Generally, don't attack the leader of the group...that comes later.
Converts often feel a loyalty and respect for the founder of the group.
Confront them when needed.
Hopefully, this basic outline will give you information to see how Cults work and how to avoid them. If you have someone who is lost in a cult, you need to pray and ask the Lord to remove them and give you the insight and tools needed. It can be a long and arduous task and very often ends in failure. This is not an easy ministry."

Friday, January 22, 2010

A Reasonable Parent Would Have Sought Medical Care for Neil Begley, doctor says


By Nicole Dungca, The Oregonian
January 22, 2010, 11:14AMView full sizeRANDY RASMUSSEN/THE OREGONIANWayne Mackeson, Jeffrey Beagley's defense attorney, addresses the jury during the trial of Beagley and his wife, Marci.


The Beagley trial
Benjamin Brink /The OregonianMarci and Jeff Beagley


ARCHIVE: Previous stories about faith healing in Oregon.Jeffrey and Marci Beagley, members of the Followers of Christ church, are charged with criminally negligent homicide for allegedly failing to provide adequate medical care for their 16-year-old son, Neil, who died in June 2008 of complications from a urinary tract blockage. The trial began on Tuesday.

The main characters in the courtroom today, including the Beagleys, are:
» Judge Steven Maurer
» Prosecutor Greg Horner
» Prosecutor Steven Mygrant
» Defense attorney Wayne Mackeson represents Jeff Beagley
» Defense attorney Steve Lindsey represents Marci Beagley
» Doctor Edward Guillery, a pediatric nephrologist


11:11 a.m. Both defense lawyers had no questions for Guillery and the state had no further witnesses.

Because defense was not expecting to start calling witnesses until Monday morning, the court will adjourn for the day.

11:09 a.m. Would Neil have survived if they had sought treatment the week before he died?

“Yes,” Guillery said. Even if they had sought treatment the day before he died, that would be the case, he continued.

Horner took up that In that day before his death, with an effort to seek medical care, would he be alive?

“Absolutely,” Guillery said. Though his condition would have been worse, medical personnel in the city have been trained to deal with that situation.

“Could Neil have survived even the day of his death had he received medical care?”

“Yes,” Guillery said.


11:04 a.m. Horner asked more about what long-term care Neil would have gotten. Guillery said he would likely be stabilized in the intensive care unit before staying in the hospital for several days. They would likely seek the treatment of dialysis, and eventually a kidney transplant.

He explained dialysis, particularly peritoneal dialysis, which is often used by pediatricians, and also said a kidney transplant “would be the best thing for (Neil).”



11:01 a.m. Horner asked more about what kind of treatment Neil would have likely gotten if he had gotten medical treatment in the week before his death.

Guillery said he would get an exam, and after several steps, he would likely be referred to a local nephrologist like himself, he said. He would have also be referred to an intensive care unit.

They would have administered dialysis immediately, Guillery said. This referral to a type of dialysis matches the opinion of yesterday’s medical expert, a local pediatric urologist.


10:48 a.m. Horner asked if a reasonable parent would have sought medical care for Neil in those last two weeks.

“Certainly” in those two weeks, and the days before his death, Guillery said.

The longevity of the symptoms and his decline were factors for that opinion, he said.

The testimony followed a lengthy back and forth between Maurer and Mackeson over the defense’s objection about Guillery’s use of statements from family members taken from the police. The jury had been ordered out of the room for the discussion.

10:31 a.m. Guillery also relied on statements from family members concerning Neil’s conditions in the last few months, and days, of his death. They showed a child with a “pattern of inexorable decline” in the last week of his death, Guillery said.

Were the symptoms presented in a way that would have raised concerns about the possibility of death?

“Yes, I think a parent would have that concern,” Guillery said. “If they had been recording the diet this way and seeing these symptoms, a reasonable parent would have that concern.”

10:24 a.m. Jurors were brought back in, and Horner came back to the food journal.

"What was in that journal that caught your attention that you think is important?"

"The fact that there was one is what really caught my attention. Parents bring in food journals .. for much younger children, and they usually reflect a significant concern that something is wrong," Guillery said.

The journal suggests that "something has been going on for a while," he said.

The contents were also striking to Guillery.

"He was getting a peculiar diet that suggests to me that there was really a problem," Guillery said. Sixteen-year-olds should be eating entire bags of groceries, he said.

The vomiting without fever or diarrhea or other flu-like symptoms was quite unusual, he said.

10:15 a.m. Maurer ultimately ruled that Guillery’s opinion on what a reasonable parent would do will be allowed in questioning.

Maurer had responded to Mackeson by saying Guillery’s opinion on that issue would help show a “community standard” that is integral to the judgment of the case.

Mackeson continued to argue that the question would not be helpful, since the jury is the one who must decide what is or is not reasonable on standards that stem from a community, not necessarily an expert looking at the facts of the case who presents a “professional standard” for the parents.

Maurer and Mackeson went back and forth with several arguments, comparing the Beagley case to medical malpractice trials and a trial involving an automobile accident.

10:02 a.m. Mackeson objected to a question from Horner that concerned the actions of a reasonable parent in the Beagleys' position. The jury was led out of the courtroom because of the objection.

The question is a doctor’s comment on the state of mind of the defendant, Mackeson said. Mackeson called it a “legal question” and unhelpful for the jury.

Horner argued that the trial is about a “reasonable person’s” judgment. What Guillery would ultimately comment on, Horner said, is whether they were doing something appropriate or reasonable. Guillery, as a medical expert who deals with many parents, would be a good source for what a “reasonable parent” would do, Horner said.

9:59 a.m. Guillery referenced the food journal again, agreeing with a question from Horner that asked if the Beagleys’ attempt to feed Neil glucerna, a formula for adults who have diabetes, was “inappropriate.”

9:58 a.m. Guillery was “disturbed” by the food intake journal that recorded how much Neil ate: “Most striking to me is the diary of the food intake, which as a doctor who is also in general pediatrics, is a disturbing thing to see,” he said.

He was also struck by the reports showing comments from family members prior to the death, as well as the printouts detectives found in the room where Neil died. They concerned internet searches about peptic ulcer disease and treating heartburn.

They were a sign of an awareness of a “significant medical problem,” Guillery said.

9:51 a.m. “Are you aware of any children dying from this condition?” prosecutor Greg Horner said.

“No, I’m not,” Guillery responded, before further explaining: “I’ve never encountered a child who has died from this beyond that early newborn period.”

“Have you ever heard of any situation that you’re aware of, of any child dying from this condition that was completely untreated?” Horner asked.

Guillery said he had never seen that situation, or heard a report of that.

Horner zeroed in on Neil’s case: why did Neil die, as opposed to these other children with this condition?

“Because he received no medical care during his life,” Guillery said.


9:44 a.m. Guillery testified that he has seen many children with Neil’s condition of posterior urethral valves. He is one of four pediatric nephrologists in Oregon, he said.

“We know that when boys have this condition, it very commonly leads to an inexorable decline of their kidney function,” Guillery said.

A minority of those children are identified after birth, and he sees those children for an extended period of time, he said.

The children who have this condition diagnosed later in life have often been brought to a pediatrician because of problems with bed-wetting or urinary accidents during the day, he said.

9:42 a.m. Guillery agreed with the medical examiner’s cause of death, which was involved complications with urinary tract outlet obstruction.

“It’s entirely obvious,” Guillery said. “There can be no doubt, based on my impressions.”

9:30 a.m. Doctor Edward Guillery, a pediatric nephrologist, was the first witness to be called to the stand today. He follows yesterday’s testimony from a pediatric urologist and the medical examiner who conducted Neil Beagley’s autopsy. Both medical experts said Neil Beagley’s condition had been beyond anything they had seen before.

Guillery's specialty, nephrology, is the field of medicine that studies kidney disease."

Indiana Couple Sentenced in Baby's Death


Associated Press in NY Times/August 13, 2005

Franklin, Ind. -- An Indiana couple who chose to pray over their dying newborn daughter rather than seek medical care for her were sentenced Friday to six years in prison for reckless homicide.

But a judge suspended most of those prison terms for Dewayne and Maleta Schmidt, instead ordering the couple to serve about a year each at a work-release center.

Their daughter, Rhianna Rose Schmidt, died in August 2003, less than two days after she was born at the couple's home, from an infection typically treated with antibiotics.

The Schmidts' church, the General Assembly and Church of the Firstborn, advocates prayer and faith healing over medical intervention but does not require members to shun medical care.

''Rhianna would be alive today if not for the actions and inactions of her parents,'' Johnson County Superior Judge Cynthia Emkes said.

The Schmidts' probation includes a directive to seek medical help for their two other children should they suffer life-threatening health problems.

Rhianna was the third child of parents attending the Schmidts' church to die since 1998 after family members refused medical treatment, according to published reports. The church is in Morgantown, about 30 miles south of Indianapolis.

Children born to members of the church in Colorado and Oregon also have died after their parents refused medical treatment.

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Jury Indicts Midwife in June Death of Newborn-Nov 16/05


Judges are beginning to look more closely at prayer-healing deaths in the Church of the First Born. In reality there is no godly, moral or legal excuse for helpless babies and children dying painful, agonizing deaths who could easily have been saved by timely medical expertise. If true to form, the COFB birth mother had received no prenatal care which may have contributed to what appeared to be a premature birth.

Jury indicts midwife in June death of newborn
Associated Press/November 16, 2005

Martinsville – A grand jury has indicted a Morgantown woman on a charge of practicing midwifery without a license in connection with a newborn's death in June.

Doris White, 72, pleaded not guilty to the charge Monday and was released without bond from the Morgan County Jail after her initial hearing.

Prosecutor Steve Sonnega said White has agreed not to assist with the births of any infants while the criminal case against her is pending.

White's indictment arose from the death of Sarah Leeman, who was delivered about two months premature by White at the newborn's parent's Martinsville mobile home.

White and the child's parents are members of the General Assembly and Church of the Firstborn, where many members turn to prayer rather than medical care.

Investigators said the infant, born May 28, weighed less than 3 pounds, and received no medical care. An autopsy showed the baby died of bacterial meningitis.

Prosecutors impaneled a grand jury to look into the infant's death.

Sonnega said the grand jury interviewed more than 25 people before indicting White. Jurors also looked at the role of the parents, Louis and Patricia Leeman, but declined to charge them.

During Monday's hearing, White said she understood the charge, but did not understand why she was charged because she had "done this for 30รข€‚years and never been questioned before."

A message was left Tuesday seeking comment from White's attorney, Bill Van Der Pol.

In May, a Johnson County jury found another couple belonging to the same church guilty of reckless homicide for refusing to seek medical treatment to help their newborn daughter in 2003.

A judge sentenced both Dewayne and Maleta Schmidt to spend one year at a work release facility.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/firstborn/f...

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Midwife Ordered to Stop Delivering Babies


Indianapolis Star/August 19, 2006
By Tim Evans
A 73-year-old Morgan County woman who served as midwife at the birth of an infant who died has been ordered by a judge to stop delivering babies.

But Doris White -- who has delivered about 100 babies, many for people affiliated with a church whose members turn to prayer rather than doctors -- told the court she couldn't promise to abide by the order.

Morgan Superior Court Judge G. Thomas Gray issued the permanent injunction Thursday prohibiting the Morgantown woman from practicing midwifery.

Gray's ruling likely ends a legal case that began after a grand jury indicted White in November 2005 on a felony charge of practicing midwifery without a license. The indictment followed an investigation into the death of Sarah Leeman.

The baby died June 4, 2005, six days after her premature birth at the Martinsville home of her parents, Louis and Patricia Leeman, who are associated with the General Assembly and Church of the Firstborn in Morgantown.

Medical experts testified there was a 98 percent chance the baby, who died from complications of an infection, would have survived if she had been seen by medical professionals and treated with an antibiotic, said Morgan County Prosecutor Steve Sonnega.

Neither White nor her attorney could be reached Friday.

Sonnega said the injunction is a fair end to the case, but added White could face contempt and possibly other charges if she violates the judge's order.

"This was a way of getting Doris' attention," he said. "We have put her and others on notice that there are laws that regulate midwifery."

While the criminal case focused on White's violation of Indiana law regulating midwives, it was framed by the larger issue of the sometimes-blurry line between the law and religious freedom. That is obvious, Sonnega said, in the stance of church members who say they respect the state's laws but answer only to God's law.

The prosecutor said he had hoped the indictment would be enough to provide the leverage to get White to stop delivering babies. But, after meeting with her and other church officials, he realized that was not the case.

"In a way, it is refreshing to have people whose faith is so pure and strong," he said. "But on the other hand, they are out of step with the laws of Indiana."

Monday, January 18, 2010

Family Says Church Allowed Woman to Die Following Childbirth


This tragedy happened in Cushing, Oklahoma. Kathy's family still grieves over her untimely, unnecessary death. They have never been able to find out exactly what happened that day in the room where Kathy died, because they weren't allowed entrance by COFB members, to be with Kathy during her birthing process.
Kathy left 5 children without a mother. However, her husband married three months after her death.

KTUL News Channel 8, Oklahoma/November 1, 2005
By Teri Bowers
Cushing -- There is a delicate balance between religion and the law. NewsChannel 8's Teri Bowers has the story of Kathy Capdeville, a life lost in that balance. She was only 26 years old when she died giving birth. Her family believes her life could have been saved. But, they claim Kathy's church let her die in the name of faith.

Kathy Capdeville's family describes her as a devoted daughter, sister and mother to her four children. She was due to have her fifth baby this past August.

"I told her, promise to call me as soon as you go into labor because I'm three hours away," says Kathy's sister Jeanne Shadaram. "And, she promised she would. And that's the last time I talked to her."

Kathy's family was nervous because she planned to have the baby at home, attended to only by church midwives. Kathy had followed her husband into the Church of the Firstborn in Cushing. They shun doctors and rely on prayer for healing.

"We worried about this ever since she married into the faith," said Kathy's father, David Griffin. "And, it happened."

Kathy's family says it was by chance they learned she'd gone into labor. They called and were told Kathy was resting after delivering a healthy baby girl. But, within hours, the news turned tragic.

"From what we've been told, at about 5:20 she had Kathryn, the baby," Shadaram says. "And she never passed the placenta. She never passed the afterbirth. And, she bled for six hours, she lay in bed bleeding before she passed away."

"There's no reason for my daughter to have died like that," adds Griffin.

Kathy's family says she had sought medical care before and had promised she would get help if anything went wrong. But, church members told them Kathy's faith was strong.

"What they say just doesn't make sense to us, that she would willingly lay down and die knowing she had five children," Shadaram says.

And they don't believe religion should protect the midwives and other members of the church who were in the house during Kathy's final hours.

"Somebody in that house should have stepped up and did the right thing, regardless of religion," says Shadaram. "If they'd called 911, an ambulance could have come, if she was alert and awake like they say she was, Kathy could have signed a refusal to go to the hospital and it would have been done."

It is not done. Cushing police investigated Kathy's death. It is now up to the Payne County District Attorney to decide if charges are warranted against anyone who was in the home.

"It's extremely difficult," says Cushing Deputy Chief Terry Brannon. "I think any time you begin to intertwine religion in terms of potential criminal negligence, you get into an area that is awfully difficult."

The law is more clear when a child's life is at stake. The Oklahoma Legislature removed religious belief as a defense in the death of a child in 1983. Kathy's family wants lawmakers to act again to more strongly regulate midwives. They they may never get answers to the questions that haunt them about her death -- was she in pain? Did she ask for help? Or did she lose consciousness and peacefully drift away?

"I have to hope she was okay and that she went easy," Shadaram says. "And, God help them if she was in pain and they witnessed that. Then they'll have that nightmare just like I do."

Now, Kathy's family believes the only way they'll find any peace is to make others aware.

"I just miss her so much," says Shadaram. "But I know I have to tell people. This is my outlet, this is how I deal with what's happened, I do research and try to change what's going on."

Kathy's family hopes they can bring change to spare others their grief and their loss.

We tried to contact members of the church, including Kathy's husband, both in person and by phone. They declined to comment. Kathy Capdeville did not have a living will or anything similar in writing clearly expressing her religious wishes. So, her family says it comes down to their word against the church members whether she would have wanted medical attention.

There is no word yet on when the Payne County district attorney will decide for or against charges. There was another death from the very same church in 1987, when a three-month-old girl died of pneumonia. Her parents served a two-year sentence for failing to seek medical help."

Saturday, January 16, 2010

The Battle Over Faith Healing


In the Lord's hands

"Just before Christmas 1996, 1-year-old Patrick Foster caught a bad cold. As the sniffling persisted week after week, Daniel and Anne Marie Foster did what they had always done when one of their three children got sick, they prayed the devil would be driven away.

But Patrick was not healed. As winter turned to spring, he became more lethargic and gaunt. It was March when Daniel and Anne Marie noticed the growth bulging from their son's left side.

As the growth swelled, the Fosters increased their prayers. Four times each week they attended services at Faith Tabernacle Congregation Church in north Philadelphia, asking their pastor to pray aloud for Patrick.

Regardless of how sick Patrick got, there would be no visit to a doctor. And no medical treatment, not even an aspirin. Members of Faith Tabernacle, like thousands of faith-healing Christians across the United States, trust that God, inspired by the prayers of true believers, will heal sickness and disease. To seek a doctor's care would be to turn their backs not only on their faith, but on God himself. Patrick was in the Lord's hands, Anne Marie Foster would tell police.

But one day in early May, the Fosters' private religious beliefs came crashing through the doors of the Philadelphia prosecutor's office.

A neighbor had seen the listless boy sitting on his father's lap on the front steps. Patrick's body was so wracked by the growth that had ballooned from his kidney and attached itself to his liver and heart, that he needed his father's help just to lift his head.

The neighbor called the child abuse hot line.

Twenty-four hours from death

Social worker Michael Bonetti first looked in on Patrick only hours after the neighbor's phone call. The Fosters reluctantly let Bonetti inside their well-kept two-story brownstone.

Daniel Foster carried Patrick downstairs and laid him face down on the sofa. The boy winced, then groaned.

The growth, which at 6 pounds was now almost a third of Patrick's weight, was hidden by the rust-colored blanket pulled up over his shoulders. A pinkish rash covered the boy's cheeks and hands. His left eye was swollen shut; his lips were cracked and white from dehydration.

Bonetti urged the Fosters to rush Patrick to a hospital. They refused. The following afternoon Bonetti returned with the police and a court order demanding that the Fosters release Patrick to a doctor's care.

At St. Christopher's Hospital, doctors said Patrick likely would have died in another 24 hours. The large mass growing from his abdomen was a Wilm's tumor, a common form of childhood cancer that 90 percent of patients survive if they receive prompt treatment.

Doctors removed the tumor but doubted Patrick would live. He spent six months in the hospital, his parents and extended family always at his side. The prayers were never-ending.

But the battle over what was best for Patrick Foster was just beginning."