Post by nathanb on Aug 12, 2008 14:50:21 GMT -5
Hi Nathan,
Of the practice of "laying on of hands" in the f&w fellowship, you said,
Quote:Yes, we do but not literally!
A couple questions arise, and I ask them with due respect:
Why is it so important in the f&w to be literal about other things Jesus did, but not this?
And, how do the f&w, as a group (not referring to personal conviction, but group practice) know when to interpret literally, and when not to?
Blessings,
Linda
Shushy wrote:
This also is biblical. Laying on of hands
Luke 4:40 When the sun was setting, the people brought to Jesus all who had various kinds of sickness, and laying his hands on each one, he healed them.
Luke 4:39-41 (in Context) Luke 4 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 8:18 When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money
Acts 8:17-19 (in Context) Acts 8 (Whole Chapter)
1 Timothy 5:22 Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, and do not share in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure.
1 Timothy 5:21-23 (in Context) 1 Timothy 5 (Whole Chapter)
2 Timothy 1:6 For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands.
2 Timothy 1:5-7 (in Context) 2 Timothy 1 (Whole Chapter)
Hebrews 6:2 instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.
Hebrews 6:1-3 (in Context) Hebrews 6 (Whole Chapter)
2) Question four from Shushy
(a)Have you ever read these scriptures and asked yourself can we do this?
~~~ N9: Yes, I have wondered about the laying on of hands in the past. Yes, we do but not literally! When I started in the work in USA the overseer had us who started in the work took turn to speak in the same Saturday morning meeting at Convention with him. It was a sign he had laying on of hands on us as minister of God before his workers' staff and to the friends at convention.
Written by Stephen Lang.
Laying on of hands on another person (usually on their head) had serious meanings in the Bible times. It could symbolize bestowing an inheritance (Gen. 48:14-20) or an act of blessing (Matt. 19:13).
Jesus and the apostles often laid hands on a person asking to be healed (Mark 5:23). But laying on of hands is most associated with conferring the gifts or rights of an office--- apostles, deacons (Acts 6:6) pastors, missionaries.
The ones laying on the hands are respected authority figures who symbolically pass on power to the other person (Acts 6:6; 13:3). The apostles would sometimes lay hands on a person who would receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:17; 19:6).
(b)Do you believe this is for today?
~~~ Yes, I do believe the laying on of hands is for today.
In Asia the laying on of hands custom or tradition means a sign of approval and blessings.
To Selah: Laying on of hands is the Jewish custom of blessing, pass on the power to another person.
The Americans have their own styles/customs on laying on of hands= passing on the power, authority, or approval to other person by hand shakes, a pat on the back, etc.. That's what I meant not literally laying on of hands on the head of a person.
1) Ken wrote: Nate, my friend
I am confused with your answer to Linda's questions. I never experienced or witnessed the laying on of hands while we we in the F&Ws fellowship. Certainly no transfer of power from workers to anyone. Did I miss something in all the quotes?
ken
~~ N9: Hi ken,
As I have shared in my previous post about the time when I started in the work in 1986 the overseer had all of us NEW workers speaking with him on Saturday morning convention. That is a form of laying on of hands= blessings, approval, and pass on authority as workers on us to show all the friends and workers at convention we have been chosen as ministers of God.
By the way, I had the laying on the hands by God in 1979 and offered for the work in 1980.
Selah wrote:
Hi again Nathan,
Quote:The Americans have their own styles/customs on laying on of hands= passing on the power, authority, or approval to other person by hand shakes, a pat on the back, etc.. That's what I meant not literally laying on of hands on the head of a person.
This seems like a reasonable explanation to me, and I agree that through the ages and cultures, we often use different methods to convey the same message.
My question is why is that okay concerning laying on of hands, and not okay concerning other methods/traditions that may also have a cultural context? For example: Immersion in baptism comes from the Jewish tradition of cleansing in the mikvah.
1) Scott wrote:
OK....
So a LITERAL laying on of hands (USA style) does not involve a physical touch.... And could therefore be done over the internet, by a letter, sent by a carrier pigeon or whatever.... BECAUSE there is no physical 'touch'?
And......
~~~ Laying on of hands on the head/Touching in public is NOT Americans way of showing approval. In the Orient, laying on of the hands on the head, touching, hugging, or holding hands of the same sex are signs of great friendship, showing affection and respect.
The Americans do most everything the opposite. because when their parents, grandparents immigrated to this NEW country many of them wanted to forget the old country traditions and customs.
2) Do you feel that the only laying on of hands is FIGURATIVE and not physical? Ever?
~~~ In the Bible times laying on of hands is NOT figuratively but literally... It was the custom in those days.
2) Is there any other method in which one is given the authority to be ministers other than a FIGURATIVE laying on of hands by an overseer? Just a simple Yes or No will work for me unless you wish to explain your answer.
~~~ Yes, there are other methods the Americans are using as a form of laying on of hands such a phone call, talking to the person face to face, hands sakes, writing a letter, emails, etc... when the workers appointed the elders for Wed. or Sunday morning meetings.
The hands wrote:
The laying on of hands, as mentioned, is the method in which the approval/blessing was conveyed - be it a custom of that day or not, tho' it sounds likely. But it also gives weight to the claim of some that there has to be a personal touch - meaning it's not an internet ministry, nor a television/radio ministry, but a person to person conveying of authority, blessing, approval, acceptance, etc.
Not essential to salvation, but essential to fellowship. It was symbolic of the essence of fellowship. Like the washing of feet was a symbol of the Spirit of Jesus that should be in us, toward others. Not a ceremony that is continued, literally, but continued in spirit.
The emblems established in the upper chamber was a symbol that was told to be continued in remembrance of me. They gathered together on the first day of the week in sorrow that was turned to rejoicing, the following Sun in seeking that same experience - not a symbol, but a real, living experience. So it continues. Go for it Nathan - - - make it clearer ! You have the gift of explaining things.
~~~ Thanks, for your kind words. Thanks, and appreciate for what you have shared also. Very good. You've explained it better than I could.
Of the practice of "laying on of hands" in the f&w fellowship, you said,
Quote:Yes, we do but not literally!
A couple questions arise, and I ask them with due respect:
Why is it so important in the f&w to be literal about other things Jesus did, but not this?
And, how do the f&w, as a group (not referring to personal conviction, but group practice) know when to interpret literally, and when not to?
Blessings,
Linda
Shushy wrote:
This also is biblical. Laying on of hands
Luke 4:40 When the sun was setting, the people brought to Jesus all who had various kinds of sickness, and laying his hands on each one, he healed them.
Luke 4:39-41 (in Context) Luke 4 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 8:18 When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money
Acts 8:17-19 (in Context) Acts 8 (Whole Chapter)
1 Timothy 5:22 Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, and do not share in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure.
1 Timothy 5:21-23 (in Context) 1 Timothy 5 (Whole Chapter)
2 Timothy 1:6 For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands.
2 Timothy 1:5-7 (in Context) 2 Timothy 1 (Whole Chapter)
Hebrews 6:2 instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.
Hebrews 6:1-3 (in Context) Hebrews 6 (Whole Chapter)
2) Question four from Shushy
(a)Have you ever read these scriptures and asked yourself can we do this?
~~~ N9: Yes, I have wondered about the laying on of hands in the past. Yes, we do but not literally! When I started in the work in USA the overseer had us who started in the work took turn to speak in the same Saturday morning meeting at Convention with him. It was a sign he had laying on of hands on us as minister of God before his workers' staff and to the friends at convention.
Written by Stephen Lang.
Laying on of hands on another person (usually on their head) had serious meanings in the Bible times. It could symbolize bestowing an inheritance (Gen. 48:14-20) or an act of blessing (Matt. 19:13).
Jesus and the apostles often laid hands on a person asking to be healed (Mark 5:23). But laying on of hands is most associated with conferring the gifts or rights of an office--- apostles, deacons (Acts 6:6) pastors, missionaries.
The ones laying on the hands are respected authority figures who symbolically pass on power to the other person (Acts 6:6; 13:3). The apostles would sometimes lay hands on a person who would receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:17; 19:6).
(b)Do you believe this is for today?
~~~ Yes, I do believe the laying on of hands is for today.
In Asia the laying on of hands custom or tradition means a sign of approval and blessings.
To Selah: Laying on of hands is the Jewish custom of blessing, pass on the power to another person.
The Americans have their own styles/customs on laying on of hands= passing on the power, authority, or approval to other person by hand shakes, a pat on the back, etc.. That's what I meant not literally laying on of hands on the head of a person.
1) Ken wrote: Nate, my friend
I am confused with your answer to Linda's questions. I never experienced or witnessed the laying on of hands while we we in the F&Ws fellowship. Certainly no transfer of power from workers to anyone. Did I miss something in all the quotes?
ken
~~ N9: Hi ken,
As I have shared in my previous post about the time when I started in the work in 1986 the overseer had all of us NEW workers speaking with him on Saturday morning convention. That is a form of laying on of hands= blessings, approval, and pass on authority as workers on us to show all the friends and workers at convention we have been chosen as ministers of God.
By the way, I had the laying on the hands by God in 1979 and offered for the work in 1980.
Selah wrote:
Hi again Nathan,
Quote:The Americans have their own styles/customs on laying on of hands= passing on the power, authority, or approval to other person by hand shakes, a pat on the back, etc.. That's what I meant not literally laying on of hands on the head of a person.
This seems like a reasonable explanation to me, and I agree that through the ages and cultures, we often use different methods to convey the same message.
My question is why is that okay concerning laying on of hands, and not okay concerning other methods/traditions that may also have a cultural context? For example: Immersion in baptism comes from the Jewish tradition of cleansing in the mikvah.
1) Scott wrote:
OK....
So a LITERAL laying on of hands (USA style) does not involve a physical touch.... And could therefore be done over the internet, by a letter, sent by a carrier pigeon or whatever.... BECAUSE there is no physical 'touch'?
And......
~~~ Laying on of hands on the head/Touching in public is NOT Americans way of showing approval. In the Orient, laying on of the hands on the head, touching, hugging, or holding hands of the same sex are signs of great friendship, showing affection and respect.
The Americans do most everything the opposite. because when their parents, grandparents immigrated to this NEW country many of them wanted to forget the old country traditions and customs.
2) Do you feel that the only laying on of hands is FIGURATIVE and not physical? Ever?
~~~ In the Bible times laying on of hands is NOT figuratively but literally... It was the custom in those days.
2) Is there any other method in which one is given the authority to be ministers other than a FIGURATIVE laying on of hands by an overseer? Just a simple Yes or No will work for me unless you wish to explain your answer.
~~~ Yes, there are other methods the Americans are using as a form of laying on of hands such a phone call, talking to the person face to face, hands sakes, writing a letter, emails, etc... when the workers appointed the elders for Wed. or Sunday morning meetings.
The hands wrote:
The laying on of hands, as mentioned, is the method in which the approval/blessing was conveyed - be it a custom of that day or not, tho' it sounds likely. But it also gives weight to the claim of some that there has to be a personal touch - meaning it's not an internet ministry, nor a television/radio ministry, but a person to person conveying of authority, blessing, approval, acceptance, etc.
Not essential to salvation, but essential to fellowship. It was symbolic of the essence of fellowship. Like the washing of feet was a symbol of the Spirit of Jesus that should be in us, toward others. Not a ceremony that is continued, literally, but continued in spirit.
The emblems established in the upper chamber was a symbol that was told to be continued in remembrance of me. They gathered together on the first day of the week in sorrow that was turned to rejoicing, the following Sun in seeking that same experience - not a symbol, but a real, living experience. So it continues. Go for it Nathan - - - make it clearer ! You have the gift of explaining things.
~~~ Thanks, for your kind words. Thanks, and appreciate for what you have shared also. Very good. You've explained it better than I could.