I saw this woman on FB and then on Youtube and her deliverance ministry. I am posting this because I see she is part of the church known as 5Fold Church.
I am only wanting a biblical response to please to her teaching and what you see in the videos/ Teaching. If you are just going to say comments that are insulting, please just move on.
Thank you
Interesting.
What I noticed from an empirical perspective is that some of those contortions seemed to go beyond the realm of nature, unless she is a contortionist or gymist with an uber strong and flexible core. The Crucible depicted the Salem witch hunt situation as non-supernatural, but I read that during the trial the girls bodies were contorted in unnatural ways. I do not think they handled it right if they believed these spirits' testimony and stuff like that to accuse others.
I do not think we have to see something totally unnatural for it to be a demon. I mean they don't have to levitate and their head doesn't have to spin around (like in some movie) for it to be real. I do not sense the presence of a demon. She gave a creepy look. It's on film though. And in real life, I do not always sense the presence of a demon, just sometimes. Even if an exorcism or purported exorcism is going on, I do not necessarily sense it.
I am inclined to think this may be a genuine exorcism, though I know little about her. Some people might want attention and flop around even though they are pretending to be inhabited by evil beings. Or they could pretend under the persuasive influence of evil beings, not knowing such things are real. Or they could be doing it out of some sort of psychological thing, mass hysteria or whatever. Or it can be genuine.
As far as the exorcism goes there, I am glad she did not try to interview the spirit. Jesus asked a question-- what is your name-- to a legion, so some people use that as an apologetic for interviewing demons. It was short though.
I was a little disappointed to find out that in real life, they don't always just come out in two seconds when you mention it. I was taught in Sunday School or some meeting in that room in church that if you tell them to go in Jesus' name, they do. We sang a song, "In the name of Jesus.... demons will have to flee." Someone pointed out to me that there is a certain ongoing tense, and I think it shows up in Luke 8. The Lord Jesus told the demons to come out of the guy infested with legion before he finally cast them out.
I know some people who do exorcism want to get at the root of sin (maybe devil worship through idolatry, occult stuff, etc.) or unforgiveness (based on delivering to the tormentors in the parable of the unforgiving servant) while casting out demons. They may tell people who have never done it who just say it will be instant that it may take some confession or repentance to get rid of the demons legal 'right.' I understand the rationale for that. But I don't see specific instances of that in the Bible. The reasons I see for not being able to cast a demon out are unbelief in Matthew 17, combined with some manuscripts saying, "This kind cometh not out but by fasting and prayer." Another is it took a while apparently for a huge number of demons, legion, to come out. We don't know how long all of Christ's other exorcisms took.
I would not want the idea that I had to go through an elaborate methodology to cast out a demon to hinder my faith in any way--- getting people to renounce sin and repent first. Can't that be taken care off after so the spirit does not come back and inhabit with reinforcements? I suspect some rather sinful people in Biblical times got demons cast out of them. One was a diviner probably with the Apollo cult that Paul cast a demon out of. Those are sinful things. Of course, she was a Gentile during a time of repentance and remission of sin through Christ's name was newly being preached among her people. I would imagine if someone had enough power from God for it, that the demon could just go out instantly and some of this other stuff would be resolved. The outliers here might be the kind that comes out through prayer and fasting, maybe multiple demons taking a bit longer. I think I've seen the fast and slow kind, both in person and on film, but probably more of the slow kinds in cases where there seems to be more evidence of the demon there.
The other issue is the power to cast out demons. Jesus had it. He gave it to the Twelve and the 70. In Mark 16, we read that them that believe will cast out demons, lay hands on the sick and they shall recover, take up serpents, etc. There are some people who have taken that serpent thing quite literally. If you interpret the passage to mean that each and every individual that really believes is going to cast out demons, take up serpents, and heal, then you end up with people feeling condemned and thinking they aren't saved unless they handle a snake and some miraculous things happen. I see it as the group of believers will manifest these signs, rather than necessitating every believer has to heal, has to cast out devils, etc. I think Apostolic Constitutions made a similar point. I read that in there a while back if I have the title right, maybe from the 400's AD.
Casting out demons is also a miracle/sign, according to Jesus. Apparently the 'children' of the Pharisees could cast out demons according to Jesus in Matthew 12. There were other people not following with the disciples who cast out demons in his name. John didn't like that and the apostles forbid them, but they were wrong to do so. Manifestations of the Spirit are given as the Spirit wills, but God is generous, and the Spirit can give a one-off manifestation of the operation of powers/miracles so we can cast out a demon when we need to. All things are possible to him that believes.
I don't understand what she meant by 'family death.' My guess is that might have been some terminology used in some teaching I am not familiar with, some kind of theology the exorcist there holds to. I have mixed feelings about 'generational curses.' I think 'curse' may be the wrong word. Someone has to communicate a curse-- usually speak it. It could be written to. Someone has to curse someone else for there to be a curse. Israelites and those who get circumcised and take upon themselves the obligation to obey the law of Moses with an intent to be justified by the law are under a curse, because they violate the law (all have sinned) and there is a curse in the law for those who do not obey it. Is that multi-generational? Does it apply to Gentiles? That does not seem clear to me. So who put a __curse__ on all these people with sins in their bloodline or whatever they call it?
There is this verse from Exodus 20.
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God
am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth
generation of them that hate me;
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
God is speaking to Israel. We all learn from the ten commandments. The principle is is more general though. The fourth (generation) of them that hate God. God visits the wickedness of them that hate Him down for four generations, but mercy for thousands of generations for them that hate him.
Then we can read Ezekiel and see how they who are under the guilt of the fathers' sins can repent and be free from it. God can deliver people from the effects of past sin through individual repentance. This may be the principle partly found in the 'generational curse' teaching, but if no one spoke a curse, then there is no curse. If God did not curse, why call it a curse. Is that statement in Exodus 20 a 'curse'? That seems to be a stretch of the meaning of the word....maybe.
As far as the honorific titles are concerned, I don't like people being called 'apostle' or 'pastor' in front of their name. It reminds me of the rabbi and Father stuff in Matthew 23. All ye are brethren. We might have different gifts and roles. I see apostles as those who are 'sent out'-- since that is what the word means. We can look at the examples in scripture-- Jesus calls the 12 'apostles' in connection with their being sent out to heal, cast out demons, raise the dead, and preach 'Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.' Then they are apostles after that. Paul and Barnabas start getting called 'apostles' after the Spirit speaks to the prophets and teachers in Antioch to separate them for ministry, and the Spirit sends them out. Then Acts first calls them 'apostles' in Acts 14:4 then again in verse 14.
Then in I Thessalonians 1, we see Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy authored the epistle, and in 2:6-7, we see 'apostles of Christ' used to describe them. Timothy had a gift in him with the laying on of the apostles hands, and a gift in him given through prophecy accompanied by the laying on of hands of the apostles. Compare Timothy having a gift through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders to Barnabas and Saul (Paul) having hands laid on them to separate them to ministry and being sent out by the Spirit after the Spirit spoke to the prophets and teachers in Antioch. Silvanus/Silas was a prophet the apostles in Acts 15 sent with a letter. He and Paul later travelled together. There is no story about his becoming an apostle.