Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Gehazi was healed and restored?


Recommended Posts

  • Members
16 hours ago, Oὐ Νικολαΐτης said:

Not only is he adding to scripture, but in his quest for a good story, his fairytale has other repercussions as well...

Elisha said the leprosy would cling to Gehazi forever. Evans has reduced Elisha to a false prophet by saying Gehazi was healed.

Very true. That's one of the many problems with adding/subtracting from Scripture. Any changes we make not only make that specific impact but also has a ripple effect throughout Scripture. Add a gap theory of millions of years, pre-adamic races and dinosaurs dying, and the whole creation account becomes suspect which places all of Scripture in question; for example.

We need to separate ourselves from those who corrupt the Word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 1/21/2016 at 11:10 AM, heartstrings said:

I know there were four lepers(which were not named) which found the abandoned Syrian camp and reported it to the king and I had questioned before that Gehazi was mentioned in 2 Kings 8, seemingly after he was made a leper. But I never heard this one before.......

What say you?

 

 

 

Rubbish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Quote

Brother,

 

 

Thank you for your quick response. I understand that Brother Tony cannot reply to so many inquirys.

 

 

 

But I still cannot see any indication in these scriptures of #1 Gehazi's name among the four lepers or of any named lepers. #2 I still see nothing saying that Gehazi was healed. #3 I see no direct statement saying that Gehazi was appointed an advisor to the king. Perhaps it is in another scripture somewhere? This story was very interesting to me; maybe I am missing something.

 

 

 

Thank You

 

 

 

Wayne

 


 

Didn't get a reply to this one. You would think a guy with "ThM" after his name would know the answers. ???

Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Received another response this morning......

Quote

Not everything is stated in plain text, yet that does not mean it is not true. Nowhere does the Bible call God “The Trinity” yet we know by reason of deduction and applying the scriptures that if all three, the Father , the Son and the Holy Spirit claims to be God, then there is a Trinity in person. Gehazi was a leper, and lepers do not enter into the King presence or present “report” to the King. Gehazi was in the open court where people would come to present their case to the King. A transformation had to have taken place. This is the same Gehazi because he recognize the woman that Elisha assisted. It appears that since Gehazi was a leper and the lesson to learn was selfishness, which is why he became a leper, he was given the opportunity to redeem himself from the first error. He learned the lesson when he discovered the empty camp. Saving the nation by providing materials gain him some form of recognition, which could have been the reason why the king gave him a position. Elisha could have been aware because he sent the woman (at the Right time) to see the king. There are a lot of gaps, because scripture does not record every little detail. Many theological points are concluded from examining the facts on hand. This position is stated because it adds up when we look at all the facts involved. Of course you do not have to agree with this information if you must see it in writing. This is not a life changing theological issue. I pray that God will grant you peace on this subject. Rev. Leighton Smith, ThM. Customer Care Team The Urban Alternative

Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Pastor was in the Book of James tonight. Came across this....

27And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian. 28And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 2/1/2016 at 10:00 PM, heartstrings said:

Pastor was in the Book of James tonight. Came across this....

27And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian. 28And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath,

That nailed it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I passed that verse on to Tony Evans' correspondent and got this response....

 

Quote

 

I have to request that you take time to read the entire passage correctly. I have placed it in this text.

Luke 4:24 And He said, "Truly I say to you, no prophet is welcome in his hometown. 25 But I say to you in truth, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the sky was shut up for three years and six months, when a great famine came over all the land; 26 and yet Elijah was sent to none of them, but only to Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. 27 And there were many lepers in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian."

  1. This passage has a time frame. No one was cleansed within the 3 and ½ years except Naaman.
  2. This passage is talking about Elijah the prophet
  3. The servant Gehazi belonged to Elisha – the Prophet who took Elijah place
  4. So not only is it a different time frame but an altogether different prophet.

Their names are almost the same, so it is easy to get them mixed up. I hope this has clarified your concern.

Rev.xxxxxxxxxxxxx, ThM.
Customer Care Team
The Urban Alternative

 

 

It was Elijah who told Namaan to dip 7 times in the Jordan? Huh? Is he trying to mess with my head? Is that what people with a ThM behind their name are trained to do? I need a nap, y'all. :blink:

Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah...it's easy to get them mixed up...real easy when it doesn't fit your story.  :nuts:

Is he saying that even the Bible has the names mixed up...that even though his version says Elisha, it actually means Elijah? It's rather easy to read the story of who the prophet was that dealt with Naaman's leprosy...

Like I said earlier...pride trumps truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Hey, I have to admit again: I liked the story very much, So much that I HOPED it was true. But I had to verify and much to my dismay I'm just not seeing it. Then during Bible study when we came across the Luke 4:27 verse it pretty much confirmed it for me. But what's even more of a letdown, is when someone just turns a blind eye to what's staring them right in the face, seemingly just to follow a personality....and I LIKE Tony Evans too, I really do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
  • Members

First of all I must agree with the consensus that as ministers of the gospel of Jesus the Christ,                               we should preach the written word, and must not add, inflating or season our sermons with                                           our personal opinion, calming that is the word of God says as Tony Evans did!

However, it is nothing wrong with a teacher or a preacher, telling their listeners what they believe the text is           saying as long as the stay in context with what is written, and make it aboundingly clear, that  is their theological  perspective on what was written.

After all, the apostle Paul the champion  writer of the New Testament gives his theological opinion                             where he says in 1 Corinthians 7:12" not the lord but I. and in 2 Timothy again Paul says that I suffer or do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over over a man. And Paul has a different opinion on divorce that opposes Jesus position on the grounds for divorce. And  "The Church" favored Paul's position over Jesus position on divorce.  Also the "early church fathers."                                                                                                                                 

Moreeover,  "the early church" fathers concluded that the word trinity that is also not written in the Bible is a theological  conclusion that explains the three dimensional personal of God. Christianity is a montheolitic religion, God is not three persons according to Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 45:5; I am the LORD, and there is no other; There is no God besides Me. I will gird you, though you have not known Me. Mark 12:29; John 5:7.     So one cannot deny the connection between 2 Kings 5:27; 7:1-3; and 8:1-4; in is not a fantasy of Tony Evans           is a logical theological  perspective: However, the Bible does not name the four Lepers, but one does have wonder why would a king hang out with a leper? But if you follow the text, Gehazi was consulted to veryify the Shunammite womans story. In chapter 8. Also it should be noted, that Gehazi's punishment of leporcy was not contagous, according to Leviticus 13:13,17; because 2 kings 5:27; says he was with as snow meaning he was clean. 

Edited by Jonas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Members

Interestingly, Naaman the leper was a mighty man of valour and was captain of the king's army even as a leper. 2 Kings 5:1.

This thus refutes the proposition of Tony Evans that Gehazi had to be cleansed to be in the presence of the king, and it supports the argument of white vs raw skin leprosy : clean vs unclean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...