People starve to death in Kenya while fasting 'to meet Jesus'

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Four people were on Thursday found dead and nearly a dozen others hospitalised in Kenya's coastal Kilifi county, after being rescued while waiting the imminent end of the world.

The victims who are believed to be members of Pastor Paul Mackenzie’s Good News International Church say they had been told to fast to avoid “apocalyptic damnation”, the police said.

The authorities said they rescued 11 people - six of them were emaciated and in critical condition.

Read more here: 4 starve to death in Kenya while fasting 'to meet Jesus' | Africanews

I never understood the fasting part of Christianity. The only thing fasting has brought me was illness. Intermittent fasting caused me gallbladder disease. Every time I fast, my health deteriorates.

Why would God want people to deprive themselves of nourishment for their bodies? Why did Jesus fast for 40 days? What was He trying to accomplish? Why did He say that some demons can't be cast out except through fasting? What kind of ridiculous rules are these? Demons are lawless spiritual entities. Why would lawless spiritual entities have any legal ground based on whether a human nourishes their body or not?

 

[Messy]

Read more here: 4 starve to death in Kenya while fasting 'to meet Jesus' | Africanews

I never understood the fasting part of Christianity. The only thing fasting has brought me was illness. Intermittent fasting caused me gallbladder disease. Every time I fast, my health deteriorates.

Why would God want people to deprive themselves of nourishment for their bodies? Why did Jesus fast for 40 days? What was He trying to accomplish? Why did He say that some demons can't be cast out except through fasting? What kind of ridiculous rules are these? Demons are lawless spiritual entities. Why would lawless spiritual entities have any legal ground based on whether a human nourishes their body or not?

I have fasted in the past. It works, because it's easier to pray. You say no to the flesh and can concentrate on God. Jesus fasted before He started His ministry. But He said it to His disciples and then they didn't even have to fast, because He was there. He didn't say it to the one who was sick.
I don't fast anymore either now. My stomach protests. I have half fasted too much since I got kids. Not for religious reasons, but because food is expensive and I rather bought them extra's.

 

[Messy]

10 Powerful Biblical Benefits Of Fasting | Just Word Blog Article | 2024

"10 Powerful Biblical Benefits of Fasting" is so insightful! We often say, if you do it the Bible way, you get the Bible results. As we deal with life, fasting is a key tool in our spiritual toolbox with powerful results, when combined with prayer, study, and obedience to the instructions in...

justwordministries.com

Isaiah 58
5 Is it a fast that I have chosen,
A day for a man to afflict his soul?
Is it to bow down his head like a bulrush,
And to spread out sackcloth and ashes?
Would you call this a fast,
And an acceptable day to the Lord?

6 “Is this not the fast that I have chosen:
To loose the bonds of wickedness,
To undo the [c]heavy burdens,
To let the oppressed go free,
And that you break every yoke?
7 Is it not to share your bread with the hungry,
And that you bring to your house the poor who are [d]cast out;
When you see the naked, that you cover him,
And not hide yourself from your own flesh?
8 Then your light shall break forth like the morning,
Your healing shall spring forth speedily,
And your righteousness shall go before you;
The glory of the Lord shall be your rear guard.
9 Then you shall call, and the Lord will answer;
You shall cry, and He will say, ‘Here I am.’
“If you take away the yoke from your midst,
The [e]pointing of the finger, and speaking wickedness,
10 If you extend your soul to the hungry
And satisfy the afflicted soul,
Then your light shall dawn in the darkness,
And your [f]darkness shall be as the noonday.
11 The Lord will guide you continually,
And satisfy your soul in drought,
And strengthen your bones;
You shall be like a watered garden,
And like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail.

 

[tango]

People may fast for all sorts of reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean you have to do it.

The fact the guy in the pulpit says something doesn't mean it's true. There are enough kooks and nutjobs out there masquerading as ministers that we can't just trust anything we hear from the pulpit or read in a "Christian" book.

 

[Stravinsk]

Read more here: 4 starve to death in Kenya while fasting 'to meet Jesus' | Africanews

I never understood the fasting part of Christianity. The only thing fasting has brought me was illness. Intermittent fasting caused me gallbladder disease. Every time I fast, my health deteriorates.

Why would God want people to deprive themselves of nourishment for their bodies? Why did Jesus fast for 40 days? What was He trying to accomplish? Why did He say that some demons can't be cast out except through fasting? What kind of ridiculous rules are these? Demons are lawless spiritual entities. Why would lawless spiritual entities have any legal ground based on whether a human nourishes their body or not?

In the Clementine Homilies (which is considered Apocrypha to mainstream Christianity) eating meats is considered to be partaking with demons. "“The unnatural eating of flesh meats is as polluting as the heathen worship of devils…” (Homilies XII). When I read the passage about Christ saying some demons can only leave with prayer and fasting, it brings to mind this and similar passages in Clementine literature. Fasting doesn't necessarily have to be no food. Even in some Christian traditions, their "fast" involves leaving meat off the menu for a short period of time.

 

[Albion]

When I read the passage about Christ saying some demons can only leave with prayer and fasting, it brings to mind this and similar passages in Clementine literature. Fasting doesn't necessarily have to be no food.

That's true. A significant reduction of food taken does count as a fast.

Even in some Christian traditions, their "fast" involves leaving meat off the menu for a short period of time.

Which "Christian traditions" would that be?

 

[Messy]

A Daniel's fast.

Daniel Fast - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Albion]

People may fast for all sorts of reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean you have to do it.

The fact the guy in the pulpit says something doesn't mean it's true. There are enough kooks and nutjobs out there masquerading as ministers that we can't just trust anything we hear from the pulpit or read in a "Christian" book.

It depends a lot on the organization that authorizes the nutjob. While there are of course exceptions, this is one reason for being wary of congregations that are unaffiliated with any parent body or denomination, and especially so when the guy in the pulpit started up the church himself.

 

[tango]

It depends a lot on the organization that authorizes the nutjob. While there are of course exceptions, this is one reason for being wary of congregations that are unaffiliated with any parent body or denomination, and especially so when the guy in the pulpit started up the church himself.

Be wary of the unaffiliated but also be aware of affiliations. Personally any church associated in any way at all with a place like Bethel would be a huge red flag for me. A church I attended for a short time was notionally part of a very conservative denomination but went so far off the rails with the silly charismatic stuff I got sick of walking out of services and just walked away from the church.

 

[Albion]

Be wary of the unaffiliated but also be aware of affiliations. Personally any church associated in any way at all with a place like Bethel would be a huge red flag for me. A church I attended for a short time was notionally part of a very conservative denomination but went so far off the rails with the silly charismatic stuff I got sick of walking out of services and just walked away from the church.

I understand, but since it would have been quite a task to assess the whole range of churches in my post, I pointed to what is probably the most prominent "red flag" when it comes to choosing a congregation.

Still, when it comes to charismatic and/or pentecostal congregations, there are a wide variety of small associations or denominations that any of them might be affiliated with, so that situation may not be a lot better. But I don't mean to include the several larger and longer-established ones in that overview.

 

[tango]

I understand, but since it would have been quite a task to assess the whole range of churches in my post, I pointed to what is probably the most prominent "red flag" when it comes to choosing a congregation.

Still, when it comes to charismatic and/or pentecostal congregations, there are a wide variety of small associations or denominations that any of them might be affiliated with, so that situation may not be a lot better. But I don't mean to include the several larger and longer-established ones in that overview.

Sure, it can be hard to strike a balance. The pastor who "felt called" and started a church might be the best guy for the job but, to put it politely, sometimes it's hard to conclude anything other than it being a wrong number. But then the disciples never went to college.

Sometimes I get a sense that many people just assume that the guy in the pulpit is right, the talking head in the "Christian" resource video is right, the author of the "Christian" book is right, and often wonder how many people even consider the possibility that these people might either outright be wrong about something or that they present an opinion that (intentionally or otherwise) is interpreted as an absolute fact.

 

[Messy]

Sure, it can be hard to strike a balance. The pastor who "felt called" and started a church might be the best guy for the job but, to put it politely, sometimes it's hard to conclude anything other than it being a wrong number. But then the disciples never went to college.

Sometimes I get a sense that many people just assume that the guy in the pulpit is right, the talking head in the "Christian" resource video is right, the author of the "Christian" book is right, and often wonder how many people even consider the possibility that these people might either outright be wrong about something or that they present an opinion that (intentionally or otherwise) is interpreted as an absolute fact.

Better to not just trust whoever it is. That's people worship or just naive. The Bereans even checked Paul. A guy warned in the 60s for false teachers. He said: They will first preach good and Biblical and then when people trust them, they will bring in heresies and they'll say: yeah but the other stuff he said was good, so this must be good too.

 

[tango]

Better to not just trust whoever it is. That's people worship or just naive. The Bereans even checked Paul. A guy warned in the 60s for false teachers. He said: They will first preach good and Biblical and then when people trust them, they will bring in heresies and they'll say: yeah but the other stuff he said was good, so this must be good too.

That's it exactly. Test everything - if the person you blindly trust leads you astray it makes little difference whether they did it on purpose or if they truly believed they were right.

An outright lie is often easy to spot. A lie blended with some truth is often harder to weed out, particularly when the speaker or their supporters respond to the claims by asking if anyone really believes the true part is a lie.

 

[Stravinsk]

That's true. A significant reduction of food taken does count as a fast.

Which "Christian traditions" would that be?

A Daniel's fast.

Daniel Fast - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The Daniel fast is sometimes taken up by Protestant Christians, although in my experience fasting isn't common in Protestant churches. Although I do remember people sometimes "giving up" something during lent. Not necessarily something they eat.

Catholic and Orthodox however, have some history of fasting regularly or during certain periods. There are probably some other Christian variants that do too, it's not something I've really looked into much.

Here are some guidelines I found for the Orthodox church. As can be seen, every Wednesday and Friday all meat, fish, dairy, eggs and alcohol (except beer) are not consumed for the weekly fast: The Fasting Rule of the Orthodox Church

In Essene literature, what is considered a "fast" in the Orthodox church every Wednesday and Friday, is every day for the Essene, without exception, and doesn't include alcoholic beverage.

 

[Albion]

Better to not just trust whoever it is. That's people worship or just naive.

Test everything - if the person you blindly trust leads you astray it makes little difference whether they did it on purpose or if they truly believed they were right.

Whoa. The point about knowing whether to trust what a preacher preaches wasn't about routinely doubting everything one's pastor tells you from the pulpit, etc.

That's going way overboard, except if there are warning signs. We pointed to a few--no supervision of the local pastor such as that experienced by ministers who belong to a well-established denomination, and perhaps also the kind of faith that predominates in the church in question.

If there's a lot of present-time "prophesizing, casual interpretations of tongues-speaking, acceptance of claims made by members of the congregation about them having supposedly talked personally with God, and more in that vein...take care. But that's not to say that everything one hears from the pulpit in the average church must routinely be doubted.

 

[tango]

Whoa. The point about knowing whether to trust what a preacher preaches wasn't about routinely doubting everything one's pastor tells you from the pulpit, etc.

That's not what I said - I said we should test and I stand by that. It doesn't mean doubting everything, it means considering that it might be correct and it might be incorrect.

That's going way overboard, except if there are warning signs. We pointed to a few--no supervision of the local pastor such as that experienced by ministers who belong to a well-established denomination, and perhaps also the kind of faith that predominates in the church in question.

As with everything else we can develop trust in a pastor but that doesn't mean the pastor is right on everything. We don't need to come with a preconceived assumption they are wrong but we equally don't need to assume they are right.

If there's a lot of present-time "prophesizing, casual interpretations of tongues-speaking, acceptance of claims made by members of the congregation about them having supposedly talked personally with God, and more in that vein...take care. But that's not to say that everything one hears from the pulpit in the average church must routinely be doubted.

As before, we can test without inherently doubting. If we have a reasonable grounding in Scripture we can listen and figure that what we are hearing aligns with our understanding of Scripture, or clashes with it, or something in between. If what we hear doesn't fit with our understanding of Scripture there's nothing wrong with talking to the preacher and asking about it - in that situation it's always possible that they are right and we are wrong.

I don't dispute any part of what you say about some of the excesses of the fringe charismatic churches. But the call in Scripture to "test all things, hold fast what is true" doesn't offer exclusions for the guy in the pulpit. It does give us some freedom to figure for ourselves how much we trust the guy in the pulpit and how we go about testing what they say.

 

[Messy]

Ĺ

Whoa. The point about knowing whether to trust what a preacher preaches wasn't about routinely doubting everything one's pastor tells you from the pulpit, etc.

That's going way overboard, except if there are warning signs. We pointed to a few--no supervision of the local pastor such as that experienced by ministers who belong to a well-established denomination, and perhaps also the kind of faith that predominates in the church in question.

If there's a lot of present-time "prophesizing, casual interpretations of tongues-speaking, acceptance of claims made by members of the congregation about them having supposedly talked personally with God, and more in that vein...take care. But that's not to say that everything one hears from the pulpit in the average church must routinely be doubted.

Someone from a well established denomination can also be wrong about things, but in general they miss out on a lot of craziness.
I was searching for a church. Oh hey that name (evangelical pastor with a big church) is familiar. I heard he's good. Lets listen to a preaching online. He says: God told me that ppl don't have victory over sin because they don't understand what happened on the cross. Yes. Okay. And then he says: So I decided I was gonna preach about it. Great. The law died on the cross. What? Never mind. Skip. Next. And he's not even bad. He just doesn't know either.

But when I was not long saved I opened my mouth like a baby bird and trusted and believed everyone. Rodney Howard Browne, the Toronto blessing, went there a few times, Kenneth Copeland (seriously? How blind can you be? That laugh is evil), Kathryn Kuhlman, Todd Bentley even. We have a big evangelical church in Holland. They always invited preachers like that and because it's Holland, we get the ones that America spewed out. I once asked on christian forums in the charismatic part if they knew a name from a guy I had been to in that church. There were preachers there. One said: No that's a total fraud. We don't want him. That's why he goes to the Netherlands. He preached about going back in time, his son hit a rock and water came out and he caught a fish with sunglasses. It was the craziest ever, but the scary part: those ppl, the place was packed, they saw nothing wrong with it. Or Bill Johnson with his gravesucking. The other opposite is that it's not crazy, but dull. You don't even know what they preach, cause you fall asleep and they throw out the kid with the bath water and say God gives diseases. And even if you find a good normal church with a normal pastor, then yes you don't have to keep checking, but I do check automatically. Nobody's perfect. One guy said: this and that is in my Bible. The whole church looked puzzled. He said: It's in my Bible. Not in yours. I wrote it there. Funnypants. With evangelical churches you really have to watch out. Check what they believe. Nowadays some are from Kingdom Now. They are gonna rule on earth now literally. Else Jesus can't come back. And it all happened in 70 AD and the church replaced Israel.

 

[Messy]

Lately I posted a link here to warn that guy, who doesn't listen to me and my mom was watching a guy. You should go there. He's good. So I Googled. Hey church is not that far away, 45 mins with bus and train and this sunday they invite that guy. It's a big normal church. Lets go there. And then I saw his name in that link, that warns against hypercalvinism, but also charismania and they said he was a money preacher, so I looked him up. Yup. Money money money. Pennycostals and charismaniacs. I give up. I want to go to a normal church meeting in my dad's retirement home.

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

God told me that ppl don't have victory over sin because they don't understand what happened on the cross.

He's right. I don't understand what happened on the cross. Why does God allow this confusion?

 

[Albion]

That's not what I said - I said we should test and I stand by that.

Okay, but that seems to me to be close to the same thing. Sound doctrine is important, and we all need to know what it is that we believe, but I can't see second-guessing or double checking (or however else we could word that) one's pastor every time he preaches on something in the Bible. At least not unless he's previously given you reason to think his beliefs are shaky.