Background to the Holy Laughter Movement

[DeaconDan]

The person falling is supposedly the recipient of the Holy Spirit at that moment in time, not the person catching them yes ?

How do these people catching them know who to stand behind ?[/I]

When you are tapped on the forhead, you are suppose to fall. And, you do not want to look like an idiot by standing there stiffly, but you want to accept the experience. And, they do shove you harder than you may be expecting.

[Lily]

Dan, I noticed in one clip ( think it was Benny Hinn ) where he pushed his Wife and when she was going down, her shirt blew up slightly and you could see her quite unskillfully trying to hide the fact that she was adjusting her clothing while on the floor

[DeaconDan]

Dan, I noticed in one clip ( think it was Benny Hinn ) where he pushed his Wife and when she was going down, her shirt blew up slightly and you could see her quite unskillfully trying to hide the fact that she was adjusting her clothing while on the floor

I do not want to make light of this, but I cannot resist.

In this video Hinn is a mob boss who has put lead weights in the bottom of his coat, turning his coat into a whipable club, a weapon. Two goons bring a victim to Hinn and he smashes the poor guy. The goons pick the victim up so Hinn can smash him again. Hinn is so overcome with rage that he goes on and assaults his own henchmen. Later, to appease is lust for violence, victims are brought to him one by one and pushed in front of Hinn. Their bodies pile up as he bashes them. Some people raise their hands above their heads in surrender, but Hinn does not hesitate to smash them, as well.

[Steveg]

I was referring to the summary given to the links, but since you spotted it in the article whereas I was looking for some rubberstamp of the RCC as officiating that link, thanks for spotting it.

There was even another link listed in the Google search that said the same summary and yet it was the same report.

And you ignored my quote:



But I understand your need to smear me. Everybody knows of your pride in the RCC. I forgive you foir accusing me of deception.

I didn't ignore your quote Paraiah. It was insincere since you had just posted what was clearly deceiptful.

Feb 11, 2006 ... (per Roman Catholic Church). ... A recently issued doctrinal statement indicates that the Vineyard considers that Bible .... John Wimber has reiterated his belief that the holy laughter movement is a move from God, .

The (per Roman Catholic Church) was take totally out of context and linked to other quotes that had no relation to it. The clear intended implication was that they were related.

I suppose it's too much to expect you to apologise.

[Pariah]

For those that can read without prejudices, refer to the first post:

Steve's false accusation quoted below:

The (per Roman Catholic Church) was take totally out of context and linked to other quotes that had no relation to it. The clear intended implication was that they were related.

Quoted to refute Steve's false accusation:

Not that I found anything at that site as identifying the report as per Roman Catholic Church FYI.

But I do believe this site has given sufficient background on the event.

Only you are making something out of nothing, Steve... and again, besides the point of the OP.

And the same can be said about expecting you not to apologize.

Now go back and stick to the OP.

[Steveg]

For those that can read without prejudices, refer to the first post:

Steve's false accusation quoted below:



Quoted to refute Steve's false accusation:



Only you are making something out of nothing, Steve... and again, besides the point of the OP.

And the same can be said about expecting you not to apologize.

Now go back and stick to the OP.

But you did quote a misleading reference to the Catholic Church, taken out of context, with no relevance to the quotes you linked it to.

Weasel get out clauses after that are no excuse.

[Pariah]

But you did quote a misleading reference to the Catholic Church, taken out of context, with no relevance to the quotes you linked it to.

Weasel get out clauses after that are no excuse.

That was practically a disclaimer, Steve. It was included in the initial OP. That is permissable in the forum.