Devotionals

This Biblical Truth Squelches the Argument Against Being Slain in the Spirit

Note: This is the second in a three-part series.

In Wednesday's article, I defined the phenomenon of being "slain in the Spirit." I explained that this can occur during a spiritual encounter with God, but if someone is not "slain in the Spirit," that doesn't mean that they didn't have an encounter with God.

A question that comes to mind when pondering this is why are some vehemently against "falling under the power?" I have encountered four basic arguments that opponents of this manifestation will use. I will explain one here and three more on Friday:

1. Being "slain in the Spirit" is not biblical. Now, as far as this specific argument goes, there are really two main positions. There are those who believe that the manifestation is anti-biblical, and there are those who believe that the manifestation is extra-biblical.

However, there is nothing in scripture that specifically condemns the manifestation itself. The manifestation cannot be considered anti-Biblical, as there is nothing in the Scripture that labels it as demonic or of the flesh. In fact, the opponents will say, "It's not even found in scripture." If that were true, what grounds would they have to label it as anti-biblical in the first place? At that point, it would simply be extra-biblical.

So those who say it is anti-Biblical say so without any justification whatsoever.

Now what about those who say it is "extra-Biblical?"

I find it quite humorous that opponents of the manifestation will pick at the supporting scriptures with statements like, "Well, they fell but they didn't fall backwards. They fell, but nobody laid hands on them." They demand very specific mentions, yet the criticisms that they raise are themselves not found in biblical specifics. Rather, they base their criticisms on biblical principles. It's insincere to then say that the manifestation cannot, therefore, be supported using the same approach.

If one is to believe, based upon the Scripture's supposed silence, that the manifestation is something to be avoided, they must commit to a very subtle form of hypocrisy, particularly if they deny that the silence can also be an endorsement.

After all, if the Scripture doesn't address it, should not they be silent to condemn it, especially if they are so concerned about adding to the Scripture? Most who reject the manifestation do so because it is extra-biblical. Yet their condemnation of the manifestation is itself extra-biblical.

We don't see the apostles or Christ specifically condemning the "slain in the Spirit" phenomenon. So if anything, the Bible's silence on the issue should lead them to be silent on the issue, if they are really that concerned with adding to the Bible.

But, in fact, that's not their position. They base their opposition upon Biblical principles. If then the opposition is based upon principles like "defending the faith," should we not then first look to see if the manifestation can be supported by Biblical principles?

In fact, it is supported by biblical principles. My response to critics can be summarized in four premises that lead to one conclusion. Each premise is based upon a Biblical principle, and the principles together make a solid, undeniable conclusion, that the manifestation can be supported with scripture.

My argument is as follows:

Premise A: God manifests His presence.

Premise B: God's manifested presence can cause a physical reaction.

Premise C: The Spirit dwells in us.

Premise D: The Spirit and His power can be transferred through touch.

Conclusion: Therefore, being "slain in the Spirit" is biblical.

So we take Biblical principles and apply them to being "slain in the Spirit." You won't see that term in the Bible, but neither will you see "rapture" or "Bible" in the Bible. Just because something is not specifically mentioned—chapter and verse—does not mean that the foundational principles for it are not. The question we must ask then is not, "Is it in the Bible?"

The question we must ask is, "Is it in God's nature?" And, if someone were to disagree, they would have to deny one or all of the premises above.

Premise A is so biblically solid that I don't feel I even need to show scriptural support for it. For we know that, in fact, God manifested Himself to people, time and time again. The same goes for premise C.

What about premise B? Does the manifested presence of God sometimes cause people to physically react? Indeed, it does.

"And when the priests came out of the holy place, the cloud filled the house of the Lord, so that the priests could not continue to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord" (1 Kings 8:10-11, MEV).

"They answered Him, 'Jesus of Nazareth.' Jesus said to them, 'I am He.' And Judas, who betrayed Him, was standing with them. When He said, "I am He," they drew back and fell to the ground." (John 18:5-6).

"At midday, O King, I saw along the way a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining around me and those who journeyed with me. When we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language, 'Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'" (Acts 26:13-14).

In the instances above, those who fell at God's glory did not do so voluntarily and did not do so out of reverence. They did not faint, and they did not collapse in fear. And they did not fall back out of surprise (yes, that's an actual argument someone tried). They were simply unable to stand in the presence of God.

In each of the instances above, they fell because that is what the glory and presence of God caused to happen. It is very clear, from the Scriptures above, that God's manifested presence can cause the physical human body to react.

Again, we are not looking for this specific instance: A preacher lays hands on someone and that person falls backwards. Rather, we are searching to see if the principle, that God's manifested presence sometimes causes a physical reaction, is well-founded.

Some would argue, "But in the Bible, they fell forward, not backwards like at revivals." And they would be correct in speaking of other references besides the ones above. In the Scriptures above, they fell backwards and were also unable to stand. It is obvious that the manifested presence of God causes physical and emotional reactions. In the case with the priests, they were unable to stand.

But I don't even think that's the main issue for opponents. The effects of God's presence on a human are both plainly and often seen all throughout the Old and New Testaments.

The challenger might here interject, "Yes, but nobody laid hands on them!" That leads us to premise D.

So how about it? Can the power of God be transferred through touch?

"So handkerchiefs or aprons he had touched were brought to the sick, and the diseases left them, and the evil spirits went out of them" (Acts 19:12).

"At once, Jesus knew within Himself that power had gone out of Him. He turned around in the crowd and said, 'Who touched My garments?'" (Mark 5:30).

"But avoid profane foolish babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness" (2 Tim. 2:16).

"Then they laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit" (Acts 8:17).

So we see, from Scripture, that spiritual things can be transferred and given through the laying on of hands. The Spirit and His power can be transferred through human touch.

And what happens when the Holy Spirit and His power are present? In some cases, people are unable to stand or otherwise react physically. We see the reactions to the glory of God all throughout Scripture.

So to say that the manifestation is unbiblical, one must deny one or all of these premises.

Otherwise, he cannot reject the conclusion.

Premise A: God manifests His presence.

Premise B: God's manifested presence can cause physical reaction.

Premise C: The Spirit dwells in us.

Premise D: The Spirit and His power can be transferred through touch.

Conclusion: Therefore, being Slain in the Spirit" is Biblical. {eoa}

David Diga Hernandez (author of Carriers of the Glory) is an evangelist, healing minister, author and TV host. He heads an international healing ministry based in Southern California. David travels both domestically and internationally and his TV show, Encounter TV, is available in millions of home globally. His ministry is marked by a distinctive presence of the Holy Spirit, miracles, healing and salvation. David is a unique and emerging spiritual leader, called to take God's saving and healing power to this generation.

For the conclusion of this article, stay tuned Friday.

Use Desktop Layout
Charisma Magazine — Empowering believers for life in the Spirit
button
button