If you still believe in the Bible, more than 85% of His messengers, prophets and apostles were not theologians.

They were farmers, physicians, lawyers, builders/contractors, tent makers (real-estate agents?), armies, generals, state employees, teachers, etc....
But from theology/religion education background? How many was the percentage compared to the non theologians...of the prophets God called?

But why God did that?

Well, in this case, would you mind to complaint, "Ooh please God. I don't like your way here. I hate this. Let doctors be doctors, and take care of physically sick people. And let pastors be pastors, and take care of spiritually sick people. Do your own job!!! Don't talk too much about Jesus and religion...."

"....That's why God, I also really don't like your prophets and servants Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego because they were not Pastors but talking about religion and witnessing about their Redeemer when they were in their office. This is not a good thing, God. And...hey God, do you understand that?"

Delta,

I do see your point, and appreciate your point of view. However, when it comes to the health of Gods people, I must impress upon you the importance of each and every health care worker doing the very best job they can. And that means doing what you are specifically trainded to do. When any one person on the health care team chooses to play too many parts, their ability to specialize decreases dramatically. This in turn leads to more harm than good, for the lives of God's children.

I'm not saying that a doctor shouldn't witness for the lord, outside of the work place. But when that MD is on the job, actually taking the lives of his/her patients in hand, I most certainly hope the foremost thought in mind is the physical well being of that patient (ie,you, your loved ones, or anybody else).

So, do I really want doctors to do what they are very specifically trained to do? ABSOLUTELY! And do I want pastors to do exactly what they are trained to do? ABSOLUTELY! When I need to be seen for a head cold, I'll gladly go to my doctor. And when I have a head full of doubt, sorrow, remorse, joy, fullfillment, I'll gladly see my pastor.

So yeah, I think we all have a job to do. And most often, the people who are best trained to do a job, should be the ones doing it. There's always room for God to intervene and assist us in the process of bringing others to the light of God. But when we use the skills God has given us, I think we do more than just take care of lives, we witness with our actions. And I think that says more than handing out some pamphlets in the office when someone really just came there because they were feeling sick.

I assure you I don't believe that I'm telling God what He can and can't do, or what He should or shouldn't do. I am, however, stating that I think PEOPLE should do what they are best trained and suited to do.

I would not prefer to see my pastor when having spiritual problems, and then have him offer to remove a mole, or to prescribe some treatment for my cough. I'd much rather see each of them seperatly, for they are very different professions, with profoundly differnt impacts on the lives of God's children. How about you?

I agree with you. OTOH, I have been up in the surgical suites where the surgeon has prayed before beginning surgery on his patient, and this was in a non-Adventist, secular hospital. No one objected, and the Adventist surgeon was one of the most highly sought-after physicians in the area.

But prayer may lie out of the realm of what you were referring to, i.e., handing out church doctrine-related brochures, giving unrelated-to-health information to patients in his/her office, etc.

Yeah, not talking about prayer before surgery. I would most certainly hope that anybody weilding a knife into the soft parts of any person should ask God to steady their hand.

The discussion is about when that MD is talking to you, not cutting on you. And even then, nothing wrong with praying with your doctor, if thats what you ask. But I still don't think that the office or ER is the place to convince someone to visit an SDA church, or come over for bible studies. Why not let the patient see the light of God in your life, without handing out pamphlets or encouraging them to attend the next service at the local church.

When a patient has a good experience with the MD, they will more likely come back. Then, they will see how God is working in the life of that MD, and they will seek to know that same God. But if you overstep your boundries, you will push that patient away, certainly from God, and probably from quality health care. And I think we can all agree that seeing your MD on a regular basis is one of the best things we can do for our bodies. Certainly Sister White felt this way, as she helped to establish the Loma Linda Medical School, and advance the cause of health care for all people.

Thanks, fun2, for your comments. I appreciate that.

Sure you can argue as much as you want and about this.

But this still not answer the very basic question.....why God did that?


Again, God's messengers/prophets/apostles were mostly non theologians. And I'm fully believe that God-from generation to generation-must be able to choose the experts from religion field with perfect theology background to choose as His messengers.

But God didn't do that. Why?

In other words, my question is: "The majority of His prophets or messengers were not the right men in the right place (mismanagement) because they're not theologians. In fact, even after God choose them, those messengers/prophets still need to do their job as usual since nobody pay for their salary. Why did you do like that, God, I just don't get it."

Anyway, isn't God has multi-billion upon billion holy Angels? I think this is a big mistake of God since He never use any of His Angels that being sent from heaven and appear personally as if business as usual everyday...those angels have a full time job as pastors to serve the sinners and to win souls to Christ. What a big mistake!

That's simply my question.

Any idea?

And another job description of Angels in case they're being sent here as pastors is to ban, not to allowed God's people on earth especially in the medical field to witness about their Saviour while they're still at work. The consequence if this rule is being violated is that the Angels then will blotted out their names from the book of life because they talk about religion and their Jesus at work...Not good. This is to interfere Angels' job as pastors.

But the Angels won't do anything and not considered as violations if God's People on earth-especially in medical field--talking about Football, Baseball, Olympics, NBA, Movie stars, $700 billions bailouts, election, sharing coupons, mucic concerts, etc. at work. No religion or Jesus involved in their chatting at work. So...no problem.

I feel certain that none of us can answer for God. And only He know's why he works with the people He does.

I think that it's less about who God chooses, and more about those who choose to let God lead in their lives. I don't think God was sitting up there, and pointing out non-religious leaders to spread His gospel. I think people have been moved by the power of God, and have invited Him in to their lives, so that they can be a witness for Him, not the other way around.

I am unaware that angels are able to come to earth, and take the form of humans. So I can't really comment about what angels might be able to do. If you could provide biblical reference for angels taking human form (as far as I know, only Jesus has taken human form), then maybe I could comment.

I don't think there's a problem with mixing work and religion, in most cases. But there are certainly some times that it's not in the best interst of persons to push personal spiritual views upon others, one case being a patient doctor relationship.

Dear Mr(s) fun2believe,

As my highest respect to you, I just wanna humbly remind you not too much to be objective and personal when dealing with this "witnessing to patients" issue.

When we believe God want us to be His witnesses wherever and whenever we are, but at the same time I don't think it is not wise at all for us to deal with their personal issue such as, "What if", or "This doctor push his personal spiritual view upon others" etc.

Well, I am sorry but that's not your business. No matter how bad or how stupid the physicians, nurses or dentists on HOW they are witnessing about our Precious Saviour Jesus Christ at their works, the way they're witnessing to their patients are not your business at all !!!

Wouldn't it be nice if you are not be bothered....not to feel uncomfortable or at least not to be so judgemental in your view?

You see some "bad apples". But you then are going to trash the rest of the full-basket of good apples, and finally promise to yourself that you don't wanna deal nor buy any apple anymore forever because of that some few bad apples?


Love in Christ,
d

Delta,

I appreciate this opportunity we have to openly discuss issues that are clearly close to our hearts. I'm glad we live in a time and place where people from great distances and different backgrounds can come together and openly, and respectfully, share with one anohter matters of religion and personal conviction.

After careful consideration of your reply, I must respctfully disagree with your assessment.

First of all, being "objective" about these situations is exactly what we should be doing. Being "subjective" is what we shouldn't do when looking at something of this magnatude. To be objective is to adhere strictly to truth-conducive methods in one's thinking, particularly, to take into account all available information, and to avoid any form of prejudice, bias, or wishful thinking.

Second, I feel this IS my business, just as much as it is your business. I believe this is an open forum on the subject, and thus, I have equally as much right to be "personal" about my feelings as you have clearly been. On top of that, the whole point of having a conference on the subject, open to people other than physicians, is to get the input of those people whom it directly affects. If our church is going to push an agenda, which this clearly is, then we as members have a right and responsibility to weigh in on such a sensitive subject.

Additionally, medical doctors that are board certified here in america, are held to certain ethical standards for the protection of all patients. These standards state the following in regards to religion in the patient doctor relationship.

From the AMA official website at http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/384/cpearl_0505.pdf

"There has been a great deal of discussion in the literature regarding the ethical and boundary issues involved in incorporating spirituality into medical care [5]. In a multicultural society, it is important to keep in mind that physicains and patients frequently do not come from the same cultural background or belief system. Since patients in medical and spiritual distress are often in a vulnerable position, it is critical that health care providers be sensitive and careful in their approach to patients. Physicians should also be aware of their limitations in training and expertise in spiritual care and should utilize the help of trined chaplains in complex or difficult situations."

That being said, you are absolutely correct in that the patient doctor relationship is one that is private and protected by law to stay that way, for the best interst of the patient. However, neither you, nor I, nor the Adventist church has the right to impinge our views onto physicians concerning witnessing to patients while that patient is under the care of that physician.

Just as a patient is vulnerable when under the care of a physician, MD's are vulnerable when under the influence of the chruch. When the church starts to tell physicians how to deal with their patients, that's when we as members must step forward and object. Just as you don't want the government to tell your church how to worship, we shouldn't allow the church to tell MD's how to provide service to their patients.

Now that's not to say that MD's shouldn't discuss spirituality with their patients. The same AMA that warns MD's to be responsible about this issue, also states the following.

"During the last 10 years there has been a considerable increase in the number of studies shwoing positive associations between spirituality and health [1,2]. Incorporating spirituality into medical practice, however, continues to pose many challenges [3]. These include the multicultural milieu in which medicine is practiced and the deeply personal meaning these issues carry for both patients and health care providers. A culturally sensitive spiritual assessment is a first step towards addressing the spiritual needs of patients [4]. It also provides a tool through which health professionals can understand their own beliefs, biases, values, and needs as related to health care."

And finally, the AMA set of ethics regarding spirituality states

"Once a patient's spiritual needs have been assessed, there are several options for health care professionals not specifically trained as clinical chaplains.
1. Do no more--sometimes just giving the patient the opportunity to express his or her concerns in a safe, compassionate environment is enough.
2. Incorporate the patients "OWN" spiritual resources into preventive care or as adjuvant care.
3. Modify the treatment plan based on the patient's identified spiritual needs; eg, continue or stop heroic life sustaining measures; refer a patient in spiritual distress to a trained clinical chaplain; teach simple relaxation or meditation techniques to patients interested in this approach; consider alteratives to blood products for patients who are JW."

****Please note that the CAPS of "OWN" is directly from the AMA, underscoring the importance in using the patients already established spiritual belief system.****


So, what does all this mean? Well to me, it means that MDs should encourage pt's to be spiritual, whatever that means to them, as studies show this does lead to greater health. However, an MD should NOT use this time as a way to try to convert someone from their own belief system, into the Adventist church! That would be taking advantage of someone in a vulnerable position, and that's breaking the ethical rules set forth by the governing body of the American Medical Association, as well not providing the basic respect for another human being.

I don't think my point of view throws out all the apples. I've stated, and agree with, the view point that spirituality should be a part of the patient doctor relationship. And that's apples that should stay in the basket. But the apples that shouldn't make the final cut are those that would remove the rights of patients, and allow the agenda of a church, or MD's associaited with that chruch, to be pushed on vulnerable people.

You are also correct that it would be nice if this subject matter didn't bother me. However, it's clearly too late for that. And since I'm so moved by God on this subject matter (I've spent some considerable time speaking with my Saviour on the matter), I feel it's important to show others just how injurious this type of "witnessing" can be.

So, I'll try not to be "judgemental" in my postings, and just present the facts, thus being "objective". I hope you can do the same.


God Bless