|
|
|
Christian Evangelism, Healing, and Teaching Resources
|
|
| Home > Healing > Answering Common Objections About Divine Healing | Email this article |
|
Answering Common Objections About Divine Healing
Introduction
According to the Bible, Jesus had a three-year ministry of evangelism and healing, and then He turned this ministry over to the Church in what we call "the Great Commission." We have been commissioned by Jesus to lay hands on the sick! For proof, I invite you to see my Healing Training Course and learn how to heal the sick in Jesus' Name. Even though the Bible doesn't say that laying hands on the sick will ever "die out," many sincere, well-meaning Christians have raised a number of objections about divine healing. The purpose of this article is to provide Scriptural answers to some of these objections. My Personal Testimony
The Bible talks about the testimonies that we all have as Christians, and I have felt impressed by the Lord to share my testimony of how God led my wife and me to learn about healing. When my wife and I got married, we were quite anti-charismatic because of our religious backgrounds. We began attending a local Protestant church, and soon we began feeling a call to missionary work of some type. We got involved with several local ministries (such as the JESUS Video Project), and through a series of amazing confirmations it became clear to us that God wanted us to stay in Houston and serve Him here. At about this same time, things began falling into place for me to get involved with the Internet. My Internet ministry was born, and I have received many further confirmations that this is one of the things God has called me to do. At some point we began sensing that God was leading us to a new church home, and it turned out that He was leading us into the Baptist denomination, which we didn't know much about. The specific Southern Baptist church that He chose for us had a "charismatic" flavor to it (which we didn't know anything about at the time), but I thought that perhaps this must be how "Southern Baptists" do things as opposed to the way that "other" Baptists do things (such as contemporary praise and worship music, people raising their hands in the air, and so on). After about a year or so we heard a lady speaking quietly in a strange language at one of the church's home fellowship groups that we had joined. We weren't quite sure what was going on or what God wanted us to do about it, so we prayed for wisdom and guidance on the matter. After being at that church for a couple of years, God began leading us to a new church home, and this one happened to be a non-denominational church. At this new church we thought we heard people whispering softly to themselves in a strange language, and it sounded like the same type of language as that lady was using at our previous church! We knew that the Lord had led us to this new church, but what was He trying to show us? We prayed for more wisdom and guidance. It actually took us several weeks to realize that we were in a charismatic church, at which point we were really confused! After all, the Bible tells us to guard our hearts and our minds and to keep ourselves away from false doctrines, so why had God placed us in a charismatic church? As we prayed about the purpose for our being at this church, we felt that we should learn what these charismatics believe. Our first surprise was that they are Christians! Who knew? The next surprise was that although they believe that all spiritual gifts are still in operation today (didn't they realize that certain gifts died out in the first century?), all of their core beliefs at this church were essentially the same as the Baptist denomination. The biggest shock of all was that as we studied Scripture and prayed and studied Scripture and prayed, we discovered that the weight of evidence in the Bible is overwhelmingly on their side concerning healing, speaking in tongues, and other spiritual gifts. Eventually I documented this in some of my articles, such as The Baptism of the Holy Spirit, Praying in the Spirit Involves Speaking in Tongues, the Healing Training Course, Every Example of Healing in the New Testament, and the article you are reading now. I joined the intercessory prayer team at church, and also joined a home Bible study. My wife and I had been hearing reports of people being healed (in modern times!), and I began sensing a desire to be able to minister healing to people. As I drove to the home Bible study one evening I prayed, "Father, if this desire in my heart to lay hands on the sick is really from You, please put it into [the Bible study leader's] heart to say something which will confirm that this is from You and that this is Your will." I had never mentioned to anyone this desire that I was feeling and I didn't mention this prayer to anyone, but about halfway through the evening the leader of the Bible study interrupted himself in mid-sentence, looked straight at me, pointed at me, and said these words: "That desire in your heart was put there by God," and then he turned back and picked up his conversation with someone else right where he had left off. He never again mentioned anything about that, and he probably didn't have any idea (and still doesn't to this day) what he was referring to, but the blood drained from my face and I just stared at the floor in shock! What an awesome God to give me such an exact and almost immediate answer to my prayer and to confirm His will in this way! As we prayed for direction and studied about healing, a wonderful truth became clear. God wasn't leading my wife and me into a special healing ministry, but instead He has called all Christians to bring His love and mercy and compassion to a hurting world through such things as preaching the Good News, casting out demons, and laying hands on the sick! To learn how, I invite you to see my Healing Training Course. "The Gift of Healing"
Sometimes Christians will make the argument that only those who have "the gift of healing" will be able to heal the sick. However, there is no such thing as "the gift of healing" anywhere in the entire New Testament! Remember, spiritual gifts are special abilities given to Christians by the Holy Spirit. Scripture tells us that all Christians are authorized and commissioned to lay hands on the sick (see my Healing Training Course), but we're also told that the Holy Spirit gives special healing abilities to certain people. In 1 Corinthians 12:9, 28, and 30, the apostle Paul said that the Holy Spirit gives out "gifts of healings." Every time the Greek word for "gifts" is used in connection with healing, it is always in the plural (charismata), and in fact the Greek word for "healings" is in the plural in all of those verses as well. All Christians are commissioned to lay hands on the sick, but some people will receive special gifts of healings. For example, everyone can draw or paint to some degree, but some people are gifted in certain areas of drawing or painting. They have special artistic abilities. In a similar way, some people might have a spiritual gift in a certain area of healing, and others might have a spiritual gift in another area of healing, yet the New Testament never says that anyone will receive "the gift of healing." When we study the gifts of the Spirit (Romans 12:4-8, 1 Corinthians 12:4-11, 27-31, Ephesians 4:11, and 1 Peter 4:10-11), we find something which is very interesting. Notice that faith is listed as a gift of the Spirit in those passages. Does this mean that only certain people will ever have faith? No, because we are all supposed to have faith! Notice that serving is listed as a spiritual gift. Does this mean that only certain people will ever serve? No, because we are all supposed to be servants. Notice that encouraging others, contributing to the needs of others, showing mercy to others, helping others, and so on are listed as spiritual gifts. Even evangelism is listed as a spiritual gift! Does this mean that only certain people will do these things? No, because we are all supposed to do these things. All Christians are supposed to be doing the things listed above, but the Bible says that some people will have special spiritual gifts or abilities in those areas, just as some people might have special gifts or abilities in various areas of healing. Here's another assumption that many Christians make, which has a bearing on spiritual gifts. When people speak of the early believers, they tend to refer to that time period as the "early" Church (and our time period as the "modern" Church). The implication is that one form of the Church ended when the New Testament was completed. But when the apostle Paul said that Christ is the head over the church (Colossians 1:18), which Church was he talking about, the "early" one or the "modern" one? Clearly Jesus established one New Testament Church, which is His body. There are not two types of Churches, an "early Church" (which ended when the New Testament was completed) and a "modern Church." The original Christians were in the same New Testament Church which still exists today. Why do many Christians find it easy to believe in the idea of an "early Church" which operated differently than the "modern Church"? Is it because they don't witness any supernatural things happening like the first-century Christians witnessed? If so, then why don't people see such supernatural things now? Is God no longer able to do miracles? Did the Holy Spirit's power fade with the passing of time? Has Jesus changed over the centuries? Does He no longer care? The answer to these questions is "no." So why do some people say that they don't see supernatural things happening now? After all, when God answers prayer then He is doing the supernatural. If we don't believe that supernatural things happen today then why do we pray? Many people say that there is no longer any need for miracles, but that's just not true. Consider that there are many people in the world today who have never heard of Jesus, and there are many people who have heard of Jesus but who don't believe in Him as their Savior. This is the same situation that we see in the New Testament, yet Jesus and the apostles and the early Christians used miracles specifically so that people would believe and be saved. Miracles and miraculous healings are every bit as useful and as valid for evangelism now as they were in the first century. So if God has not changed, and if the purpose for miracles has not changed, then what has changed between the first century and now? We have changed! Christians in general don't seem to have any faith in miracles today, except maybe if a miracle happens to a missionary in a different part of the world. Yet from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation, God has shown Himself to be a supernatural God, and He has told us over and over that He does not and will not change. He has always been a supernatural God! He has always been a God of miracles. But for the most part we no longer believe that He does these things. It is much easier for us to rationalize away Scriptures that we're not comfortable with (saying that they belong to this fictional "early Church") than it is for us to believe that the Bible really means what it says and that God has always been a supernatural God. When we hear accounts of healings and spiritual gifts (tongues, prophecies, etc.) in modern times, we often find it easier to attribute these things to the devil rather than believing that God has always operated according to His Word. Perhaps this is why Jesus said, "when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:8). But if we will simply believe what the Bible says, and if we will step out in faith, we can see New Testament kinds of healing miracles because Jesus promised that we would! Jesus was our perfect role model while He walked the earth, and He turned His evangelism and healing ministry over to the Church in the Great Commission. To learn more about the Great Commission, and to learn how to see healing miracles, I invite you to read the articles in my Healing Training Course. Jesus Paid for Our Healing 2000 Years Ago
Is healing in the Atonement? Let's take a look at the connection between healing and atonement throughout the Bible. Laying a foundation
First of all, let me lay a quick foundation. Recall that trusting in Jesus for salvation means that we are "born of God" (John 1:12-13). We are "born again" (John 3:3). The Spirit "gives birth to spirit" (John 3:6). We are "born of the Spirit" (John 3:8). We become "a new creation" (2 Corinthians 5:17). We become "a new creation" (Galatians 6:14-15). "Our old self was crucified" and "we died with Christ" (Romans 6:6-8). We receive "the new self" (Colossians 3:9-10). We "put on the new self" (Ephesians 4:22-24). We are given "new birth" (1 Peter 1:3). We are "born again" (1 Peter 1:23). We are "born of God" (1 John 5:1), and so on. In other words, when we receive salvation through faith in Jesus then we become a new creation. The point here is that salvation does not cause our old, sinful nature to be "patched up" or "healed" because our old self is crucified (Romans 6:6-8) and our spirits are born from God (John 3:6-8). This new life is available to us because of the shed blood of Jesus (see Romans 4:25, 5:6-10, Colossians 1:20, for example). I'm sure that you already know these facts, but I wanted to lay an important foundation for some things that we're going to see in a few moments. Isaiah's prophecy
The prophet Isaiah told us that Jesus intended on purchasing salvation, peace, and healing for us, as we can see in Isaiah 53:4-5 in several different translations: "Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed." (Isaiah 53:4-5, NIV)According to Isaiah's prophecy, Jesus took up all of our griefs and our sorrows, and was wounded for our transgressions and was crushed for our iniquities, and so on, which enables us to freely receive salvation, peace, and divine healing. We know that Jesus purchased forgiveness of sins for us on the cross, and it turns out that Jesus did far more for us than we will ever comprehend. In the above passage, Isaiah specifically said that Jesus will be stricken and smitten. The Hebrew words for "stricken" and "smitten" mean "violently, to strike" and "give [wounds]...(give) stripes" respectively, according to Strong's Dictionary. The vicious scourging or whipping that Jesus received on His back (His "stripes") certainly fulfills this part of the prophecy. Then Isaiah said that Jesus will be "wounded" for our sins, and His punishment will redeem us, and His wounds will enable us to be healed. Notice that if the salvation parts of Isaiah's prophecy apply to us (and they do), then the healing parts of his prophecy apply to us as well. Isaiah's prophecy says that Jesus will bear our sins for us (purchasing our salvation), and that He will bear our infirmities (purchasing our healing). Now let's take a look at Isaiah's prophecy using a more literal translation of the Bible: "Surely our sicknesses he hath borne, And our pains -- he hath carried them, And we -- we have esteemed him plagued, Smitten of God, and afflicted. And he is pierced for our transgressions, Bruised for our iniquities, The chastisement of our peace is on him, And by his bruise there is healing to us. ... And he the sin of many hath borne" (Isaiah 53:4-5, 12, Young's Literal Translation)Speaking about Jesus, the above prophecy says that "our sicknesses he hath borne [taken away] ... And he the sin of many hath borne [taken away]." Notice that Jesus took away all of our sicknesses, just as He took away all of our sins. We receive salvation as a free gift by faith, and we receive healing as a free gift by faith. The apostle Peter quoted from Isaiah's prophecy
Okay, so Isaiah had prophesied that Jesus will enable us to receive healing, peace, salvation, and so on. The New Testament also explains that Jesus enabled us to receive salvation and healing: "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed." (1 Peter 2:24)As Bible commentaries often point out, in 1 Peter 2:24 (above) Peter was paraphrasing Isaiah 53:4-5 (above). Since Peter paraphrased Isaiah, Peter mentioned both the salvation and the healing parts of the Atonement (both of which are found in Isaiah's prophecy). However, people sometimes interpret the last part of 1 Peter 2:24 (above) as meaning, "by His death you have been spiritually healed [i.e. saved]." But is this what Peter really meant? 1 Peter 2:24 (above) says, "by his wounds [molops] you have been healed," and Strong's Greek Dictionary says that molops means "blow-mark:--stripe." In Isaiah 53:5 (above), which Peter was referring to, Isaiah used the Hebrew word chabbuwrah, meaning "blueness, bruise, hurt, stripe, wound," according to Strong's. So in the Greek as well as in the Hebrew, these words do not mean "death," but instead they specifically mean "wound" or "stripe mark." Peter was not talking about Jesus' death in the last part of 1 Peter 2:24 (above), Peter was talking about Jesus' wounds (His "stripes"). Here is how The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament (Spiros Zodhiates) describes the Greek word molops: "A welt, a mark of fighting, a blow or wound made in war, also a scar, wheal, or the mark left on the body by the stripe of the whip. Used figuratively in 1 Pet. 2:24 referring to stripes, quoted from Is. 53:5." (p.1000, emphasis added)So molops specifically refers to a mark on the body which results from a wound, especially the type of stripe mark created by the vicious scourging (whipping) that Jesus received on His back. As we saw a moment ago, Isaiah's prophecy (which Peter was paraphrasing) specifically said that Jesus will be "smitten" and "stricken," and we saw that those words mean "give wounds" and "give stripes." When Peter and Isaiah referred to Jesus' "stripes" they meant His stripes, not His death. In addition, Peter said that Jesus' stripes brought healing to us, and he used the Greek word iaomai in that verse. This Greek word is used in Matthew 13:15 and John 12:40 (which are both quoting from Isaiah 6:9-10), and in these two cases it is possible that the word iaomai is not referring to physical healing. But in every other place where iaomai is used in the New Testament, it always refers to physical healing (here are the references: Matthew 8:8, 13, 15:28, Mark 5:29, Luke 4:18, 5:17, 6:17, 19, 7:7, 8:2, 47, 9:2, 11, 42, 17:15, 22:51, John 4:47, 5:13, Acts 3:11, 9:34, 10:38, 28:8, Hebrews 12:13, James 5:16). In the vast majority of cases throughout the New Testament, the Greek word iaomai is used in the sense of physical healing because physical healing is the normal meaning of this Greek word. In the next section we will see that the apostle Matthew also quoted from Isaiah's prophecy, and Matthew specifically said that Isaiah's prophecy involves physical healing. Jesus' blood and His death on the cross purchased our salvation, and His "stripes" somehow purchased physical healing for us. Now, recall that earlier I laid the following foundation:
The apostle Matthew quoted from Isaiah's prophecy
Not only did the apostle Peter quote from Isaiah's prophecy, but the apostle Matthew did as well: "When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: "He took up our infirmities and carried our diseases."" (Matthew 8:16-17)Isaiah had prophesied that the Messiah will take up our infirmities and carry our diseases (as we saw in Isaiah 53:4-5, above), and Matthew 8:16-17 (above) explains that Jesus fulfilled this prophecy by physically healing the sick. Matthew was quoting from the same prophecy that Peter did when Peter said "by his wounds you have been healed" (1 Peter 2:24, above). Notice that Matthew has given us definite proof that Isaiah and Peter were talking about physical healing! Some people argue that when a prophecy is fulfilled then it has been accomplished once and for all, never to be fulfilled again. According to that argument, Isaiah's prophecy of physical healing was fulfilled before the cross (Matthew 8:16-17, above), and therefore physical healing cannot be in the Atonement. Is this a valid argument? In Matthew 8:16-17 (above), the apostle Matthew used the Greek word pleroo ("fulfill"), and this Greek word is sometimes used in the sense that a prophecy was fulfilled and brought to an end, as in these examples: Matthew 2:13: "When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. "Get up," he said, "take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.""These examples appear to validate the argument that healing cannot be in the Atonement, based on the idea that Jesus fulfilled Isaiah's prophecy of physical healing, bringing that prophecy to an end. But this is only part of the picture! In order to determine if that argument is accurate, let's consider what a prophecy actually is. A prophecy is a promise from God concerning an event which will happen in the future. One Greek dictionary says that a prophecy is a: "prediction, the foretelling of future events" (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament, Spiros Zodhiates, p.1242)For example, imagine a man named Tom. Let's pretend that Tom's wife points out to him that the grass needs to be cut, and Tom says, "You're right, I'll cut the grass." Tom has now made a promise, a prediction, a foretelling of a future event. Several days later when Tom goes out and cuts the grass, he has fulfilled that promise. Does this mean that Tom can never again cut the grass since he has now fulfilled his "prophecy"? Obviously not. A fulfilled prophecy simply means that the promise has been accomplished. In some cases, the prophesied event will never be repeated (as in Matthew 2:13-14 and Matthew 21:1-5, above), but this does not mean that all fulfilled prophecies will never be repeated. For instance, here is a Scriptural example in which a prophecy was fulfilled (God's promise was accomplished), yet this did not prevent the same thing from happening again and again: "Even after Jesus had done all these miraculous signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him. This was to fulfill [pleroo] the word of Isaiah the prophet: "Lord, who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?"" (John 12:37-38)Notice that there were people who did not believe in Jesus even after witnessing God's power in action, and this fulfilled one of Isaiah's prophecies. But does this mean that no-one else can ever refuse to believe in Jesus (even if they witness God's power in action)? No, because even to this day there are people who do not believe in Jesus (even if they witness God's power in action). So when a prophecy is fulfilled, sometimes the same event can occur at other times as well (as in John 12:37-38, above). Here's another example: "Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say anything to them without using a parable. So was fulfilled [pleroo] what was spoken through the prophet: "I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world."" (Matthew 13:34-35)Here we see Jesus speaking to people in parables, which fulfilled a prophecy. Does this mean that Jesus could never again speak in parables since the prophecy was now fulfilled? No, because Jesus continued to speak to people in parables even after that prophecy had been fulfilled (see Matthew 13:44, 47, 18:12, 23, 20:1, 21:8, 33, 22:1, etc.). What it boils down to is that when a prophecy is fulfilled, sometimes the same event can take place again and again, even after the prophecy was fulfilled. This is because a fulfilled prophecy simply means that God's promise was accomplished. So now we have seen some Scriptural examples in which the Greek word pleroo is used with two different results: One result is that a prophecy was fulfilled once and for all (never to be repeated), and the other result is that a prophecy was fulfilled yet the event might be repeated. The question is, which category does Matthew 8:16-17 fall in? If we can show that Matthew 8:16-17 falls in the first category then this would support the argument that Isaiah's prophecy was fulfilled once and for all before the cross, which means that Matthew 8:16-17 argues against healing being in the Atonement. But it is easy to demonstrate that Jesus' healings in Matthew 8:16-17 were not a once and for all fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy because Jesus continued to heal people after Isaiah's prophecy was fulfilled (see Matthew 9:35, 12:15, 14:14, 14:35-36, 15:30, 19:2, 21:14). Therefore, when Matthew 8:16-17 (above) says that Jesus healed people in fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy (before the cross), this does not prevent healing from being in the Atonement. To further demonstrate this, notice that Jesus forgave certain people's sins before the cross: "Some men brought to him a paralytic, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven."" (Matthew 9:2)Consider that Jesus redeemed us from our sins on the cross, yet in the above passages we see Him forgiving people's sins before the cross. Does this mean that forgiveness of sins cannot be in the Atonement, since Jesus forgave some people's sins before the cross? Obviously not. Notice that if it was possible for the forgiveness of sins to be in the Atonement even though some people were forgiven before the cross, then in the same way, it was possible for healing to be in the Atonement even though some people were healed before the cross. Now let's look at Matthew 8:16-17 again: "When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: "He took up our infirmities and carried our diseases."" (Matthew 8:16-17)Jesus took up all of our infirmities and carried all of our diseases, just as He took up all of our sins. Here's what the evangelical Bible Knowledge Commentary (Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.37) says about Matthew 8:16-17: "Matthew simply recorded that Jesus healed them all, in fulfillment of words spoken through . . . Isaiah (Isa. 53:4). His taking our infirmities (astheneias) and carrying our diseases (nosous) was finally accomplished on the cross in His death."As this highly-respected Baptist commentary points out, Jesus took our infirmities and carried our diseases on the cross. Christ took them upon Himself for us, just as He took our sins upon Himself for us. This doesn't make much sense to our natural minds, but the cross was not simply about Jesus' physical death, the cross was a supernatural event which we will never fully comprehend until after we get Home. Notice that the commentary (quoted above) mentions two specific Greek words, astheneias and nosous. Here's what The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament (Spiros Zodhiates) says about these two Greek words: "The Lord on the cross took upon himself not only the consequences of sickness (astheneias), but sicknesses (nosous) themselves, both being basically the result of man's disobedience to God (Gen. 2:17)." (p.271, emphasis added)Again, Jesus paid the price for our healing as well as our salvation when He was brutally tortured and shed His blood on the cross for us. And as we saw, Matthew 8:16-17 gives us definite proof that Isaiah 53:4-5 and 1 Peter 2:24 are talking about physical healing! Healing is in the Atonement, and we will see more evidence in the next several sections. "Save" and "heal" come from the same Greek word
Here is further evidence that Jesus purchased our healing in the Atonement, as well as our salvation. Notice that healing and salvation are so closely linked together in the Bible that the very same Greek word (sozo) is used in the New Testament to mean both "save" and "heal": "She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save [sozo] his people from their sins." (Matthew 1:21)According to Strong's Greek Dictionary, sozo means "heal, preserve, save (self), do well, be (make) whole." So the same Greek word is often used for "saving" and for "healing." Redemption involves both of these things. Salvation and healing are linked together in the Bible, and they were both purchased for us by Jesus' suffering and death (recall Isaiah's prophecy, above). Jesus proved His authority to forgive sins by healing people
Here is even more evidence that Jesus purchased our healing in the Atonement, as well as our salvation. John the Baptist had preached that someone will come and take away the sins of the world, but while he was in prison he apparently began to have doubts about Jesus. Therefore, he sent two men to Jesus to verify that He really was the One who was to come: "The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is the one I meant when I said, 'A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.'" (John 1:29-30)Did you catch the significance of that? How did Jesus prove that He was the One who came to take away the sins of the world? He proved it by healing people! Salvation and healing are linked together in the Bible, and they were both purchased for us by Jesus' suffering and death. Once again Jesus proved His authority to forgive sins by healing a person
Here is further evidence that Jesus purchased our healing in the Atonement, as well as our salvation. When the teachers of the law accused Jesus of blasphemy because He claimed to be able to forgive people's sins, Jesus said: "Which is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and walk'? But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins. . . ." Then he said to the paralytic, "Get up, take your mat and go home." And the man got up and went home." (Matthew 9:5-7)Once again, Jesus healed a man in order to prove that He has the authority to forgive sins. He demonstrated that His authority to save people [sozo] and His authority to heal people [sozo] are one and the same. When He paid for our salvation He also paid for our healing. Healing and atonement in the Old Testament
Even though the evidence is so strong, it is probably a "new" concept to many people that healing and atonement often go together. However, this was not such a strange concept to the Jews who were familiar with the Old Testament, because healing and atonement often went hand in hand throughout the Old Testament. For example, it is significant that a number of the "types" or "foreshadowings" of Christ in the Old Testament had to do with both healing and atonement, as in the description of Passover in Exodus 12:3-13. Recall that the Israelites were commanded to slaughter the Passover lamb and put its blood on their doorposts, and the blood of the lamb saved them from death. They were also commanded to eat the body of the lamb, and this gave them strength and health for their flight from Egypt (Psalm 105:37, especially in the King James Version, the Amplified Version, and the Living Bible, says that not one Israelite was feeble when they left Egypt). 1 Corinthians 5:7 tells us that Jesus is the Passover Lamb, and as we have seen over and over, Jesus' blood purchased our salvation and the scourging of His body purchased our healing. In Exodus 30:12, God told Moses that each Israelite male (20 years or older) must pay a ransom for his life so that no plague will come upon them. Jesus said in Matthew 20:28 that He is our ransom, and the Bible Knowledge Commentary (Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.154) describes Exodus 30:12 in this way: "This tax was considered a ransom (Ex. 30:12) because its payment guaranteed protection from plagues. This helped motivate each male to pay. It was also considered an atonement, a covering for sins." (emphasis added)So once again we see health and atonement in this "foreshadowing" of Christ's ransom for us. In Leviticus 14:1-32 we see that a leper (or someone with an infectious skin disease) who was healed had to make an atonement (see verse 31 in particular). In Leviticus 13:13-15 we see that when a man was cleansed from some bodily discharge then he had to make a sin offering as an atonement. In Numbers 8:19 we see that Aaron and his sons were told to make atonement so that no plague will strike the Israelites when they went near the sanctuary. In Numbers 16:46 we see that Aaron made an atonement for the Israelites and stopped a plague that was killing them all. In Numbers 21:5-9 we see that Moses was commanded to make a bronze snake and lift it up on a pole so that any Israelite who was bitten by a snake could look at the bronze snake and be healed, and the plague was stopped. Jesus specifically referred to this bronze snake on a pole as a foreshadowing of His crucifixion in John 3:14. In Numbers 25:3-13 we see that another plague was stopped when an atonement was made. In 2 Samuel 24:10-25 we see that yet another plague was stopped when a sacrifice was made. In 2 Chronicles 30:18-20 we again see health in connection with the Passover feast, which we know was a foreshadowing of Christ's sacrifice. In Job 33:19-30 we see healing being associated with a ransom and redemption from sins. In Psalm 103:2-5 we see that the Lord forgives all our sins and heals all our diseases, and the same linking of forgiveness and healing is found in Isaiah 33:24. This is not meant to be a complete list of healing and atonement in the Old Testament, but it is clear that there are numerous examples throughout the entire Bible which demonstrate that healing and atonement often go together. Significantly, some of the Old Testament "types" and "foreshadowings" of Jesus specifically demonstrate the linking together of healing and atonement, just as all of the New Testament examples in this section demonstrate that healing and atonement were purchased for us in Jesus' suffering and death. Notice that Jesus paid for our sins 2000 years ago, yet sinners are not automatically forgiven. They must receive forgiveness of sins by faith (Acts 26:18). Healing works in a similar way, because Jesus paid for our healing 2000 years ago, yet we are not automatically healed from our infirmities. We must receive healing by faith (Luke 18:42). When we lay hands on people, we can believe for them to be healed when faith is present because Jesus has already paid the price for all of our healing needs. Clearing Out Hospitals
People will sometimes say, "If you believe that you can heal the sick then why don't you go clear out all of the hospitals and get everyone healed?" This is a good question, and if Scripture tells us to clear out hospitals then that's what we should do. So what does the Bible say about this? What we find in the Gospels is that Jesus did not always heal everyone around Him, nor did He go out in search of people to heal. Instead, He healed all those who came to Him or those whom God placed in His path. For example, Jesus healed a lame man at the pool of Bethesda, but apparently He did not heal any of the other disabled people there (John 5:2-9). Another man, crippled from birth, was brought to the temple gate every day to beg, and he was healed by Peter and John (Acts 3:2-8). Jesus probably passed by this man many times as He went in and out of the temple gate, yet Jesus never healed him. There are a number of passages which say that Jesus healed all of the sick people in various places, but these were people who came to Him or who were brought to Him. These were not people whom Jesus sought out to heal. Since Jesus did not automatically heal everyone around Him, and since He did not seek out people to heal, and since there is no record of Him going around emptying out leper colonies, we have no Scriptural command and no Scriptural precedent for trying to empty out hospitals. Jesus showed us that a person's faith is often an important ingredient in his healing (see some of the articles in my Healing Training Course), and that's why we often see Jesus and the apostles preaching and teaching before doing any healing. If the Holy Spirit leads us to visit a hospital and go around laying hands on people then that's what we should do, but otherwise it is not likely to be fruitful if most of the patients have not had their hearts prepared to respond in faith. Paul Left Trophimus "Sick" in Miletus
Notice that the apostle Paul said that he had left Trophimus "sick" in Miletus: "Erastus stayed in Corinth, and I left Trophimus sick [astheneo] in Miletus." (2 Timothy 4:20)Based on this verse, people sometimes claim that Paul had "lost" his healing abilities. But is that really what this verse implies? The Greek word translated as "sick" is astheneo, and Paul used this Greek word 22 other times in the New Testament. It is interesting to note that with the exception of a single passage, Paul always used this Greek word to mean "weak": "Without weakening [astheneo] in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead--since he was about a hundred years old--and that Sarah's womb was also dead." (Romans 4:19)These are all of the passages in the New Testament where Paul used the Greek word astheneo, and we can see that Paul normally used this Greek word in the context of weak faith, weak conscience, weak in power, and so on. Philippians 2:25-27 (above) is the only other place in all of Paul's writings where astheneo is translated as "ill" instead of "weak" (or "weakening," or "weakened"), but having an illness can certainly leave a person feeling weak. Since we don't know why Trophimus was "weak" or "sick" when Paul left him in Miletus (2 Timothy 4:20, above), we can't prove anything from that verse, whether for or against healing. Trophimus might have been suffering from working too hard, or he might have been weak as he was recovering from an illness, or he might have been weak because he was actually sick, or he might have been suffering from a weak conscience or a weak will like some of Paul's other companions who ended up deserting him (see 2 Timothy 1:15, 4:10, 16), and so on. Some people take that verse (2 Timothy 4:20, above) to mean that Paul had lost his power to heal the sick, but Paul never had any healing power to begin with! It is the power of the Holy Spirit which heals people, and the Holy Spirit certainly hasn't lost any of His power. In the entire New Testament, Paul never said that he had lost any power to heal the sick or that he was gradually losing this ability, but that's what well-meaning people sometimes assume from that verse because it fits into their view that healing "died out" in the first century. But notice that Paul was not teaching a doctrine in that verse, he was simply describing an event. Trying to build up a doctrine out of a vague description of an event (in which no doctrine is actually being taught) is a poor way to interpret Scripture. If there was an "Age of Miracles" which ended in the first century (as some people believe) then there should be plenty of teaching in the New Testament to support this doctrine. However, the New Testament never says such a thing. People sometimes use 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 to argue that the "sign gifts" (including healing) died out after the New Testament was completed, but I invite you to see my two-part article called The Baptism of the Holy Spirit for an in-depth discussion of 1 Corinthians 13:8-12. So the question is, if Paul left Trophimus sick in Miletus, does this prove that Paul had lost his healing gift and that the "Age of Miracles" was over? Not really. To illustrate why, let's look at a simple timeline of 3 events in the first century: The birth of the Church, the death of the apostle Paul, and the death of the apostle John. To begin with, a number of scholars tell us that Jesus was born around 4 B.C., and that He was around 30 when He started His ministry (Luke 3:23), and that His ministry lasted for about three and a half years. So Jesus died somewhere around 30 A.D., and the Church was born on the day of Pentecost 50 days after the cross (for more on these dates, please see my article called Who Wrote the New Testament?). Scholars also tell us that the apostle Paul died around 67 or 68 A.D.: "The date [when Paul wrote 2 Timothy], as best it can be established, was approximately A.D. 67. Not long afterward, according to tradition, the apostle was beheaded." (The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.749)In addition, a number of scholars tell us that the apostle John wrote the book of Revelation around 95 A.D. Here are some examples: "The book of Revelation was probably written about AD 95, at a time of conflict and persecution" (The History of Christianity, Dr. Tim Dowley, p.70)Based on the above information, here is a timeline of these events (each dash represents one year):
The Church Paul leaves Trophimus The apostle
is born "sick" in Miletus John dies
...-----|-------------------------------------|--------------------------|----------...
30 A.D. Before 68 A.D. After 95 A.D.
When people believe that "the Age of Miracles" ended after the last apostle died, they sometimes try to prove this by saying that Paul was not able to heal Trophimus in Miletus. The idea is that Paul was unable to heal Trophimus because "the Age of Miracles" was coming to an end. But when Paul left Trophimus "sick" in Miletus it was only about halfway between the time that the Church was born and the time that the last apostle died! In the above timeline, notice that when Paul died in 68 A.D. there were almost 30 more years left to go before this "Age of Miracles" allegedly ended, so it makes no sense to claim that this "Age of Miracles" was ending when Paul left Trophimus "sick" in Miletus. In other words, we can't claim that this "Age of Miracles" ended when the last apostle died (after 95 A.D.), and that this "Age of Miracles" was ending 30 years earlier when Paul left Trophimus "sick" in Miletus (before 68 A.D.), because those are contradictory statements. We can't have it both ways! The whole argument that there was an "Age of Miracles" which ended when the last original apostle died falls apart because it has no support in Scripture. Instead, the New Testament demonstrates that miracles are for the entire Church Age, which includes us modern Christians. To summarize, if Trophimus was weak for some reason (but not actually sick), then this passage does not teach that Paul was "losing" his healing gift. But if Trophimus really was sick, and Paul was not able to minister healing to him, then this provides Scriptural support for the fact that modern-day Christians might not have 100% success when laying hands on the sick (there are a number of reasons why people might not receive healing, which are described in my Healing Training Course). Either way, this passage does not support the idea that healing "died out" in the first century. Timothy's Stomach
The apostle Paul told Timothy to drink wine and not just water, because Timothy was experiencing frequent stomach illnesses (1 Timothy 5:23, below). Based on this verse, people sometimes claim that Paul couldn't heal Timothy, as if Paul was "losing" his ability to heal people. But clearly Paul was writing to Timothy. Paul was nowhere near Timothy and could not have laid hands on Timothy even if he wanted to! After Paul left Timothy in Ephesus to provide leadership there, Timothy had "frequent illnesses" in his stomach from drinking the local water (for example, see The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.730, 745). Here is that verse: "Stop drinking only water, and use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses." (1 Timothy 5:23)Notice that Timothy did not have an "illness" (singular), but instead he had several illnesses (plural) because of the local water. Since he had "frequent illnesses" (plural), this shows that his stomach illnesses were healed each time! This verse does not support the idea that healing was "dying out" in the first century. Paul's "Thorn"
What was Paul's "thorn in the flesh"? There has been a lot of speculation about this, but Paul tells us exactly what it was. It was a "messenger of Satan" (2 Corinthians 12:7, below). Nowhere in the New Testament does this word "messenger" or "angel" (angelos in the Greek) ever refer to sickness or disease, it always refers to sentient, living beings (usually angels, but sometimes humans). Paul did not use a Greek word for sickness or disease in this verse, but instead he specifically used the Greek word for "angel," and he specifically told us that it was a demonic angel. Paul also told us exactly why this demon was sent to torment him: "To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations" (2 Corinthians 12:7-10, below). Notice that Paul pleaded with God three times to remove this "thorn," and when God wouldn't remove it then Paul "boasted" and "delighted" in it: "To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger [angelos] of Satan, to torment me. Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong." (2 Corinthians 12:7-10)If we want to use the above passage as Scriptural justification that it might not be God's will to heal us, then are we actually obeying this Scripture passage? In other words, are we "boasting" about our sicknesses and "delighting" in them? Usually we go to a doctor, or we take medication, or we try to do something to get well, but notice that Paul did none of these things concerning his "thorn." Instead, he delighted in his weaknesses. Wouldn't it be hypocritical to use this passage to justify our sicknesses, while doing just the opposite of what we believe the passage says (by trying to get better rather than delighting in our sicknesses)? As we will see, Paul's "thorn" had nothing to do with sickness. In the above passage, notice that Paul did not ask God to heal him, but instead Paul asked God to take away (aphistemi, literally, "that it might depart from me") the "thorn." There is a big difference. This is the same Greek word which is used in Acts 12:10 when an angel "departed" from Peter, and in all of the 15 other occurrences of this Greek word in the New Testament it is never used in reference to sickness or healing (see Luke 2:37, 4:13, 8:13, 13:27, Acts 5:37, 38, 15:38, 19:9, 22:29, 1 Timothy 4:1, 6:5, 2 Timothy 2:19, and Hebrews 3:12). Paul wasn't asking for a sickness to be healed, he was asking God to take away this demonic harassment. Now, what did this demon do to Paul? It "tormented" him, according to the NIV. The Amplified Version translates this Greek word by saying that it "buffeted" and "harassed" him. In addition to the verse that we are examining (2 Corinthians 12:7), this Greek word occurs four more times in the New Testament, where it means "to strike with the fists" (Matthew 26:67, Mark 14:65), "to be brutally treated" (1 Corinthians 4:11), and "to receive a beating" (1 Peter 2:20). This Greek word is never used in reference to sickness or disease. It is always used to describe someone brutally mistreating someone else. Further, Paul did not just ask God to take this demon away, he pleaded with God to take it away. Nowhere in the New Testament is there even a single example of anyone healing a person by pleading with God to do the healing (for proof, I invite you to see my article called Every Example of Healing in the New Testament). Jesus never pleaded with God to heal anyone, and the apostles never pleaded with God to heal anyone, and so on. This is not how healing works, and this is never how Paul healed anyone in the New Testament. Paul was not pleading for a healing! He was pleading to be delivered from persecutions and hardships. For example, notice that when Paul began boasting about his "thorn in the flesh," he was boasting about insults, hardships, persecutions, difficulties, and anything that made him weak, because God's power is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:7-10, above). In fact, we can see that in the previous chapter of the same book (2 Corinthians) Paul boasted about more of his sufferings and afflictions and weaknesses: "Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more. I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again. Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my own countrymen, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false brothers. I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked. Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches" (2 Corinthians 11:23-28)Several chapters earlier, Paul described even more of his sufferings and afflictions: "Rather, as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: in great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distresses; in beatings, imprisonments and riots; in hard work, sleepless nights and hunger; in purity, understanding, patience and kindness; in the Holy Spirit and in sincere love; in truthful speech and in the power of God; with weapons of righteousness in the right hand and in the left; through glory and dishonor, bad report and good report; genuine, yet regarded as impostors; known, yet regarded as unknown; dying, and yet we live on; beaten, and yet not killed; sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything." (2 Corinthians 6:4-10)Paul described just about every form of suffering and affliction that we could possibly think of, yet nowhere in these verses did he mention any sicknesses or diseases! Paul's "thorn" had nothing to do with sickness, but instead his "thorn" was a demon who continually harassed him with many hardships and sufferings. All of these afflictions kept Paul from becoming conceited, and they kept him weak so that God's power was manifested in Paul's life, giving him the strength to carry on his ministry. In order to fully understand what it means to have a "thorn" in the flesh it is helpful to examine every place where this concept appears in the Bible. There are four more places where people seem to have had "thorns": "'But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land, those you allow to remain will become barbs in your eyes and thorns in your sides. They will give you trouble in the land where you will live." (Numbers 33:55)Notice that in every description of a "thorn," it is always used to describe people who are bringing suffering upon other people. Demons are personalities just as people are, except that they do not have their own bodies. Paul specifically said that his "thorn" was a demon which was bringing suffering upon him everywhere he went, which is exactly the same way that a "thorn" is used everywhere else in Scripture. It has nothing to do with sickness or disease. When we read the book of Acts and all of Paul's letters, it is easy to see that it was never a part of Paul's doctrine or teachings that sickness is a "thorn in the flesh" to be patiently endured, and we can see that Paul did many great healings even though he had this "thorn in the flesh." This "thorn" did not hinder any of Paul's recorded healings back then, and his "thorn in the flesh" should not be used as a hindrance to healing today! "Afflictions" and "Chastenings"
People sometimes justify their sicknesses by quoting Scripture passages such as, "many are the afflictions of the righteous," or "God chastens His children." However, the words "afflictions" and "chastenings" in those passages do not mean sicknesses or diseases. Psalm 34:19 in the King James Version begins with, "Many are the afflictions of the righteous," and sincere, well-meaning people sometimes use this verse to justify their sicknesses. Notice that this verse does not say, "Many are the sicknesses of the righteous," but even if it did, the verse ends with, "but the Lord delivers them out of them all." Therefore Psalm 34:19 can't be used to justify our sicknesses. In fact, the word "afflictions" in Psalm 34:19 has nothing to do with sickness because it means "anguish, burdened, persecution, tribulation, trouble" (Strong's Dictionary). Now let's consider what it means when the Lord "disciplines" or "chastens" those He loves: "the Lord disciplines ["chastens" in the KJV] those he loves, and he punishes everyone he accepts as a son. Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his father?" (Hebrews 12:6-7)In the above passage, the Greek word for "chasten" or "discipline" means "instruct, learn, teach," according to Strong's Greek Dictionary. What kind of parents would instruct or even discipline their beloved children by intentionally inflicting cancer or AIDS or any other disease on them? God is a God who loves His children and has our best interests at heart, He is not a God of child abuse. But even if we want to believe that sicknesses are "chastenings," what does the above passage instruct us to do? We are instructed to endure chastenings! So if we believe that sicknesses are "chastenings" then we should not go to a doctor nor take any medication nor do anything to alleviate our symptoms nor try to get better, because then we're not enduring our discipline. To use this passage of Scripture to justify sicknesses as chastenings, but then to go against this Scripture by not enduring the "chastening," wouldn't that be hypocritical and rebellious against God? We have seen that afflictions and chastenings do not mean sicknesses. We have also seen several long lists of sufferings which Paul not only endured but boasted about (2 Corinthians 6:4-10, 11:23-28, 12:7-10, above), and there is not a single example of sickness or disease in any of those lists of sufferings. God might sometimes use an existing sickness as a way of teaching us something, but this does not mean that all of our sicknesses are "afflictions" or "chastenings." Unfortunately, many people are misusing these Scriptures in order to justify their sicknesses and diseases and infirmities. But wouldn't you rather believe what the Bible really says and then be healed of your sickness and pain? Paul's "Eye Condition"
It is sometimes argued that Paul might have had an eye condition which was never healed, and this argument is used in support of the idea that healing "died out" in the first century. But even if Paul had an "eye condition" of some kind, does this prove that healing is not for today? No, because the Bible tells us that all believers have the authority to lay hands on the sick (see my Healing Training Course). The real question is, should we create a doctrine of healing based on a possible eye problem of Paul's, or on the clear commands of our Lord and Master? Notice that Paul said he had a "bodily ailment" (which is sometimes assumed to be an eye problem) when he first visited Galatia: "you know that it was on account of a bodily ailment that [I remained and] preached the Gospel to you the first time. And [yet], although my physical condition was [such] a trial to you, you did not regard it with contempt ... For I bear witness that you would have torn out your own eyes and have given them to me [to replace mine], if that were possible." (Galatians 4:13-15, AMP)The NIV uses the word "illness" in this passage, but the Greek word literally means "feebleness (of body or mind); by implication malady; moral frailty: - disease, infirmity, sickness, weakness." (Strong's Greek Dictionary). So what was this infirmity of the flesh or this bodily ailment? Acts 14:19-20 tells us that when Paul and Barnabas were in Lystra, the crowd stoned Paul and left him for dead. The next day, Paul and Barnabas went to Derbe, which was in the southern part of Galatia (according to Eerdman's Atlas of the Bible): "Then some Jews came from Antioch and Iconium and won the crowd over. They stoned Paul and dragged him outside the city, thinking he was dead. But after the disciples had gathered around him, he got up and went back into the city. The next day he and Barnabas left for Derbe." (Acts 14:19-20)This infirmity from the stoning was the reason why Paul preached the Gospel in Galatia for the first time (Galatians 4:13-15, above). Consider that Paul both preached and practiced healing, and not once did he ever tell anyone to patiently endure their sicknesses, nor did he ever say that he himself was patiently enduring any infirmity. If Paul's eyes were wounded during the stoning, they apparently were healed because he never listed any eye problems among the sufferings which he had received for the sake of the Gospel. In fact, in Paul's very last letter (near the end of his life) he asked Timothy to bring him his scrolls and parchments (2 Timothy 4:13), which would imply that he intended to read them. Sometimes people also use Galatians 6:11 to support the idea that Paul had an eye condition which was never healed: "See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand!" (Galatians 6:11)The argument here is that Paul's eyes were so bad (because they were never healed) that he needed to write in large letters so that he could read his own handwriting. One thing to consider is that if Paul wrote in large letters, this doesn't prove that his eyes had been damaged and were never healed. For example, it's possible that he wrote in large letters for emphasis, such as when we use bold letters for emphasis. It's also possible that his eyes were getting weak with age. Another possibility is that he simply had poor handwriting! Paul sometimes dictated his letters to an "amanuensis" (a scribe), such as the person named Tertius who physically wrote the book of Romans, and Paul wrote his own greetings at the end of some of his letters: "I, Tertius, who wrote down this letter, greet you in the Lord." (Romans 16:22)Here are some things that Bible scholars have said about Paul's "large letters": "With how large letters (phlikoi grammasin). Paul now takes the pen from the amanuensis (cf. Romans 16:22) and writes the rest of the Epistle (verses Romans 11-18) himself instead of the mere farewell greeting (2 Thessalonians 3:17; 1 Corinthians 16:21; Colossians 4:18). But what does he mean by "with how large letters"? Certainly not "how large a letter." It has been suggested that he employed large letters because of defective eyesight or because he could only write ill-formed letters because of his poor handwriting (like the print letters of children) or because he wished to call particular attention to this closing paragraph by placarding it in big letters (Ramsay). This latter is the most likely reason. Deissmann, (St. Paul, p. 51) argues that artisans write clumsy letters, yes, and scholars also. Milligan (Documents, p. 24; Vocabulary, etc.) suggests the contrast seen in papyri often between the neat hand of the scribe and the big sprawling hand of the signature." (Robertson's Word Pictures of the New TestamentAs these Bible scholars point out, there are various ways to interpret Paul's statement about his "large letters." Notice that if Paul had some kind of a lingering eye condition which was never fully healed, then this gives us Scriptural support for the fact that modern Christians in the healing ministry might sometimes get sick, or go bald, or wear glasses, and so on. There is really no way to prove whether Paul did or did not have any kind of a lingering eye condition which was never healed. Even if we believe that he did have an eye condition of some kind, this did not hinder Paul's recorded healings back then and it shouldn't be used as a hindrance to healing today. Conclusion
I hope that I have adequately addressed these objections, but if you still have concerns then a good resource is the "Healing for Windows" help file which can be downloaded from the Healing for Windows Web Site  .
It covers just about everything you can think of concerning healing, and the "Objections overruled" section answers many of the questions that skeptical Christians often ask.
However, if you really want proof that healing is for today, I would suggest that you read through my Healing Training Course and follow the principles in those handouts, and let Jesus show you that you can heal the sick in His Name. It's hard to keep arguing against healing when you start seeing people instantly and miraculously healed right in front of your eyes! Teach us and enlighten us, Lord, all for your glory! |