Signs and Wonders (Part III)
The biblical gifts of healing :The gift of healing is one of the most sought after gifts in the world.
The only explicit mention of healing as the gift of the Holy Spirit is in 1CO 12:9,28 and 30. In these verses, the term is used in the plural - "gifts of healing." The plural is probably due to demon-casting being considered a part of the healing ministry. Physical illness can be due to demon possession (MAT 9:32-34). Paul's healing ministry in ACT 19:11-12 seems to indicate that demon-casting is part of the gifts of healing.
The gifts of healing empowered the Apostles to cure any type of illness or handicap caused by nature or by demons. The healing was complete and it was instantaneous. In other words, whenever Jesus or the Apostles exercised their gifts of healing anyone with any type of illness was healed completely and instantaneously. The healing was organic and visible. For example, the man who was lame from his mother's womb (ACT 3:2) obviously had an under-developed withered limb. When Peter healed him, he was immediately cured (ACT 3:7) and his withered limb became a normal limb and he was able to walk and leap (ACT 3:8). This cure was clearly visible to onlookers (ACT 3:9-11). And he never needed to return for another session of healing of his leg.
Biblical healing occurred irrespective of the recipient's faith. Healing took place in whatever place the sick person was. The sick person did not have to go to some pre-designated place. There has been no substantiated evidence of objective (ie, visible and measurable) Charismatic healing. Charismatic healing is subjective (ie, it is not visible nor measurable). In other words, until the "healed" person with the migraine is asked how he feels, or the deaf is asked whether his hearing is better, or the patient in the wheel-chair is asked to get up and walk - no one is sure that a cure has taken place because it is not visible nor measurable. Biblical healing was complete and total. There was no need to return to the healer repeatedly.
"But not all healings were instantaneous": Charismatics point out that Jesus' healing of the blind man in MAR 8:22-26 was not instantaneous. It is true that in this unusual case, Jesus healed in two-steps. However, there was only a short interval of a few minutes between the two steps. It was a two-step instantaneous healing, ie, in each of the two steps there was instantaneous improvement. More importantly, the healing was total, ie, he received perfect eyesight (MAR 8:25 "he saw every man clearly").
Is the recipient's faith required for healing?: When Charismatic faith-healers fail to heal, they often blame the sick person of lacking faith. This appears to be a very convenient excuse for failure.
As for Jesus, "great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all" (MAT 12:15). Jesus healed tens of thousands (JOH 21:25), and yet at the end of His earthly ministry, the multitudes cried: "Crucify him." Obviously, the vast majority of those that Jesus healed did not have faith.
As for the Apostles, "there came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one" (ACT 5:16). It is equally obvious that not everyone that the Apostles healed had faith.
When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, it was obvious that he could not have had faith. Even Lazarus' sisters, Martha and Mary doubted that Jesus could raise him (JOH 11:24,32) and Jesus was grieved for their lack of faith (JOH 11:33,38). When Peter healed the lame man (ACT 3:1-9), he had no faith. In fact, he did not even ask to be healed. When Paul raised Eutychus from the dead (ACT 20:9-12) it was obvious that he could not have had faith.
Some Charismatics claim that even Jesus failed to heal because of unbelief. They quote MAT 13:58 ("And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief"). When we read the whole incident (MAT 13:53-58) we realize that Jesus did not do many miracles in "his own country" because the people were "offended" that He was just a poor "carpenter's son." In other words, since they rejected Him, He decided not to continue His ministry there but to move on to other towns. Therefore, since he discontinued his ministry there "he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief." It is very different from what faith-healers do, ie, they attempt to heal and when they fail they blame the sick patient's lack of faith for their failure to heal!
Since failure to heal is blamed on the patient's lack of faith, the patient is under pressure to confess that he is healed. Otherwise, he will be labeled as a "faithless person" in front of thousands of spectators! This doctrine provides a "heads-I-win, tails-you-lose" situation for the faith-healer. He is assured of being 100% successful because any failure is due to someone else's fault, not his. Furthermore, those who were not healed will be under tremendous pressure to pretend that they are healed, for fear of being labeled as "faithless."
Is healing part of the salvation package in the atonement of Christ? : Matthew when commenting on Jesus' healing ministry quotes loosely from Isaiah 53:4-6 saying "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses" (MAT 8:17).
Isaiah says "he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities..… the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all" (ISA 53:4-6). Clearly, this passage refers to Jesus as the One who will save us from our sins. Was Matthew correct to use this passage to refer to Jesus' healing of physical illnesses?
Matthew understood that sin is the primary cause of all sicknesses. Therefore, when Jesus took our sin (the primary cause), He would also be taking away our sicknesses (the result of sin). Similarly, "surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows" (ISA 53:4). Griefs and sorrows are also the result of sin (GEN 3:16-17 "…I will greatly multiply thy sorrow….in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life"). However, we know that though Jesus has taken away the penalty of our sin at the moment of our salvation, we are still struggling with the presence of sin in our lives. We know that we will not be freed from the presence of sin in our life, till we leave this world. Furthermore, though we have Christian "peace and joy" we still have "griefs and sorrows" in this life. However, we know that when we get to heaven "God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain" (REV 21:4). Similarly, because of our salvation we will have a new resurrection body, that will never be sick. However, this will only be so in heaven. Till then we will be afflicted with sicknesses and sorrows.
Healing is a part of the salvation package, but the full salvation package will be ours only when we leave this life. Jesus' healing ministry was a type, a foreshadowing of what He will do for us. Matthew had the ability to see Jesus' healing ministry as a type of the fulfillment of His salvation from sin and its effects (ie, sorrow, sickness and death).
Is it true that Christians who suffer from sickness are outside the will of God? : Job was "perfect and upright, and one that feared God" (JOB 1:1). God said "there is none like him in the earth" (JOB 1:8). Yet Job suffered more than anyone else. James comments on Job's sufferings "Behold, we count them happy which endure. Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord" (JAM 5:11).
The great Apostle, Paul, had a "thorn in the flesh" (2CO 12:7) which afflicted him continuously. Paul prayed thrice for healing but the Lord refused to heal him saying "My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness" (2CO 12:9). Therefore, Paul willingly accepted his physical suffering saying "Most gladly therefore will I in glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me" (1CO 12:9).
Many faith-healers wear spectacles, use dentures, suffer from terrible diseases, and all of them eventually die (which is just the ultimate terminal sickness).
Is it true that good Christians should also be wealthy? : The Charismatic "health and wealth" gospel teaches that it is the Christian's right to be rich and healthy. Peter said "Silver and gold have I none" (ACT 3:6). Paul was "often in hunger and thirst" (2CO 11:27). Jesus Himself was poorer that the sparrow ("Foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head" MAT 8:20).