Perceptions, it’s said, is much stronger than reality. What we worship will consume our thinking and form our convictions. If that perception is not based on truth, but on something we want to believe, it will not matter if it is true; for us it will be, and shape all our thoughts connected to it. If the perception matches with truth, then it becomes like apples of gold in pictures of silver; it is like the wisdom of God, which James 3.17 tells us, "is first peaceable, then pure". In doctrinal error there is no peace, only inner turmoil and unending questions.

Before I go on, let me say: With my whole heart, I believe God heals. In fact, God has miraculously healed my wife. Not with some phony healing, where she was told she was healed and she really was not. But a medically, by a doctor, verified healing, where she actually recovered and the symptoms and their cause left.

The doctrine that teaches ‘ it is always God’s will to heal, eventually gives to it’s believers tremendous conflict, and inner turmoil. It makes the words and lives of it’s promoters incompatible with reality; and represents Christianity as foolishness to the reasoning man. It is one thing to be a "fool for Christ", because rebels scoff at righteousness; but it is another, to appear a fool because our doctrines are irrational to the reasonable and honest mind.

There is no legitimate doctrine in scripture which is disproved by reality or can be argued against logically. For instance, a sinners salvation may be criticized and mocked, yet, the salvation of his eternal soul can not be ultimately and finally be disproved by observation. The Virgin Birth may be doubted and mocked, but it can not be ultimately disproved. Miracles are provided for by the reasoning man, understanding that if there is a God, why should he not make exceptions to rules that ordinarily govern men's lives. The reasoning man will reject a specific claim of a miracle without some evidence. He will want some means to test those claims by his senses. Without the experience of savoring this evidence, a claim of the miraculous has no meaning. But for a person to say God always heals, while his body is not exhibiting evidence; this is similar to a drunk saying he hadn’t touched a drop, when you can smell it on his breath. It’s more like lying than giving glory to God. If God heals, He heals; there are no games, no foolishness. The person actually recovers in a way that actually brings glory to Him. God receives no glory when He is misrepresented. How does it glorify God by saying "I received a healing", when there never is any evidence of the claim? Does God expect us to play these kinds of mind games? He doesn’t play them with us, neither does He expect us to represent Him that way to the world.

If this doctrine is true now, certainly it would be true when Paul ministered in the first century. It is a good thing that Trophimus did not hear Paul’s "negative" confession, he would have ‘really’ thought he was sick.! Please forgive the obvious sarcasm but if the argument is used ‘that positive confession is a doctrine in scripture’; wouldn’t you think Paul would believe it and follow it to it’s conclusions? Where was Paul’s confession; Are the teachers of positive confession more righteous than Paul?!

James, the Lords brother didn’t tell his Christians to use positive confession, he told them to admit they were sick and call for the elders. (James 5.13)

Philippians 2:26-27 For he longed after you all, and was full of heaviness, because that ye had heard that he had been sick. For indeed he was sick nigh unto death: but God had mercy on him; and not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow.

Why would God have to have "mercy" on Epaphroditus, if all he needed to do was have a positive confession? Why would "mercy" have to be bestowed on Epaphroditus if he had a right to be healed?

Positive confession is never taught by the disciples. "If there are any sick among you, let him call for the elders of the Church...." If healing were purchased on the cross, at the same time of our salvation, then only the issue of sin would have to be addressed; following this doctrines logic, there would be no need for healing, only forgiveness of sin; but James say’s clearly, "...and if they have sinned...." (5.15), indicating there are some who have not sinned, yet they are sick.

There is something seriously wrong with the positive confession teachers, and their understanding of this scripture. The problem is, if we use this scripture as a proof text for absolute healing, then none of these teachers would ever get sick. None would ever get tooth decay; none would get a canker sore; none would get an allergic reaction. Again, if healing were in the atonement, then no kind of sickness could possibly kill us; just as sin cannot ultimately destroy the soul who truly abides in Jesus.

This begs the question; based on this doctrine, we have to ask ourselves, ‘am I losing my salvation as frequently as I lose my healing? Seems as if every time I turn around I am losing my healing!"

Mark 16.17-18 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Supposedly, this is a promise of absolute healing; we then can be confident that if we believe, then healing is promised to us, "and God cannot lie". Using this logic with this scripture, let’s use this rule on the other promises in this portion of scripture:

It is always God’s will to use the Christian to heal - It is therefore, because of the same context, always Gods will that Christians speak in tongues. (Yes- Ok, some Christians believe this.)

It is always God’s will to use the Christian to heal - It is therefore, because of the same context, always Gods will that Christians cast out all demons whom they encounter. (I don’t know of any Christian who believe this can be done)

It is always God’s will to use the Christian to heal - It is therefore, because of the same context, always Gods will that we can presumptuously handle a serpent, and since God cannot lie, we will not be harmed by any type of snake, no matter what. Some Christians believe this, and they often demonstrate this in the Southern United States. However, this snake handling, most believe is a trick. Any animal can be calmed and distracted; but to follow this scripture to the interpreters conclusion, God’s protection must be true ‘at all times, in the worst of circumstances; like Paul and the snake shook off in the fire. (Acts 28.5)

So you see, there are limitations to these verses. We can not use this portion of scripture, which is a context, to make absolute claims that healing is promised to us. Because if we apply the same rules of interpretation to the entire context, it will get us into the realm of testing God.

Some, to insist that the scripture which says, "Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." , is proof that if it was Christ’s will to heal when he walked the earth, since he does not change, it is his will to heal now. This is an incredibly simple analysis of how God works. Taking this thinking, we therefore have to assume, since Jesus is present where two or three are gathered together, that he is administering his healing exactly the same way he did when he walked this earth incarnate. Now remember - Jesus, not even once, turned anyone away for healing. If someone came to him and they needed healing, he healed them! Never once did He say their faith was insufficient for healing. Yet this is exactly what the healers today are saying. That, "Your healing is not coming because you do not have enough faith". What measure of faith did it take to get healing when Jesus walked the earth? Exactly enough for the person to walk up to Jesus; he then gave that healing to them; sometimes with a question or two before, but always, always they were given the healing. So what is the difference? Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever! We have to conclude, while Jesus walked this earth, that the administration of healing had a purpose which is no longer needed in the same way. The Lord’s love has not changed, the traits of his character are forever. The traits of his Godhead are forever. The essence of his eternal being is forever. But how his administrates his will changes. Even a child can see that, all they have to do is read the book of Exodus, then follow with reading of the gospels, or the book of Galatians to see He does things differently at different times.

The argument that God seldom heals today because of the lack of people faith, is often supported by the scripture above. But again, this is easily understood when we see in the context, that it were those who thought they knew Jesus, those who could not believe enough to come to him, lost out on what he was able to give them. It wasn’t that Jesus needed someone’s magical belief mixed with his power in order to heal. He simple needed them to come to him, and only a few sick folk did. The others were so skeptical and unbelieving, they didn’t have the emotional energy to get up, walk across town and sit at his feet. That is all they needed to do to demonstrate faith, nothing more. There were only a ‘few sick folk’ who did.

The emphasis, that Jesus did not require ‘super faith’ is an important point. The merchants of faith healing themselves can not live up to this kind of super faith. God does not put that kind of pressure on us. He puts other kinds of do-able pressures on us; like making hard choices; changing life styles; forsaking evil. But God does not make us come up with some elusive, mystical super faith before He will heal us. Man does that, God does not; "John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." Matthew 11:30 "For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

Another hard scripture, but one which opens our understanding about faith and God’s will, is James 5.14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick,

From this scripture we can see that all the infirmed have to do is call the elders. Then the elders have to have the ‘prayer of faith’. Notice something very important: The scripture says in no ifs, ands, or buts, the prayer of faith ‘shall save the sick’. Following the ‘always God’s will to heal’ interpretation, this means, that if the elders have enough faith, if there is no sin in the sick persons life; no ifs, ands or buts, that person will be healed! Then live on to the ripe old age of "three score and ten".

We cannot accept this interpretation. Firstly, because too many righteous people die prematurely. Secondly, if the elders had determined that they had arrived at a high enough threshold of faith, basically - no ifs ands or buts, they could start healing every infirmity they could run to. They could go to the righteous one armed man’s house and produce a new arm for him. This miracle would buttress their faith, then they would go on to the righteous elderly and fix their arthritis. Of course, this is all nonsense. We know this is not going to happen, but how do we know? We are simply using the same logic the absolute healers advocate, yet we know intuitively it will not work.

The real answer is simple; faith is merely a response to God’s revealed will. Since 'Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word (rehma),of God (Rom.10.17), the Elders are required to 'hear' God's will in their prayers. If they then pray for the sick person to rise up, the sick person will be healed. This then is 'faith', and not presumption. It is not a pumping up of our faith which then gives us a false confidence that God will answer us. We need not manipulate, coerce or nag the Lord. If it is his will, he will heal at our request.

The common belief regarding faith, is that it is like a commodity. Faith is not a commodity which increases in volume; rather, it is a disposition of belief mixed with obedience. Some say, ‘My faith needs to grow from a mustard seed’. But Jesus said that this was enough to move mountains! Then if we turn to Paul’s teachings, he tells us, that moving mountains required "all faith" (1Cor.13.2) . Put the two scriptures together, and mustard seed faith is ‘all faith’. It cannot grow in volume, it only grows in respect to the natural outcome of that seeds ordained genetic qualities. In other words. All we need is ‘faith’. Or it might be said, we need to follow faith.

But faith originates, is authored by God - not us. It is finished by God - not us (Heb.12.2, Rom.10.17). It is by cooperating with God, not demanding of God, that we can accomplish anything that matches His will.

In the ‘name it, claim it’ type of faith, this scripture must be taken to mean that, regardless of the will of God, we can by our own initiative, whenever it strikes us as necessary, so long as we have enough faith, cast mountains into the sea!

I am very glad this scripture is in the bible. I definitely believe that Jesus spoke these words, and I believe them, but it becomes ridiculous and outlandish, if we believe that God does anything miraculous because we have generated enough faith. God does nothing at mans initiative. If man has thought of anything worth doing, it is only at God’s prompting; and the unction of His Holy Spirit. This scripture proves we must have God’s anointing to do His will. A few experiments at moving mountains will prove my point.

Healing in the Atonement?

Is. 53.5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

We are told that Is.53, verse 5 proves that healing is in the atonement. Anyone who says that is either misleading their hearers, or not studying and ‘rightly dividing the word of God’. It is clear that this portion of scripture is not talking of physical healing; the context is speaking of our alienation from God. But verse six is defines the type of healing Isaiah is speaking of. It is our wandering from God that needs healing,"..we like sheep have gone astray".

Why then does Isaiah speak of healing? It would seem that physical healing is the most probable type of healing. In fact, this is exactly what I believed when I was a younger Christian, before I sought out these scriptures for myself. I simply believed the interpretation told me, but the more I looked, the more obvious it became.

Should we take this reference to healing as physical? I don’t think an unbiased interpreter would. The scripture that settles it for me is the exact New Testament equivalent to Isaiah 53.6.

That little word ‘For’ is very important. Peter put it there to connect verse twenty five to verse twenty four. Verse twenty five interprets verse twenty four for us. It is clear, it is speaking of mankind’s wayward hearts. Those who insist that Isaiah 53 is speaking of physical healing are missing the deep intent God has for all humanity. They are so focused on their temporal sufferings, and cannot see what He has provided for mankind. How much better it is to tell a sinner, "your sin nature can be healed; that impulse to wander away from God, that constant unmanageable nature can finally be healed and secured in God’s sheepfold.", than to promise them the temporal blessings of financial and physical prosperity.

In fact, this wonderful message is often lost in all the sensational and shallow teaching that appeal to those who are solely focused on daily bread. Like the multitudes that followed Christ for temporal gain, the western church is too often wanting a sign to stimulate them; too often concerned for their financial prosperity; too often striving for the comfort of the present life, while a world alienated from God needs to hear how their wandering, rebellious souls can be healed.

2 Corinthians 5:4 "For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life."

As I have stated, God does heal. He also performs various local, and I might say, anecdotal miracles. We can always depend on God to do the right thing from a motive of love- because He is good. But it is not always ‘loving’ to do what is temporally important to children. Usually it is destructive to do what is temporally important to children. None of us like suffering but it is usually good for the Christian. Though we do not invite or encourage suffering, most, in the final outcome, will admit that sufferings has been a tool to make them better.

Besides the need to understand the doctrine of healing, we also need to see that God has left us on the earth as a witness to His power. Of course, as children, we would love to witness to the power of God in the miraculous and sensational; but it is God’s will that we witness to His power in the ways that have more substance, and are eternal. All the world suffers pain and loss; it has never been God’s will that Christians be exempt from the suffering of this life. The difference between believers and unbelievers is not that one never has to suffer. The difference is much deeper. The believer has an eternal hope where first God has converted a rebellious heart, then has provided an eternal perspective while our bodies wait to be clothed from heaven. Even in this we have joy. This is a much better witness than an undocumented phony healing.

Back to home page