37. Divine Healing
DIVINE HEALING Is divine healing in the atonement?
Certainly, divine healing is in the atonement. So, also, is our eternal residence in Heaven in the atonement; but we have not yet reached Heaven. We are still on the earth, and we are still in bodies which are subject to “the bondage of corruption,” for “we wait for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.” The redemption of our body is a part of the redemption wrought out for us on the cross of Calvary, and is therefore in the atonement. But we wait for it nevertheless. We have not yet entered into it. Our entire inheritance, which “is incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away,” is in the atonement, but for the time being it is “reserved in heaven for us,” while we down here are “kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” No one can believe more than I in the power of God to heal, or in His willingness to heal when it is according to His plan and purpose; but I deny, and I have the authority of the Word of God for denying, that divine healing is in the atonement in the same way that salvation is in the atonement, and that it may therefore be demanded and expected in response to faith in every case. I have seen men healed in response to prayer and faith, and I myself have more than once anointed persons for healing; and in some cases I have seen them healed, and in other cases have seen them go on in the suffering until they died. But in each case I believed, and still believe, that God’s will was perfectly done; done by those who suffered unto death, as well as by those and in those who were healed promptly in answer to prayer.
I once heard a God-fearing man, who is as well read in the Bible as the average layman, say that “the days of miracles are past” Qualifying on the term miracle: I mean a miracle such as a man or woman, who by prayer heals and cures himself of an illness. My argument or side of the subject being that a man or woman who is ill and whose faith is great enough, can, through prayer, cure himself of an illness. This has been accomplished to the writer’s knowledge, and it is in my opinion a miracle. The other man says that he does not believe a man can cure an illness in this manner, and that miracles belong to the days of the apostles. Will you please give your opinion on the above in detail? When it is said that “the days of miracles are past,” it is generally meant that we no longer live in the days when such spectacular miracles are performed as were performed, for instance, in the days of our Lord and His apostles. We do not now hear of men being raised from the dead, or water being turned into wine, or of any other such miracles as He and they performed. The healing of a sick man may be miraculous, but it is hardly in the class I have referred to. During the time when the New Testament was being written, and until it was completed the spectacular gifts continued, though toward the end of the period referred to they gradually disappeared; and now that the New Testament is completed God calls upon His people to walk by faith rather than by sight. It is still true that “the prayer of faith shall save the sick,” but no one can pray the prayer of faith unless it be given to him to pray. Sometimes it is God’s will to heal, and sometimes it is not. The proper attitude of faith is to be submissive under His hand, seeking His will as the very best thing for His child at all times.
1. Would you please explain to me why the word “griefs” inIsaiah 53:4is rendered “disease” and “sickness” inDeuteronomy 7:15;Deuteronomy 28:61;1 Kings 17:17;2 Kings 1:2;2 Kings 8:8;2 Chronicles 16:12;2 Chronicles 21:15, and why the word translated “sorrows” is rendered “pain” inJob 33:19?
2. And please explain why “disease” could mean “spiritual disease” when He “healed all that were sick” inMatthew 8:16-17.
3. And also explain why it is not in the atonement 1. The reason the words are translated as indicated is that this is their correct translation.
2. Spiritual disease is not the meaning; it is physical disease, bodily sickness. Our Lord bore the griefs and sickness of His people by healing all who came to Him. But this was not done in the atonement on the cross.
3. Bodily healing for the believer is in the atonement in the ultimate sense, just as exemption from death is in the atonement. But we have not received all that was wrought out for us in the atonement. Believers still get sick and die, because the time has not arrived for us to enter upon our full inheritance which is “reserved in heaven” for us (1 Peter 1:4). Until then we have the Holy Spirit dwelling in us as “the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession” (Ephesians 1:14). Meanwhile we, who thus “have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” (Romans 8:23). Is it true, as some teach, that we may demand and expect bodily healing in response to faith and without the use of medicine, just as we may expect salvation that way? What do you say aboutJames 5:14-15?
Bodily healing is not on the same basis as salvation; we still wait “for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” (Romans 8:23); and we must not expect any healing when it is, as it sometimes is, contrary to God’s will (2 Corinthians 12:7-9). And even when God’s will is to heal, we have no right to “demand” that God shall heal “without the use of medicine.” It sometimes pleases Him to bless the use of medicine, and sometimes it pleases Him to heal directly without such means. James (like Hebrews , 1 and 2 Peter, and Jude) is primarily a Hebrew-Christian Epistle, and doubtless the promise of James 5:14-15 will find its fullest accomplishment in the Kingdom age; but we need not limit its application. It is always true that “the prayer of faith shall save the sick,” but “the prayer of faith” cannot be prayed unless God bestows it. God will give it whenever it is His will to heal. When it is not His will to heal, the yielded believer will say Amen, and rejoice in his thorn in the flesh, even as Paul did. Does the word in1 Peter 2:24, “by whose stripes ye were healed,” apply to bodily healing?
No. The words are quoted from Isaiah 53:5 and have nothing to do with the healing of the body. Of course, God is able to heal, with or without means. Sometimes it pleases Him to heal with means and sometimes without them. But on the other hand, it is sometimes contrary to His will that there should be healing at all. And it is the proper attitude of faith to submit oneself unto Him, and to know that His will is best. In the light ofHebrews 13:8;Matthew 8:17;Isaiah 53:4-5;1 Peter 2:24-25;Galatians 3:13; and Deuteronomy 28, can it be Scripturally proven that divine healing was not meant for our own dispensation? Is our commission the same as He gave to His disciples inLuke 9:2? If not, why not? The passages you cite say nothing about “our dispensation.” Without doubt, divine healing is meant for this dispensation in so far as it may please God to grant it; but it must not be forgotten that we have not yet entered into all that was bought for us at the cross. Only the firstfruits of our inheritance have come to us in the person of the Holy Spirit, and we are “waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” (Romans 8:23). As to your question, “Is our commission the same as He gave to His disciples in Luke 9:2? If not, why not?” This is certainly not the commission under which we are supposed to work. Have you ever noticed the contrast between Luke 9:3 and Luke 22:36? These two commissions are very different. Do you try to work under either of them, and if so, which one? And if you are to work under either of them who is to choose which one? You confuse things and fail to rightly divide the Word of truth, and this leads to trouble always. We are not sent to preach the Kingdom nor the Gospel of the Kingdom, but rather the Gospel of personal salvation by grace through faith.
Please explainMark 16:18, the last clause, where it says, “they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”
It is clear from a reading of the whole passage in Mark 16 that we have here Kingdom truth rather than Church truth. The signs that were to follow continued to be present during the interval after our Lord’s ascension when the Kingdom was still being offered to Israel and while God was stretching out His hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people. After the formation of the Church and as the New Testament Scriptures neared completion the spectacular gifts were largely removed, and since that time they have been exceptional rather than the rule. It is altogether likely that after the Church is completed and caught out, these signs may be revived in connection with the preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom in all the world as a testimony unto all nations before the end of the Great Tribulation and the Second Coming of Christ to earth (Matthew 24:14).
Christ healed the man who was blind from birth, and shortly afterwards healed his soul. Did Christ ever heal without saving also? Not to my knowledge. Compared with salvation, bodily healing is a small thing. The sinning believer of 1 Corinthians 5 was sentenced by apostolic command to be delivered “unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (verse 5). This is not to say that all bodily suffering is the immediate result of sin (see John 9:2-3); sometimes it results from very different causes (see 2 Corinthians 12:7). But, after all is said and done, bodily affliction, as compared with the future glory of the saved, is a small thing (2 Corinthians 4:16-18).