I’ve been listening with interest to your podcasts on the origin of sickness. As I pointed out in a previous comment, I’m very much on your wavelength in these matters.
One thought though … What would you say to Joni Earickson Tada about healing? She is undeniably a woman of strong and Biblical faith and a blessing to many around the world.
The Word asks, “For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man’s spirit within him?” We’ve never met Joni Earickson Tada. We don’t know about her situation, her ailment/injuries, her faith, her beliefs, etc. so we can’t answer your question. Aside from the Word itself, in over a dozen years as a lawyer I’ve come to realize that you can’t speak about someone’s specific situation without engaging that specific person about the facts concerning them. Over and over we have clients who say, “Well, so-and-so’s case turned out this way” and, upon further investigation, we find out that so-and-so’s case is not only a different animal, but it’s also in a different zoo.
I would, however, like to speak to your comment generally.
First, if healing is not in redemption then we have no foundation, as Christians, to ask God for healing in faith at all. Since it is, however, included in redemption, we can ask in faith. (Otherwise we’d all be like the man at the pool of Bethesda, just waiting for an angel to drop down any time.)
Once a redemptive truth has been provided (such as salvation), the responsibility of walking in that truth lies with man and not with God. For instance, in the last podcast we preached on the woman with the issue of blood. She could have just let the “things concerning Jesus” ride and carried on with her illness. Instead she responded in faith and Jesus called it “her” faith. Cf. Hebrews where Paul speaks of the Israelites not “mixing” the Word with faith.
Mainline Christianity (or whatever you might want to call it) works under an implied assumption that if healing were in redemption then every Christian would experience healing, practically automatically. That premise, however, is not reflected in scripture. For instance, we can look to various examples in the Gospels where Jesus chewed out the disciples for their unbelief. Two examples come to mind: Peter’s water walking experience (we have a post on that) and the narrative of Matthew 10 and 17. In Matthew 10, Jesus gave the disciples authority “to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness.” In Matthew 17, despite having this authority, they failed to cast the demon out of a boy because of their “unbelief.” The disciples’ names (including Peter’s) were still written in the book of Life, but they didn’t believe/act on what he said in these instances.
Mark 5 also gives us enlightenment. The Word says that Jesus went to Nazareth, “but could do no mighty work.” He did heal a few with minor ailments. The context of the scriptures show us that Jesus went to Nazareth with the Spirit “without measure” and the difference between the minor ailments (those healed) and the major ones was unbelief. That clues us in that the problem lay with the people of Nazareth, not with the Lord. It also clues us in that folks appear to have a harder time exercising faith for the “harder” cases, i.e., those with headaches might have had healing testimonies, but those with palsy were left in their beds.
And while we’ve heard many modern “faith” preachers put all the responsibility on the hearers, there is more than one side to Romans 10.17. It is the preacher’s responsibility to preach the Word accurately (how else can a hearer exercise faith in the Word?). If one goes back to the healing evangelists of yesteryear, such as Charles Price, he can see the simple, yet accurate, exposition of the Word on healing. Often these preachers would preach on healing for weeks on-end in order to raise the faith of their hearers. A week-long healing meeting is unheard of these days.
There is quite a bit more to comment on, but I will have to leave it to future posts or some podcasts. In the meantime, I suggest that you pick up Bosworth’s Christ the Healer book and/or Lillian Yeoman’s His Healing Power. They both speak of hindrances to healing. You may also pick up Charles Price’s The Real Faith. It’s a real gem.
I listened to your sermon on the woman with the issue of blood, I like the point that you made that action follows faith. In the word wriiten in Mark:5;25-34 there is no real description of this woman, which allows us to understand that this woman could be any woman. That thru her faith she was healed. It is interesting that we lean on our on vices until we see that we can not handle the situation, then call to a God who has been there all the time!
One other thing that comes to mind with this woman is just what she heard. Many preachers seem to put all of the responsibility of faith upon the hearer, but Romans 10.17 shows us that faith comes from hearing an accurate message. Maybe we don’t see some of the same kind of results because we aren’t preaching the same kind of message. It’s a thought.
Peter,
I am believing God for my personal healing, and I found your teaching particularly applicable. I did have one question. If all sickness is a direct result of satanic oppression, then why do people received improvement from non-spiritual means. For instance, a person is having symptoms as a result of a vitamin deficiency, and after taking supplements, their symptoms either end or improve. Or, a person has back pain that is resolved through chiropractic therapy. I’d appreciate any additional insight. Thanks!
I suggest the series, “The Spiritual Origins of Disease” podcasts. In those I demonstrate the spiritual root of Satanic oppression and Kutztown’s “The Thorny Issue” at http://thundersounds.blogspot.com/2007/10/whats-body-to-do.html. I believe that they’d give you the additional insight that you’re looking for.
Peter,
I’ve been listening with interest to your podcasts on the origin of sickness. As I pointed out in a previous comment, I’m very much on your wavelength in these matters.
One thought though … What would you say to Joni Earickson Tada about healing? She is undeniably a woman of strong and Biblical faith and a blessing to many around the world.
Keep up the good work. Ross
Ross, thanks for your comment.
The Word asks, “For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man’s spirit within him?” We’ve never met Joni Earickson Tada. We don’t know about her situation, her ailment/injuries, her faith, her beliefs, etc. so we can’t answer your question. Aside from the Word itself, in over a dozen years as a lawyer I’ve come to realize that you can’t speak about someone’s specific situation without engaging that specific person about the facts concerning them. Over and over we have clients who say, “Well, so-and-so’s case turned out this way” and, upon further investigation, we find out that so-and-so’s case is not only a different animal, but it’s also in a different zoo.
I would, however, like to speak to your comment generally.
First, if healing is not in redemption then we have no foundation, as Christians, to ask God for healing in faith at all. Since it is, however, included in redemption, we can ask in faith. (Otherwise we’d all be like the man at the pool of Bethesda, just waiting for an angel to drop down any time.)
Once a redemptive truth has been provided (such as salvation), the responsibility of walking in that truth lies with man and not with God. For instance, in the last podcast we preached on the woman with the issue of blood. She could have just let the “things concerning Jesus” ride and carried on with her illness. Instead she responded in faith and Jesus called it “her” faith. Cf. Hebrews where Paul speaks of the Israelites not “mixing” the Word with faith.
Mainline Christianity (or whatever you might want to call it) works under an implied assumption that if healing were in redemption then every Christian would experience healing, practically automatically. That premise, however, is not reflected in scripture. For instance, we can look to various examples in the Gospels where Jesus chewed out the disciples for their unbelief. Two examples come to mind: Peter’s water walking experience (we have a post on that) and the narrative of Matthew 10 and 17. In Matthew 10, Jesus gave the disciples authority “to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness.” In Matthew 17, despite having this authority, they failed to cast the demon out of a boy because of their “unbelief.” The disciples’ names (including Peter’s) were still written in the book of Life, but they didn’t believe/act on what he said in these instances.
Mark 5 also gives us enlightenment. The Word says that Jesus went to Nazareth, “but could do no mighty work.” He did heal a few with minor ailments. The context of the scriptures show us that Jesus went to Nazareth with the Spirit “without measure” and the difference between the minor ailments (those healed) and the major ones was unbelief. That clues us in that the problem lay with the people of Nazareth, not with the Lord. It also clues us in that folks appear to have a harder time exercising faith for the “harder” cases, i.e., those with headaches might have had healing testimonies, but those with palsy were left in their beds.
And while we’ve heard many modern “faith” preachers put all the responsibility on the hearers, there is more than one side to Romans 10.17. It is the preacher’s responsibility to preach the Word accurately (how else can a hearer exercise faith in the Word?). If one goes back to the healing evangelists of yesteryear, such as Charles Price, he can see the simple, yet accurate, exposition of the Word on healing. Often these preachers would preach on healing for weeks on-end in order to raise the faith of their hearers. A week-long healing meeting is unheard of these days.
There is quite a bit more to comment on, but I will have to leave it to future posts or some podcasts. In the meantime, I suggest that you pick up Bosworth’s Christ the Healer book and/or Lillian Yeoman’s His Healing Power. They both speak of hindrances to healing. You may also pick up Charles Price’s The Real Faith. It’s a real gem.
Thanks for the comment.
I listened to your sermon on the woman with the issue of blood, I like the point that you made that action follows faith. In the word wriiten in Mark:5;25-34 there is no real description of this woman, which allows us to understand that this woman could be any woman. That thru her faith she was healed. It is interesting that we lean on our on vices until we see that we can not handle the situation, then call to a God who has been there all the time!
Thank-you for your insight.
Thanks for commenting.
One other thing that comes to mind with this woman is just what she heard. Many preachers seem to put all of the responsibility of faith upon the hearer, but Romans 10.17 shows us that faith comes from hearing an accurate message. Maybe we don’t see some of the same kind of results because we aren’t preaching the same kind of message. It’s a thought.
Peter,
I am believing God for my personal healing, and I found your teaching particularly applicable. I did have one question. If all sickness is a direct result of satanic oppression, then why do people received improvement from non-spiritual means. For instance, a person is having symptoms as a result of a vitamin deficiency, and after taking supplements, their symptoms either end or improve. Or, a person has back pain that is resolved through chiropractic therapy. I’d appreciate any additional insight. Thanks!
Carrie, thanks for the comment and question.
I suggest the series, “The Spiritual Origins of Disease” podcasts. In those I demonstrate the spiritual root of Satanic oppression and Kutztown’s “The Thorny Issue” at http://thundersounds.blogspot.com/2007/10/whats-body-to-do.html. I believe that they’d give you the additional insight that you’re looking for.