Was Jesus ever sick?

[Supplanter]

I was just wondering if anyone can cite a source in Scriptures where Jesus was ever sick. Maybe this is far-stretched, but if we are to be imitators of Christ in every way possible and Jesus was never sick, then does it not stand to reason that we should not be sick. Also, take a look at this passage from Mark:

Mark 16:15-18 (New King James Version)

15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[a] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”




If these signs and wonders are to follow us as we carry out the great commission, Does it stand to reason that God does not intend for those who have heard the gospel and received it to be:


1. Oppressed by demons
2. Die from drinking poison
3. Be Sick






Wish I could have been more eloquent, but this will do to start us off.

 

[KingZzub]

I can give you a Scripture that Jesus was NEVER sick if you want.

 

[probinson]

Luke 22:44 (NIV)
And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.


In all the times we've discussed this, this is the only scripture someone was able to produce to support the idea that Jesus may have been sick at some point.

So it was pointed out to me that there is a medical condition called hematidrosis, and the fact that Luke the doctor pointed this out was to show that Jesus suffered from this condition.

However, I believe that Luke is quite clearly using a metaphor. Closer examination of the scripture says that Jesus sweat was LIKE drops of blood, not that He actually sweat blood.

 

[nephilimiyr]

As far as I know the gospels don't ever say or imply if He ever was or wasn't sick. And what happend to his body while praying on the mount of Olives just before He was arrested was not a sickness.

 

[tansy]

Luke 22:44 (NIV)
And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.


In all the times we've discussed this, this is the only scripture someone was able to produce to support the idea that Jesus may have been sick at some point.

So it was pointed out to me that there is a medical condition called hematidrosis, and the fact that Luke the doctor pointed this out was to show that Jesus suffered from this condition.

However, I believe that Luke is quite clearly using a metaphor. Closer examination of the scripture says that Jesus sweat was LIKE drops of blood, not that He actually sweat blood.

I looked up your link to double-check,,,and it would seem quite reasonable that Jesus would sweat blood, as he was, I would imagine, under extreme stress. And i can't see that that really counts as being sick.

 

[probinson]

I looked up your link to double-check,,,and it would seem quite reasonable that Jesus would sweat blood, as he was, I would imagine, under extreme stress. And i can't see that that really counts as being sick.

I would agree that Jesus was under tremendous stress. However, I don't believe that Luke 22:44 lends support to the idea that Jesus actually sweat blood. No matter which translation of scripture you read, it seems pretty clear that Luke is using a metaphor. In the King James, it says that His sweat was "as it were great drops of blood falling to the ground".

Therefor, I believe that Luke was using a metaphor to explain just how profusely Jesus was sweating, but I don't believe that the scripture is saying that Jesus actually sweat blood.

 

[Yekcidmij]

I was just wondering if anyone can cite a source in Scriptures where Jesus was ever sick.

I don't think there is one.

Mark 16:15-18 (New King James Version)

15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[a] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

Ah, the longer ending of Mark....

I would agree that Jesus was under tremendous stress. However, I don't believe that Luke 22:44 lends support to the idea that Jesus actually sweat blood. No matter which translation of scripture you read, it seems pretty clear that Luke is using a metaphor. In the King James, it says that His sweat was "as it were great drops of blood falling to the ground".

Therefor, I believe that Luke was using a metaphor to explain just how profusely Jesus was sweating, but I don't believe that the scripture is saying that Jesus actually sweat blood.

(1) There is a variant in Luke 22:44 that might indicate that the part about sweating blood isn't original to Luke anyway.

(2) Even if it is included, I agree that it's a simile or metaphor.

(3) Even if it weren't a simile or metaphor I don't think that it would qualify as what we normally mean by "sickness" anyway.

So I too think it's a bad passage to point to and say it indicates Jesus was sick.

 

[Desperaux]

Jesus took all the world's diseases on His body on the cross. I am sure He suffered all of them at once. That is how He understands our suffering.


Matthew 8:17... that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying:


“ He Himself took our infirmities
And bore our sicknesses.”

 

[KingZzub]

Yes, Desperaux, the cross was the only time Jesus was sin, sick and poor.

The rest of his life he was righteous, healthy and wealthy.

Good point.

Blessings,
Ben

 

[ydouxist]

Scripture does say he was
Tired
Hungry
Thirsty
Troubled
That his soul was overwhelmed
And that he wept
IMHO if he was ever sick we would have been told

 

[JimB]

I do not know whether Jesus ever suffered from the flu or a cold or a splinter in his finger or what. I do know that he was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin (Heb. 4.15).

~Jim

Faith means trusting in advance what will only make sense in reverse.​

 

[Tamara224]

As far as I know the gospels don't ever say or imply if He ever was or wasn't sick.

Yep, and IMHO we should just leave it at that. If it had been important to us to know either way, surely God would have seen to it that the Gospel writers included it. IMO, the only inference we can draw from Scripture's silence on the matter is that it's not important either way.

And what happend to his body while praying on the mount of Olives just before He was arrested was not a sickness.

I agree.

 

[KingZzub]

Actually the gospel writers silence just shows their regard for the Old Testament. Jesus lived his life entirely under the Old Testament. He never broke the Old Testament law ever.

According to Deut. 28.1-68 this clearly means that no sickness would ever have been upon him. He didn't become sick until he became the curse of the law.

Blessings,
Benjamin

 

[Tamara224]

Actually the gospel writers silence just shows their regard for the Old Testament. Jesus lived his life entirely under the Old Testament. He never broke the Old Testament law ever.

According to Deut. 28.1-68 this clearly means that no sickness would ever have been upon him. He didn't become sick until he became the curse of the law.

Blessings,
Benjamin

Meh, I think you're reading too much into silence. Plus assuming that the Gospel writers had the same opinion/interpretation of Deut as you do. Which is, of course, highly debatable, especially considering they never said as much.

Eisegesis isn't my cup of tea. But you go ahead.

 

[KingZzub]

Tamara,

I am not sure how I am reading into this Scripture:

1And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth:
4Blessed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy ground, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.

or Exodus 15.26:

26And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee.

Do you honestly think that Jesus failed to hearken to the voice of the Lord His God, and failed to do that which is right in his sight? If not, then why do you think that the Lord failed to keep His promise to Jesus that He would not permit any diseases upon Him, because He is the LORD that healeth Him?

That is the plain reading of the Scripture, not eisegesis. I am not reading into the silence of the gospels, I am reading the truth of the Old Testament. Jesus came to fulfil the Old Testament, including Exodus 15.26.

Blessings,
Benjamin

 

[Tamara224]

Tamara,

I am not sure how I am reading into this Scripture:

1And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth:
4Blessed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy ground, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.

or Exodus 15.26:

26And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee.

Do you honestly think that Jesus failed to hearken to the voice of the Lord His God, and failed to do that which is right in his sight? If not, then why do you think that the Lord failed to keep His promise to Jesus that He would not permit any diseases upon Him, because He is the LORD that healeth Him?

That is the plain reading of the Scripture, not eisegesis. I am not reading into the silence of the gospels, I am reading the truth of the Old Testament. Jesus came to fulfil the Old Testament, including Exodus 15.26.

Blessings,
Benjamin

1st, God said He would not put on the Israelites any "of these diseases... which I have brought upon the Egyptians."

It's a specific category of diseases. Not any and every sickness.

You appear to me to be assuming that this covers everything from the common cold/flu to leprosy. That cannot be supported by the Scriptures. You're reading that into the Scripture, not taking it from Scripture.

2nd, the curses on Israel were on the national level, not the individual level. When God judged Israel, He did so against them as a whole. It was never a matter of God saying "Joe is living righteously so he will be healthy but his neighbor Jim is not righteous and so will have boils." God did not deal very often with people on such a case-by-case basis in the OT. He dealt with Israel as a nation. Plagues, diseases, wars (judgment) came upon Israel when the nation as a whole turned their back on God. And even the remnant of the righteous tended to suffer (e.g. Daniel, Hananiah, Azariah and Mishael were righteous but were still taken into captivity in Babylon to serve the Babylonian king).

To assume that the Gospel writers would have understood these things on an individualistic basis (a very American, modern mindset) is to do too much assuming. IMHO.

 

[KingZzub]

Actually Deuteronomy 28 specifically says:

60Moreover he will bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt, which thou wast afraid of; and they shall cleave unto thee.
61Also every sickness, and every plague, which is not written in the book of this law, them will the LORD bring upon thee, until thou be destroyed.



That seems like every sickness and every plague to me. Maybe you will accuse me of reading the word every into it, but I think it is there!



As for individual people being treated differently by God in the same nation, that is just nonsense in the light of the Old Testament. Rahab was saved, her nation was killed. Ruth was well fed but her nation was in famine.



Psalm 91 says that if you make the Most High your dwelling place ten thousand will fall at your side, but it shall not come near you. Joshua entered the promised land and the millions did not. God fed Elijah when the nation was in famine.



According to Jesus' own words there were lepers in Israel who did not get healed, but Naaman was healed. Achan was stoned to death for his stealing of gold, but his tribe was spared. Saul was killed, but the nation was not.


Daniel may have been in captivity, but it became a blessing to him giving him free food and drink, free education and a position as the second most powerful man in the land. That didn't happen to everyone in the nation, did it!

 

[Tamara224]

Actually Deuteronomy 28 specifically says:

60Moreover he will bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt, which thou wast afraid of; and they shall cleave unto thee.
61Also every sickness, and every plague, which is not written in the book of this law, them will the LORD bring upon thee, until thou be destroyed.

That seems like every sickness and every plague to me. Maybe you will accuse me of reading the word every into it, but I think it is there!

Good point. I can now see where you go that from.

I still think it's stretching it to conclude that no illness would/could come upon an Israelite except because of failing to follow the Law. IOW, those other diseases could come upon individuals due to some other cause than God's judgment.

For example: The Law contains many provisions about leprosy and what a person was supposed to do about it. The interesting thing about it was that they only brought offerings to God after they had been cleansed. For that we can infer that leprosy was not caused by sin.

As for individual people being treated differently by God in the same nation, that is just nonsense in the light of the Old Testament. Rahab was saved, her nation was killed. Ruth was well fed but her nation was in famine.

LOL, neither of whom were Israelites, neither of whose nations were Israel. Also, Ruth's nation (Moab) wasn't in famine. Israel had been in famine and that's why Naomi's family moved to Moab.

And please note that I didn't say God never dealt with people on a individual level. Just that He mostly dealt with Israel as a nation.

Listing a few exceptions to the rule doesn't disprove the general rule.

 

[franky67]

I was just wondering if anyone can cite a source in Scriptures where Jesus was ever sick. Maybe this is far-stretched, but if we are to be imitators of Christ in every way possible and Jesus was never sick, then does it not stand to reason that we should not be sick. Also, take a look at this passage from Mark:

Mark 16:15-18 (New King James Version)

15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[a] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”




If these signs and wonders are to follow us as we carry out the great commission, Does it stand to reason that God does not intend for those who have heard the gospel and received it to be:


1. Oppressed by demons
2. Die from drinking poison
3. Be Sick






Wish I could have been more eloquent, but this will do to start us off.

Yes just one time, God the Father made Him sick. Isaiah 53:10 from the Hebrew\ English version

10 Yet it pleased the LORD to crush him by disease; to see if his soul would offer itself in restitution, that he might see his seed, prolong his days, and that the purpose of the LORD might prosper by his hand:

 

[Yekcidmij]

IMHO if he was ever sick we would have been told

That's a big assumption. There are plenty of things that the gospel writers didn't tell us about Jesus. They seem to focus primarily on his last week in Jerusalem. The reason the evangelists didn't include it is because whether or not Jesus was ever sick in any sense wasn't important to the gospel. This is a modern concern for some Westerners, not a concern of the evangelists.