When healing doesn't come

[Biblicist]

Some time ago after over a year teaching "Spiritual Basics" to a Bible study filled with folks from the "United Church of Christ" (which is probably the MOST "Theologically liberal group in the 'states"), God pointed me to 1 Cor 12 as subject material, and I thought (with some excitement) that I would be teaching on the "Gifts".

As Paul only uses the term gifts or spiritual gifts in Rom 1:11 (χαρισμα υμιν πνευματικω&#957 we should not be surprised to find that there is no teaching on “the Gifts”; we certainly encounter the major themes of the Manifestations of the Spirit and with that of the 8 Congregational Offices along with how our ministries are diverse in Christ – except for verses 2 & 3 these three themes take up the entire twelfth chapter.

You can see from the following schematic how Paul has very carefully constructed this chapter along highly Trinitarian lines with the complete (exhaustive) list of 9 MotS and with the 8 Congregational Offices – the two are certainly not one and the same which Paul goes to great lengths to point out.

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

But He told me to READ IT AGAIN, and when I did I realized that the "Spirituals" and "Ministries" weren't really the subject of the next two chapters at all. Paul was correcting the HORRENDOUS PRIDEFUL ATTITUDE of the Corinthian Church related to the distribution of empowerments in their midst. The "list of 9" is really nothing more than some "sermon illustrations" tossed on the table as frame of reference.

The MESSAGE IS: HOW DARE YOU TAKE PRIDE in the empowerments of the Holy Spirit - as though somehow YOU had something to do with the ministry that results. HOW DARE you look at the person who "speaks in tongues" as INFERIOR to the one who manifests Healings, or Miraculous phenomena. HOW DARE you say to this Brother/Sister "I HAVE NO NEED OF YOU!!!". The Holy Spirit distributes the temporary empowerments to minister to the "Body of Christ" - as he wills.

Simple as that.

Even though it is common to encounter commentators who say that there was an issue within the Corinthian church regarding how some looked down on those who operated within the less spectacular Manifestations of the Spirit – I am still waiting to see anyone who can demonstrate from the Scriptures that this was a concern of Pauls. I certainly find it to be somewhat odd in this day and age that this old wives tale is still being promoted within academic material let alone within cessationist and populist media.

If this was a concern of Pauls then why would he say in 1Co 14:5 The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified. If Paul was so concerned about this supposed matter then he definitely would not have perpetuated the problem further by saying that those who prophesied were greater than those who only spoke in tongues.

When Paul speaks of the 8 Congregational Offices he even tells us that with regard to importance or status, the apostle is the first (or greatest), second with the prophets, third teachers and so on. If Paul was so concerned with some form of spiritual pride in Corinth there would be no chance of him encouraging pride within those who held these Offices by establishing a ranking as he has done.

Why would Paul in 12:31 say “But eagerly desire the greater grace-gifts”; a better translation as with the NIV footnote is with “But you are eagerly desiring the greater gifts”.

What we do find in the first eleven chapters is that Paul is greatly concerned with how the wealthier and more socially adept believers are mistreating those who are less well off. This should not come as any surprise to us considering the diverse social structure within the Corinthian congregation/s which ranged from government officials, free citizens down to indentured servants and even slaves. This is little different from how much of the current church operates within the West. Paul tells us in 1Co 12:12:27 But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honour to the parts that lacked it, 25 so that there should be no division in the body”.

“Simple as that”…maybe not!

I DON'T waste time categorizing "God's Ministries" beyond teaching that the "Spirituals" - "Interpretation, Prophesy, etc. Are as easily manifested by an A$$, (or a fish) as by a Human, …

I strongly doubt that many would agree with you that the Holy Spirit would fall upon a 'donkey', a fish or for that matter a pig or a dog in the same manner in which he indwells someone who has repented of their sin and turned to the Lord – I would say that your viewpoint is probably unique.

… and have NO RELATIONSHIP WHATSOEVER to the "Spiritual condition" Theological Knowledge", or "maturity" of the Christian who's manifesting them (beyond his obedience to the unction of the Spirit).

So if someone holds the Office of a teacher then their “‘Theological Knowledge’ has “NO RELATIONSHIP WHATSOEVER to the…” now that’s a different point of view!?!

The "Ministry gifts" - positions of leadership in the "body", on the other hand ARE more related to the FRUIT of the Spirit in the individual, and DIRECTLY related to his personal Spiritual development, and relationship with God.

Even though we have both been raised with the idea that Eph 4 is a list of ministry gifts, this is not something that Paul actually says. These five roles are to be spread right across each local congregation and the only leaders that the Scriptures prescribe is with that of the Elders and then with the deacons.

The PERSON with his callings is the "Gift" to the church.

This only applies to those who operate within one of the 8 Congregational Offices of 1Co 12:28; when it comes to the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit (12:7-11) these are activities of the Holy Spirit through the individual so it is the Spirit who is given to each local congregation; whereas the 8 Congregational Offices in 12:28 are a combination of four Pneumatically inspired ministries along with four that are based on human personality, temperament and learned skills and as such these Offices are given to the congregation, so we can say that the individual (working within these 8 Offices) is given to the congregation.

I don't bother with "9 of these", and "27 of them", because NONE of the lists are inclusive - and there are myriads of individual ministries which humans take great pleasure in categorizing, and placing artificial limitations on as they construct their beauracracies.

This is why bureaucracies have become the norm within many Pentecostal and Charismatic denominations and congregations as man has moved away from the pattern that Paul has prescribed whereby we now become the rule of law to the point where essentially anything goes.¶

As you can see, having spent a number of years looking at 1Co 12, 13 & 14 I have taken the strong view that Paul really knew what he was talking about which is why he has carefully constructed these three very important Pneumatic chapters in the manner that he has.








​

 

[Biblicist]

It does seem that this very important topic has gone off on somewhat of a tangent (though an important one) and I will tie it together in another post.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

"I strongly doubt that many would agree with you that the Holy Spirit would fall upon a 'donkey', a fish or for that matter a pig or a dog in the same manner in which he indwells someone who has repented of their sin and turned to the Lord – I would say that your viewpoint is probably unique."

Apples and oranges. You start out with "Spirit Upon", and then you switch horses in midstream and say "Spirit Indwells".

The Holy Spirit can come UPON anybody or any THING to accomplish his work. When you've Spoken in an "tongue" that YOU don't understand, but which IS UNDERSTOOD by somebody else present as a "Prophetic utterance" that ultimately SAVES THE LIFE of the one hearing it - then you've accomplished in the Spirit what an A$$ was enabled by the Holy Spirit to do in the Old Testament.

Do you think the "ravens" fed Elijah because they FELT like it?? Did the quail come to the Israelites every evening because they WANTED to be eaten?? Did the "Milch kine" leave their Calves, and head on their own to Bethshemesh with the ark because they felt like "getting away from their families"??

Naturally, the A$$ (nor the other animals) was not "Indwelled" by the Holy Spirit, but that's never been a requirement for one to "manifest the Gifts".

Caiaphas Manifested a pure Holy Spirit sourced "Prophesy" - even as he was planning to murder God's Son. I Assume you don't feel that he was "Indwelled by the Holy Spirit" (couldn't have been since NOBODY was then).

Samson wasn't "Indwelled by the Holy Spirit" either, and was a libidinous, lust driven FOOL - who WAS used mightily by God to Judge Israel with a Holy Spirit Gifted "Supernatural strength" (which isn't included in the "List of 9" - Slingshots either, or "Axe heads" that "swim").

The Manifestations (normally referred to as "Gifts of the Spirit" in Pentecostal circles) as listed in 1 Cor 12:8-10 have no relationship whatsoever to the "Maturity", or "Spirituality" (Or even the Humanity) of the one manifesting them.

"So if someone holds the Office of a teacher then their “‘Theological Knowledge’ has “NO RELATIONSHIP WHATSOEVER to the…” now that’s a different point of view!?!"

And then you Switch horses again, IGNORE everything I said, and disingenuously apply it to the Ministry callings, which I CLEARLY SAID were related to personal maturity.

Oh well. Have it your way, 'ol buddy. I'll drop out here and let you teach it your way.

 

[dollarsbill]

I'm sort of in this situation as a family member of mine has been suffering for many years - and as a Charismatic Christian I have asked for God's miraculous healing but the answer seems to always be "no."

1 John 5:14-15 (NASB)
14 This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests which we have asked from Him.

So the question becomes, does He hear us?

 

[Faulty]

1 John 5:14-15 (NASB)
14 This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests which we have asked from Him.

So the question becomes, does He hear us?

Only if we ask according to His will. The passage says so.

This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests which we have asked from Him.
​

 

[dollarsbill]

Only if we ask according to His will. The passage says so.

This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests which we have asked from Him.
​

Healing is His will. Do you know any place in Scripture where God refused to heal one of His faithful servants or their family members?

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Ever hear of Trophimus (2 Tim 4:20). Don't know that God "Refused" - but since Paul LEFT HIM sick, you can draw your own conclusion.

 

[dollarsbill]

Ever hear of Trophimus (2 Tim 4:20). Don't know that God "Refused" - but since Paul LEFT HIM sick, you can draw your own conclusion.

That doesn't mean he didn't get healed.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

"That doesn't mean he didn't get healed."

And it doesn't mean he didn't die of whatever sickness he had.

The only thing we DO know is that "Paul LEFT HIM SICK", and within the immediate context of Scripture, there was no healing.

 

[dollarsbill]

And it doesn't mean he didn't die of whatever sickness he had.

The only thing we DO know is that "Paul LEFT HIM SICK", and within the immediate context of Scripture, there was no healing.

Why not assume that he got healed since God promised healing throughout the Bible for His people?

 

[Alive_Again]

Nowhere does it say he was sick. Don't forget His benefits. "Who heals ALL thy diseases".

We have a better covenant. Paul had an infirmity, but not a sickness. That would defy the Word that said healing was on God's benefits package.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

"Why not assume" - etc.

That's the beauty of the present time the church doesn't murder each other over minor points of doctrine anymore. Y'all can "Assume" whatever you please. All God's Chilluns gots "Opinions".

 

[Bob Carabbio]

"Paul had an infirmity, but not a sickness."

Of course we weren't talking about PAUL at all, but Trophimus.

But there IS some evidence that Paul was sick, and temporarily "Stuck" in Galatia - so he kicked off the church there while he recuperated. He mentions problems with his eyes.

Trying to split the hair between an "Infirmity", and a "Sickness" requires an Exceedingly sharp hermeneutical broadaxe (And a heavy "theological bias").

 

[dollarsbill]

God promised healing for every sickness. Did He lie?

 

[Jack Bauer]

What do you make of it when a person has had a sickness for many years and has been struggling with pain - and is charismatic and asks continually for God's healing and it doesn't come?

I'm sort of in this situation as a family member of mine has been suffering for many years - and as a Charismatic Christian I have asked for God's miraculous healing but the answer seems to always be "no." In fact the condition has only gotten worse with time. I must say it has gotten frustrating - though I have never stopped asking the Lord for his healing...

Paul, says to join in with Christ's suffering on the cross. We, as Christians, the body of Christ, often fall into this false belief that pain and suffering are worthless because Christ already suffered and died for us and that's that. The problem with this is that not even the bible teaches us this. As I stated, Paul says to join in with Christ's suffering on the Cross. That implies that there is still some redemtive properties to it. Protestants would do well to dig deeper into this as I've noticed many Baptists in particular recognizing this more now. It's fun/interesting/inspiring to watch people's light bulb go off when they recognize it. Why do you think Christians fasted and prayed? I've listened and read much on the subject since we too went through similar situations in my family. Sometimes the Lord simply says no or gives no reply. Even Christ asked the Father to release him from the suffering, but instead of running from it He/Christ submitted to it. Sure, ask for healing, but in the mean time offer up the suffering for the salvation of souls.

There are many sources on this subject. I realize that you're probably posting in a sort of sadness over this seemingly unanswered prayer. Submitting to God's will is ultimately what we really should be praying.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Paul, says to join in with Christ's suffering on the cross. We, as Christians, the body of Christ, often fall into this false belief that pain and suffering are worthless because Christ already suffered and died for us and that's that. The problem with this is that not even the bible teaches us this. As I stated, Paul says to join in with Christ's suffering on the Cross. That implies that there is still some redemtive properties to it. Protestants would do well to dig deeper into this as I've noticed many Baptists in particular recognizing this more now. It's fun/interesting/inspiring to watch people's light bulb go off when they recognize it. Why do you think Christians fasted and prayed? I've listened and read much on the subject since we too went through similar situations in my family. Sometimes the Lord simply says no or gives no reply. Even Christ asked the Father to release him from the suffering, but instead of running from it He/Christ submitted to it. Sure, ask for healing, but in the mean time offer up the suffering for the salvation of souls.

There are many sources on this subject. I realize that you're probably posting in a sort of sadness over this seemingly unanswered prayer. Submitting to God's will is ultimately what we really should be praying.

There is absolutely nothing in the Gospels, Acts, or Epistles that indicates that sickness is part of God teaching Christians to endure suffering. The Scripture is quite clear that sickness is from the devil. In the New Covenant, sickness as well as salvation is part of the redemption that we have in Christ. The ministry of Jesus made it very clear that sickness was never acceptable to Him. Nowhere did He say to anyone that they should accept their sickness as God's way of taking a person through suffering to make them better people or getting them closer to him. This is false theology invented by the RCC church in around the 5th Century.

When Jesus healed people, He quoted Isaiah, who said that by His stripes they were healed. Peter quoted the same Scripture after the resurrection of Christ and he said that by His stripes we were healed. He put it in the past tense to show that when Jesus was whipped, healing became part of our redemption. When He died on the Cross, He purchased our salvation from sin through His body. When He rose from the dead, He gave us eternal life. When He sent the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, He gave us the ability to heal the sick.

Nowhere did Jesus ever pray for healing. He did not ask His Father to heal people, nor did He pray, "if it be thy will..." Jesus pronounced and declared people healed, and they were healed. He had the authority (the anointing) from the Father to heal the sick, and had the ability to do so through the Holy Spirit in Him.

Jesus has given us the authority to use His Name to heal the sick. To pray for healing is praying unbelief. God has already provided healing and given us the authority to lay hands on the sick. Actually, the instruction was to lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. There is no mention of prayer or anything else. So, according to Scripture, we have the anointing to lay hands of a sick person and then delare them healed in the Name of Jesus.

So, to say that God allows sickness to take a Christian through suffering is simply not true.

I will say also that 85% of teaching about healing in the Pentecostal/Charismatic church does not work. This is why there are so many excuses made for why people don't get healed.

The main excuse is that the sick person does not have enough faith. Well, would a person in a coma have faith? Did Lazarus have faith? There may have been one or two people that did have faith, but the vast majority of people who were healed did not express faith, and Jesus did not demand faith before He healed anyone. He recognised faith when He saw it, but did not make that a requirement for being healed. If you don't believe me, read the passages for yourself.

The other reasons why healing in the P/C churches does not work is that they make healing a sideshow. Not many sick people welcome themselves being made a sideshow for the stickybeak spectators. Also, there is too much emphasis on the person ministering healing. They give the impression that they have a special gift when God does not work that way. The only anointed Person to heal is Jesus, and He is no respecter of persons in the person He chooses to work through.

Also, healing services in church buildings is not supported by Scripture. Most miracles of healing happened in the streets or people's homes. There were no healing services described in Scripture. What God intends is that ordinary church people be equipped to take healing to unconverted people to show them that Jesus is alive and the Gospel is true.

Healing for Christians is taught in James. It is the function of Elders to minister healing to Christians.

The trouble is with our P/C churches is that the majority of healing ministry in healing services is directed toward Christians who make up the majority of the congregations.

Healing for Christians is in the form of equipping training so that they are taught the principles of divine healing. They become divine healing technicians who go out to where unconverted people are and minister healing to them. The ones who have done this have achieved amazing results.

So, in terms of all these healing crusades, let's accept that the Emporer has no clothes. They are pretending that God is healing people when in most cases He is not doing anything.

We need to give more close study of the Gospels to see how Jesus healed people, and then to train ordinary church members to go out and do the same. Then we may see more of the power of God operating in our communities, and more people coming to Christ. This is true revival.

Just because Pentecostals have manifestations of shaking and falling over in church services, it does not mean that the Holy Spirit is doing that. When the Holy Spirit is present, people get healed, demons get cast out, and sinners are converted. It doesn't matter what other manifestations there are, if healing and deliverances do not happen, then the rest is mere barren religiousness.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

"Paul had an infirmity, but not a sickness."

Of course we weren't talking about PAUL at all, but Trophimus.

But there IS some evidence that Paul was sick, and temporarily "Stuck" in Galatia - so he kicked off the church there while he recuperated. He mentions problems with his eyes.

Trying to split the hair between an "Infirmity", and a "Sickness" requires an Exceedingly sharp hermeneutical broadaxe (And a heavy "theological bias").

To say that Paul had a sickness or an infirmity is nonsense, because the Scripture does not make that clear at all. Paul's thorn in the flesh could have been anything.

Anyhow, to say that God allowed Paul to have a sickness to teach him humility, because that was the purpose of the thorn in the flesh, is to deny that healing is part of our redemption in Christ. It contradicts Peter who said, "By His stripes you were healed."

When Paul talked about his eyes, he was using the same type of expression that we would use when we say that we would give our eye teeth for something, or that something cost us an arm or a leg. To say that Paul had some sort of eye condition is just a bit of nonsense dreamed up by some shonky teacher who tried to explain away divine healing.

Where did Jesus say to anyone who came to Him for healing that they should accept their sickness as a thorn in the flesh to keep them from getting proud?

I believe that it was the many persecutions, beatings, etc., that he received because of his preaching of the Gospel. According to Scripture, that is the definition of Christian suffering. Persecution. Not adverse circumstances, not sickness.

 

[Faulty]

Where did Jesus say to anyone who came to Him for healing that they should accept their sickness as a thorn in the flesh to keep them from getting proud?

That's not a very good argument. All one had to do is to say 'Paul'.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

That's not a very good argument. All one had to do is to say 'Paul'.

Okay. Paul is usually quite clear in what he says. He does not specify his thorn in the flesh as being some kind of sickness. He called it a messenger from Satan. As I have said before, it is much more likely to be the persecutions that he has had to bear for the Gospel. This is consistent with what he has stated about the persecutions and trials he has had to go through in declaring the Gospel wherever he went.

But there is absolutely no connection with any type of sickness. To say that he had some type of eye condition is a pure speculation bordering on absolute nonsense.

How's that?

 

[AndOne]

I have to simply ask then - why do Christians get sick?