Derek Rich

The subject of physical healing has never hurt anyone like it did Jesus. Just as Jesus bore all the sin of the world, He bore all the world’s sicknesses! Father takes very personal what His Boy went through on our behalf. He expects us to take it personal too! Until Jesus’ unspeakable agony for the sake of our healing is personal to you, you’ll claim a right to remain hurt by the subject due to personal experience. To emphasize what I mean, here is a Youtube link to a 4 minute portrayal of Christ at the whipping post (WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT. RECOMMENDED FOR MATURE VIEWERS ONLY. https://youtu.be/-K3dZqo9c-A )

WHY make such a big deal about something as controversial as healing when it’s not necessary to get to heaven?

THIS is why it’s a big deaI!

THIS is why we boldly declare the will of God to heal all!

THIS is why we hate sin and sickness!

THIS is why healing is more than just a doctrinal statement we argue!

THIS is why we honor Jesus’ experience and the Father’s esteem for the suffering of His Son more than the experiences and emotions of any other!

THIS is why we fear God more than men!  

THIS is where promises and provision for healing meet!

THIS is the Jesus to Whom we each will give an account!

THIS is the needed revelation and resolve of everyone concerning the importance God places on healing!

THIS is why if hypothetically, God forbid, someone struggled but kept trying to stand on the Word and work of Christ against the same physical problem for nearly their entire lifetime. Yet, never saw or felt the full victory. (I’m not saying this should be the case. Only for the sake of illustration) Are not Christ’s sufferings worthy of the  lifetime of that individual never having watered down the will of God to heal him/her regardless of his/her experience? Of course! Just as we know that if it took a lifetime to finally experience the victory which Jesus provided over sin, complete freedom having been affirmed as God’s will from the start, the Lord is worthy of that refusal to give up! In comparison to the endless, eternal worthiness of Christ in heaven, what is even a 100 year long struggle of not compromising the will of God for which Jesus suffered?

THIS is the motivation behind this writing! That the Lamb receive the reward of His sufferings! He is worthy! His worthiness demands “NO COMPROMISE!”

  WHY did entire multitudes seek if only to touch the border of Jesus’ garment, and everyone who touched Him were made whole? (Mar 6:56) I think the reason is found in the first mention of this method of receiving healing in the fifth chapter of Mark.

There, a woman who had suffered for 12 years from an “issue of blood” (or bloody flux) was instantly healed because she had believed and said, “If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole.” If her healing doesn’t forever prove that Jesus is not picking and choosing who He wants to heal and who He doesn’t, then I don’t know what will. Jesus literally, genuinely asked, “Who touched my clothes?” I believe this was a sincere question of which He did not know the answer. I don’t think the Truth personified was deceptively toying with them.

  His human lack of informational knowledge in this occasion no more threatens the dual reality of His divinity than His needing to eat, sleep, and being localized in a body. For the sake of the Incarnation (fully God, fully man), we recognize the commonly described divine attributes of omniscience (knowing all that can be known), omnipotence (possessing all self-sustaining power, thus never experiencing weakness or fatigue and thereby having no need of nutricional sustenance or sleep), and omnipresence (being present everywhere, at all times), were not fully experienced in Jesus’ time on earth.

  This woman received healing power from Jesus before he even knew who received it, much less made a decision after her touch of whether to heal her or not! She and the multitudes, to whom the story spread, discovered that healing did not require a personal home visit, a intentional verbal address, or the laying on of hands from Jesus! Only faith that when I touch Him, I am healed! You see, the reason for this all- access provision of grace is gloriously revealed in Jesus’ words to the woman who had “told Him all the truth”: “Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy PLAGUE.” All who heard the Greek word that Jesus used for “plague” (“mastix”), would have known it to be the word describing a whip; Roman flagellum for criminals; or scourging.

  We could say that this woman and everyone else healed in the OId Testament and in the earthly ministry of Jesus, were all healed “on credit!” Jesus could tell the woman, “Be whole of this that has been whipping and scourging you!” because He knew that He had an appointment with a whipping post! In just a short matter of time, Jesus would take stripes and His body would be broken to pay in full the price of our healing. In the same way, every instance of forgiveness of sin before the cross and resurrection was provided “on credit”. Forgiveness of sin looked ahead to the shed blood of Christ at the cross. Healing looked ahead to the broken body of Christ at the whipping post. No wonder Jesus cried with a loud voice from the cross, “It is finished!” (“Paid in full!”) If they were confident in the willingness of Christ to heal, enough to take radical action of faith, and they received from Him “on credit” without hesitation or exception, how much more confident can we be in His willingness, now that the price has been fully paid? (on this side of the cross) Oh, what a Saviour and Healer!

  My prayer is that this content has helped to heal any previous hurt due to ideas about healing! God truly wants healing to flow to you and through you to the hurting! Please share this material with others! “freely ye have received, freely give.” Mat 10:8

Formerly titled: 
Faith That Overcomes Emotional Intimidation and Mental Pressure: Understanding Salvation From Sin and Sickness

By: Derek R. Rich

I’ve yet to hear anyone disprove that undeniable healing and demonstrable power over demons are inferior to other methods of convincing and captivating the lost world, filled with false religions, atheism, and kinds of deception. (Obviously, I’m not promoting signs apart from Christ-like love and virtues.) It has never been “either/or” but always “both/and”! Which does the devil fear more for the sake of his world system: A. The Church that makes the sinner explain why he/she doesn’t repent and believe the Gospel in the face of undeniable miracles? Or, B. The Church that tries to explain why God rarely heals and works miracles because He is more glorified without them?  The Bible is on the side of option A! Christian apologetics should not depend upon eloquently and intellectually explaining away the large percentage of the Word of God which any honest, objective reader can see presupposes God’s involvement with His people to be in verifiable demonstration of His reality. (By God reality I mean that which can only be attributed to the God of the Bible)

  As our Provider, God is both our Source and Supplier for all the needs of His creation, and since the miraculous is often of necessity to us (the new birth for starters), God thinks the humanly impossible should be normal and expected in our relationship/connection with Him, right? What we call the supernatural is natural for God. (His nature on display) Jesus called miracles the “works” of the family business. Couldn’t the skeptic (be it of an atheistic worldview or another religion) easily find it very convenient for a Christian apologist to dodge the face value implications of Jesus’ words alone and appeal to God having mysterious, glorious reasons for rarely willing anymore what Jesus always willed to do, because now we have the Bible? How convenient that we have to wait until the afterlife to know those “reasons” for God choosing something “better” or “more effective” than miraculous healing, etc. To me, it seems other religions could also conveniently claim that their “gods” will give their reasons in the afterlife for not demonstrating their reality and power in answer to prayer. Whereas I could give you testimonies of miracles done in Jesus’ name that facilitated the sharing of the Gospel with ease and boldness. (Much more so than trying to explain to sinners why it is rarely God’s will to answer prayer for healing, supposedly; Ironically, the sinner’s ignorance of the Bible promises and Jesus Christ worked in my favor, as a Christian trying to explain the lack of healing demonstration in response to many Christians’ prayers!)

  All I’m saying is this: Healing doesn’t hurt the cause! Healing helps reveal Who our Father is. Healing helps the oppressed and afflicted. It helps the Kingdom to be recognized in the earth. It helps the believer/ minister experience the compassion and joy of God. Healing helps provide the world with more undeniable and irrefutable evidence of the Risen Christ. It helps as a bold conversation starter with anyone. Healing helps the Great Commission!

  To some degree, we all have experienced the hurt of long-term conditions and untimely loss either personally or of those we love. It seems most painful to admit, “It could have been different.” WhiIe we know logically to say that it could not have been different, is to say that there was nothing else possible by the grace/power of God through faith. We don’t consistently hold that position in any other area of past experience. We humbly admit that there was always more available and possible through God than what we have experienced in areas like our spiritual, financial, relational, and emotional wellbeing. (Even in our good experiences not only the bad) We do not claim these other areas to have been solely in God’s hands and therefore could not have been better in any way. In no other area but the physical does it seem the tendency to think this way.

  There are many potentially painful areas of Biblical truth for anyone who has experienced things when God’s will/desire was not fulfilled, such as: divorce, murder of loved one, suicide of loved one, abuse, drug addiction, financial ruin, war, traumatic accident, death of unsaved relative or friend, and the list could go on and on. We should weep with those who weep in such experiences. However, our desire to help those suffering to process well and also to prevent others from further suffering does not allow us to adjust our beliefs and teachings so as to avoid ever dealing with these topics Biblically.

  I myself used to think in unbiblical ways concerning God’s will to heal, but the Word of God brought me to a crossroads. It will for every one of us. Here it is: Care more about how people feel? Or how God feels? Believe man’s word or God’s? You see, I reached the painful realization that to say, “There’s no way I (we) didn’t have faith for so and so’s healing. So and so himself/herself believed. But God chose not to heal. God said ‘no’.” is in actuality saying to God, “God, you promised that if I would believe, I would receive. And that if one who believes lays hands on the sick, they shall recover. And that the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up. I (we) believed, but you did not keep your Word. You lied, God.” In effect, it is to say, “God, if anyone missed it, it was you.” Though often not that explicit, these statements are essentially implied regularly within the Church! I found that very concerning, even perplexing. How are these statements/explanations not unthinkable to us! The whole issue for me is: Do I care more about offending holy but fallible people? Do I care about offending a holy and infallible God?

  Tragically, people have no fear or hesitation to blame our Heavenly Father for disease and death in ways that we would shudder to accuse other human beings. (accusations not without legal consequences, humanly speaking) How many of us have made blanket statements about how the all-knowing God operates without even hinting that we could be wrong/mistaken? Amazing! Not even a humble disclaimer! Proverbs tells us that God hates false witness. Do we realize that slander against God is the devil’s strategy from the beginning? Imagine being falsely charged on just one account of intentionally afflicting a child with a poisonous cancer-causing substance that resulted in years of painful agony and ultimately, his/her premature death. Do we realize the gravity of bearing false witness against God Himself just once, much less thousands if not every case? Even a sincere person’s accusation of physical harm/murder, based on ignorance of truth and innocent acceptance of falsehoods which he heard from who he thought to be credible sources, has devastating consequences for the person accused. (At least until the truth is discovered and the accusation disproven) Misinformed accusations against God made by well-meaning people still produce tragic affects.

  Only the God Who is infinitely love would suffer so long these misrepresentations in the area healing (and more) by His family who often does not consider His feelings/emotions. Nothing but God’s strong love could bear up under the hurtfulness of it all. (Not to mention how the lost world treats Him) We could ask ourselves, “Does this healing a hurtful subject to the Father?” The Holy Spirit is often grieved because these false accusations usually are made as an effort to comfort/cope in times of suffering and loss. Yet, the comfort God gives does not contradict His Word. The Holy Ghost Comforter is the Spirit of truth. He will not guide us away from truth in order to comfort us. Therefore, as much hurt as we feel, we cannot take comfort in explanations that are at the expense of truth. When our explanations are embraced at the cost of truth, we actually allow the causes of our hurt to continue, because only the truth makes us free.

To be continued in Part 12…

I’ve asked my home church this very telling question: When I say that it is always the will of God to heal everyone, what first comes to your mind? (I personally think there are two primary sources for hesitancy and resistance.)

1. “That statement has not been my only, consistent experience, nor that of anyone else I know.”

2. “There seem to be passages of Scripture that challenge that statement.” (Remember, Scripture must be interpreted with Scripture in context and in “Christ-text”.)

  My stated belief in healing is not a crutch for weak minded people who want to be affirmed by experience. Ministers have suffered criticism and contradiction of experience over this belief for years. Don’t you know, that if they were not committed to Scripture, they could’ve easily changed their beliefs to agree with experience and still have sold books, Cd’s, etc?

  Honesty and humility are vital attitudes with which we must approach the Word. We are told in Psalm 138:2 that God has magnified His Word above All His name. Who did this? God Himself did. If He magnified His Word above all His name, how much more should we magnify His Word above all our negative experiences? God knows that a person’s name is only as good as his/her word.

  God can use situations that are not His will to bring about good and receive glory. (He in a Redeemer.) (i.e. funeral where the lost are influenced to get saved by someone’s  loving commitment to Christ in the midst of sickness and disease) Just because God has the ability to bring good out of something bad does not mean that the bad was His wilI or intent.

  We don’t allow experiences to make our doctrine in other areas. (i.e. victory over besetting sin, holiness standards, etc) “Well, I know what the Bible says, but I prayed about this issue, and God did otherwise.” That don’t fly with other areas, then why  healing?

  If a loved one dies lost in sin, nobody says, “How dare you say that he/she didn’t exercise faith or could’ve received more from God?”

Acts 17:30 “…but now (God) commandeth all men every where to repent:”

  We are the body of Christ. The Head hasn’t changed, and isn’t sending out different signals to the body than His Eternal Word. The Spirit indwelt church is not merely a referral service to secular services/programs for the diseased and oppressed. Christ in us is just as much the answer for them as He is for any sinner. Jesus mentioned two things that make the Word of God of none effect: Unbelief and Unbiblical traditions.

  If physical healing through Christ is God’s desire for everyone, then how could we ever die? (Isn’t it somewhat funny to worry ourselves with how we must die?) I encourage an honest look at just a handfull of the many Scriptures pertaining to this topic, such as:

Psa 104:29 …thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust. (Some may would object to this usage because the verse speaks specifically of animals. However, would any one dare suggest that God is incapable of doing the same for humans in the practical sense? The principle remains true in either case.)

Job 5:26 Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age, like as a shock of corn cometh in in his season.

Exo 23:26 There shall nothing cast their young, nor be barren, in thy land: the number of thy days I will fulfil.

Psa 91:16 With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation.

Eph 6

2 Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;)

3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

  God does not depend upon disease or any other work of the devil to receive His children home. He doesn’t need sickness to call us to heaven any more than He needs sin to keep us humble. Nothing more is required than to simply stop breathing and fall asleep in Christ. (Even in cases of peaceful death, there is often a felt need to attribute the cause to a physical problem.) This may be a shocking revelation: Everyone Jesus healed eventually died. He evidently still thought their healing was an important expression of the will of God. Though the greatest tragedy is to die lost, we do not have to sacrifice the will of God for physical healing in order to uphold the priority of eternal salvation.

To be continued in Part 11…

It is my opinion that many non-Calvinists in the area of salvation from sin are often unaware of their Calvinistic beliefs concerning divine healing. Consider the famous, soteriological acronym “TULIP” with an application to physical healing (If you are unfamiliar with the traditional meaning of Calvinism’s TULIP, you may not recognize the significance of my points of comparison). It seems as though many believe in:

T: Total depravity (inability)- Given our over-exaltation of fallen, natural conditions and magnification of sickness and disease, we cannot and should not expect anything other than physical problems.

U: Unconditional election (realistically choosing some but not most)- Our choice to believe has nothing to do with it and affects nothing unless God has sovereignly chosen to heal. 

L: Limited atonement- We only give lip service to the verses of Christ’s physical suffering on behalf of our healing, but really He didn’t intend it to be for everyone. 

I: Irresistible grace (healing virtue in this case)- If God wants me healed, He’ll do it Himself. Only until after I’m healed or not can I know if it was or wasn’t God’s will to heal me. Healing precedes faith. 

P: Perseverance of the saints (health maintained)- If the healing is lost eventually then it was never God’s will in the first place. Perhaps they were never really healed. 

  Our major problem if the Bible doesn’t reveal it’s always God’s will to heal is this: We are left to depend on EXTRA-BIBLICAL REVELATION (i.e. “God spoke to me in prayer…”). Just like the Calvinists say, “We don’t know who the elect are. It’s a mystery, so we preach to everyone…”; In like manner, some say they don’t know who God wills to heal, and that it’s a mystery, but of course we’ll pray for anyone and everyone. Both of these conclusions are misguided for the SAME REASON: They both miss what the WORD reveals about God’s WILL.

  In my estimation, Calvinistic interpretations of the Bible are one of the greatest threats to the Church. Many recognize the harm it causes in the area of salvation from sin, yet propagate the same harm in the area of salvation from sickness and disease. Why would God not unilaterally control your spirit which determines where you spend eternity, but indeed control every detail of what happens in your body which does not determine your eternal destination? If that were the case, and God was simply interested in single-handedly controlling outcomes, it seems that His priority would be more upon the eternal than the temporal. The infinite more than the finite, in terms of duration. The spiritual more than the physical. Yet, many readily affirm that man’s choice to believe ultimately decides his eternal destiny, while claiming that God’s choice is the only deciding factor of their temporal, physical condition. So man’s faith bears full responsibility for his eternal state, but bears no responsibility for his temporal state? No, this is not what Scripture teaches.

  Calvinists claim that for God alone to receive the glory from our salvation, then our choice can play no role. It must be God’s choice alone who to save and when to save. They call this Monergism. However, many non-Calvinists seem to think it’s the height of presumption and arrogance for someone to believe that they can receive physical healing right now because God chose to heal all when Jesus bore the sicknesses of all, just as God chose to forgive all when Jesus bore the sins of all. The truth is that God made His sovereign choice when He made the payment for all. We believe “today” is the day of salvation and “now” is the accepted time! (Designated by who? God, of course!) Forgiveness, healing, deliverance, and all that pertains to being reconciled to the will of God, has been available ever since to whosoever believes!   

  I’ve heard it said by dear non-Calvinists that we should “Let God be God” in the sense of His picking and choosing who He heals. What then do we tell the Calvinist who uses that same philosophy for eternal salvation against us? When asked, “How is God holy and just by unchangeably determining all things, including sin, while punishing in the lake of fire a large percentage of humanity for not receiving a salvation that was never intended or provided for them in the first place?”, they have been known to say, “For reasons perfectly sufficient to Him.” Or, “For His good pleasure.” Non-Calvinists rightly find those responses Scripturally dissatisfying. Strangely, many non-Calvinists will use with great ease the same answers as to why God “chooses” not to heal. (Apparently, by forgiving and healing all who came to receive such from Him, Jesus sure didn’t represent the Calvinistic view of God’s “good pleasure.”)

  Along those same lines, when Calvinists are pressed on their contradiction of Scripture, they conveniently appeal to mystery of which only eternity will reveal. In other words, the eternally-enduring Biblical revelation that God gave us is inadequate to know that God’s character and actions are in perfect keeping with His Word, therefore God must resort to our post-glorification minds to make sense of why He willed and acted contrary to His Word. That doesn’t eradicate the present question of “Why does God (in Calvinism) mysteriously determine (i.e. most of humanity’s damnation) opposite to what His Word unmistakably declares (i.e. His will  and provision for all to be saved). So Biblically speaking, if it is a unresolvable contradiction right now in history and violation of the law of logic (Logic being how God Himself reasons within the Biblical record), how does entering eternity make all of that go away? How could it change those realities when Jesus that very Word of God shall never pass away and will also be the means by which we all are judged in the afterlife? Somehow non-Calvinists have been content with just as glaring of contradictions regarding healing, and settled for the same convenient “solution” of, “We’ll understand it better by and by.” (as to why God chose differently than He promised) In actuality, the reality that we will understand better by and by is that God always kept His Word and that His Word never failed.

  It is often a sly tactic of Calvinists to communicate the Gospel to a sinner in such a way so as to imply that the sinner can seek the Lord and be saved, without honestly being forthright about the real and statistically likely possibility that he/she may not be one of the “elect/chosen” for whom God willed and Christ died. I have more respect for the Calvinist who at least is not deceptive with a sinner, and thereby leaves God an “out” if in fact, He chooses not to save him/her. (Though I vehemently disagree with that particular “out” so to speak) Yet, many non-Calvinists will speak of Christ as our Healer, reference healing promises, and share healing testimonies, only to feel the need/pressure to leave God an “out” so as to explain for many times past He chose not to heal, and very possibly could choose not to heal in any present case. I believe this “out” is “outside” of His Word. We do not leave God an “out” as to why He doesn’t set free from sin, perversion, worldliness, addiction, etc those whose believe and act on His promises, do we? (i.e. “Praise God, Jesus sets us free indeed! We’ve known drunkards, liars, sexual perverts, addicts, etc whom Jesus has changed! But, you know, we don’t understand why sometimes people repent, believe, and obey the Word of God but God doesn’t set them free. You know, His ways are higher than our ways. Amen?”)

  Is it always God’s will to pray for the sick? (Most of the prayers I have heard go something like, “God heal this person, in Jesus’ name.” Or oft times, “Lord, touch so and so.” Or many times, “If it be thy will, heal them. But if not, we trust you.” Without making a thorough case here for how to Biblically minister to the sick, and for the sake of argument, let’s assume that the above mentioned prayer examples are correct. Does Scripture instruct us to pray for the sick? Yes. (Obviously, I believe that the terms “pray over” and “prayer of faith” in James 5:14-15 should be understood in light of every account of healing ministry by the Lord Jesus, apostles, and early Christians. None of which resemble the above mentioned prayers which ultimately petition God to heal.) Again, assuming those prayer approaches to be correct, and affirming that Scripture does indeed instruct us to pray for the sick, where then in the teachings of the New Testament, specifically those of Jesus, are we taught to pray in faith believing without receiving the desired result? In fact, Jesus had a close friend and trainee who said that the world could not contain the books, were Jesus’ other works to be written. This man’s name was John, the recognized apostle. To say that John saw some stuff, namely successful prayer and ministry, is a massive understatement. Helpfully for memorization, in 1 John 5:14-15, he taught that we don’t even have confidence in a prayer being heard and answered if we do not know the will of God in the matter. (*Christ’s prayer in Gethsemane is another discussion much too large to include here.) So let’s put it all together in a syllogism:

According to many,

1. God expects us to always pray for any and all sick.

2. We cannot know the will of God to heal or not until after the fact.

3. Therefore, God expects us to pray without confidence most, if not all, of the time concerning the healing of the sick.

Thus, the burden of Biblical proof lies on the shoulders of those whose belief system would imply the following: It’s always God’s will for us to ask Him to heal the sick, yet it’s rarely God’s will to heal the sick in response.

To be continued in Part 10…

44a. We don’t and shouldn’t allow experiences to make our doctrine in the area of salvation from sin, regardless of whose experience it is or how contrary to the Word it is. (Psa 19:7-10, Mat 15:3-9, Jn 7:17-18, Eph 4:11-15, 2 Tim 3:16, Tit 1:9, Jud 3)

  44b. Why is experience that deciding factor for much doctrine and practice in the area of healing? It appears that so many feel we must defend and uphold the experience of a well-respected saint at all costs, even if their experience is contrary to Scripture. Perhaps concerning no other topic within the church than physical healing are men’s words, experiences, and emotions honored above those of the Master Himself. (Same references as above)

  45a. It doesn’t matter how holy and separate from the world we are, if we do not obey and cooperate (as co-laborers) with God for the fulfillment of the Great Commission, God’s will for the salvation of souls will be hindered. In others words, our standards of holiness are not a substitute for obedience to the Commission, and they will not make up for our inactivity, unbelief, etc. (Mar 16:15-20, Rom 10:13-17, 1 Cor 3:6-9, 2 Cor 6:1)

  45b. My deep concern is that unbiblical beliefs in the area of healing will be accepted, excused, and justified because after all, we believe in a holy, separated life of standards. (As if this will make up for our unbelief) We are co-laborers with God in this area too. If we neglect to lay hands on the sick, take authority, and believe, then God’s will for healing will be hindered. Honestly, we should never be in a position/scenario where someone dies sick and lost (a unregenerate sinner) to whom we ministered. (Same references as above with the addition of Mat 9:29, Rom 3:3-4, Rom 12:6, 2 Tim 2:13, Jam 5:14-15)

  46a. When we see someone who is obviously bound by sin, depressed, etc, do we pass off the opportunity to minister to them with the mindset, “God knows what He’s doing. Perhaps, He’ll get more glory out of them staying in that oppressed condition…”, while we leave and sing along to what we have in Jesus and what’s waiting for us on the other side? (Mat 7:12, Lu 10:30-36, Acts 3, 1 Jn 3:16-18)

  46b. How many times have we been guilty of seeing someone with a severe, obvious physical affliction (disability, paralysis, deformity, etc) and passed off the opportunity to minister to them by thinking, “God knows what He’s doing. Perhaps, He’ll get more glory out of them staying in that oppressed condition…”, while we walk to our cars, drive wherever we wish, and enjoy able health? How much more for the visibly afflicted saints among us should we exercise our faith for them and edify their faith as well? (Same references as above)

  47a. When we see someone obviously bound by sin, addiction, etc, how many of us ask God, “Why don’t you do more for people like that?” What would God’s response be? Perhaps, something like this, “I’ve equipped and sent you! If their condition bothers you so much, you do something about it! Represent me, as an ambassador, and trust me to back you up with confirmation!” (Mat 10:1, 7-8, Mat 28:18-20, Mar 16:15-20, Lu 10:1-11, 19, Jn 14:12-14, Jn 20:21, Acts 1:1-8, 1 Cor 6:17, 1 Cor 12:27, 2 Cor 5:17-20, Eph 5:30, Col 1:27, 1 Jn 4:17)

  47b. When we see someone obviously bound by sickness, disease, etc how many of us ask, “Why God? Why don’t you do more for people like that?” I believe God’s response would be similar to the one already mentioned, “You’re my ambassador! I’ve given you authority and power! If you care so much for them, use what I’ve given you and do something about it!” We don’t expect people to be saved and church growth without us giving God something to work with, aka outreach. He’s looking for something to work with in healing as well. (Same references as above)

  48a. A minister is usually not required to personally do follow-up on every single person to whom he/she has preached the Gospel, even if a prayer of salvation was prayed. What minister could constantly make sure every person that ever made a decision for Christ is still pressing on with the Lord? (The Ministry of Jesus and the Book of Acts)

  48b. Why is healing ministry held to a different standard and criticized when a minister doesn’t do personal follow-up on everyone who received prayer for healing, to make sure they are still healed? Did Jesus and the apostles do this? Follow-up is good and needful, but one person is not obligated to the continued upkeep of everyone who has ever received ministry from them. (Same as above)

  49a. True preachers of the Gospel have suffered all kinds of criticism, slander, and persecution for faithfully standing with what Scripture clearly says. They could have compromised truth to agree with people’s experience, or culture’s preferences, and still sold books, audio/digital resources, etc. However, their unwavering, consistency to true beliefs regarding salvation is admirable. (Mat 5:10-12, Acts 20:17-38, 2 Cor 2:17, 2 Cor 4, 2 Tim 2:2, Heb 13:17)

  49b. Let us not forget that many ministers who have believed and ministered healing for decades have suffered criticism, slander, and persecution also. In other words, in was not the easy road of least resistance to believe in the will of God to heal every sick person against the pressure to believe otherwise. They could have easily changed their beliefs to agree with mainstream, best-selling authors and people’s experience and still sold books, resources, etc. Does not their unwavering longevity and consistency say something significant about the validity of their position? Critics can say what they want, but which position shows more self-denial than self-preservation? (Same references as above)

  50a. Every Christian must overcome the devil’s main lie targeting our faith: “What if?” Let me explain. For a sexually immoral, drug addict to believe and receive salvation from sin, we encourage them to cast down those thoughts of, “What if I go right back to sin, addiction, etc? What if it don’t last? What if it makes God look bad and hurts the faith of others?” We know that no one can live an effective life of faith while in bondage to the “What if’s.” I mean, if we allowed it, there could be a “what if” for every thing that God promises in His Word. (freedom from sin, Holy Ghost baptism, financial giving, etc) If we gave in to the “what if’s” we would never act in faith on the Word. “What if” is fear, and it’s not of God. (Every one of the approx. 365 times in Scripture we are told to “fear not”, Mat 7:7-11, Lu 12:22-32, Rom 8:15, 31-32, 2 Tim 1:7, 1 Jn 4:18)

   50b. Oh, how many times “what if” has hindered and robbed faith for healing. The “what if’s” seem to get more of a pass in the area of healing for some reason. We were never meant to live with the mindset of “What if I believe God’s Word but He doesn’t keep His promises?” That thought is nonexistent in the mind of Christ and should sound utterly incoherent and illogical to the believer. (In addition to the references above, ultimately our victory in any area of life solely depends upon whether we are convinced and persuaded (aka “believe” Gr “pisteuo”) that the Word of God is true and trustworthy above all else. We will never rise above our confidence in Scripture. God is never obligated to honor unbelief and doubt. (Psa 78:41 with entire chapter, Mat 17:19-20, Heb 3:19, 4:1-2, 8:9) Num 23:19, Psa 33:4, Psa 89:34, Psa 119:89 and the whole chapter, Mat 24:35, Rom 3:3-4, 2 Cor 1:17-20, 2 Tim 2:13, Tit 1:2, Heb 6:18, Heb 11:6)

  There is so much more that could be said. Please don’t reject any point without looking up the verse references. I pray that these 50 points of comparison between salvation from sin and sickness help us to overcome the emotional intimidation and mental pressure that often keeps us from receiving and ministering healing by faith and the authority of Jesus’ name.

  Our infinitely loving Father never meant for something so glorious and beautiful as divine healing to be a touchy, volatile area that few dare to walk in, and the few only because their past experience perfectly testifies that everyone has received healing in every case. This “few” doesn’t exist. If the only way that we could legitimately believe in the will of God to heal all is if our experience has been such, nobody could believe. However, everyone can believe the Bible and experience the promised results of both salvation from sin and sickness. The reason that physical healing seems more difficult to experience is because it’s the easiest area to be influenced by sight and feelings, neither of which are faith. Jesus equally provides salvation from sin and sickness as summarized by two Scriptural phrases: “As many (sinners) as received him” were made sons of God. “As many (sick) as touched him” were made whole.

To be continued in Part 7… 

If the will of God for physical healing is in question than it is for spiritual salvation as well. For every one Scripture/passage used to disprove God’s will to heal everyone, I dare say that there are three to four Scriptures/passages that could be used to disprove God’s will to save everyone. (*Only if the same methods of misinterpretation are used!) Obviously, I believe the Bible proves God’s will to save and heal all. I’m just showing that if healing critics were consistent, they would end up denying that God wants to save everyone. Therefore, they couldn’t be sure “who” exactly, with certainty God wills to be saved, by just using the Bible. They would be left to depend upon extra-biblical/outside the Bible, strictly experiential validation, criteria, etc. You couldn’t tell anyone with confidence,”It’s God’s will to save you. God wants to save/forgive you.”

  Which in that case, there would be a denomination to which you could belong called “Reformed Theology/Calvinism”. (Or “Deformed Theology” as one friend described) Calvinists believe that because Jesus did not die for everyone, but rather died only for the elect. (He did not die for most, in fact, if they’re honest) Thus, it is not God’s will to save everyone. At least they are consistent with that logical conclusion. (although contrary to Scripture, we know)

  What is inconsistent, is to affirm that Jesus took stripes and bore the infirmities  and sicknesses for everyone, BUT/HOWEVER, it is not God’s will to heal everyone! Can you see it? That’s more inconsistent and contradictory than Calvinism!

  Here’s a practical exercise by way of a survey: Imagine I were to ask for a raised hand of everyone who is convinced/persuaded that it is God’s will that every human being get saved and make heaven. Or put another way: “Do you believe that God wants to save everyone?”

  It is important to consider that if you were to be wrong about that conviction/belief, you would quite literally and likely (apparently and statistically speaking by the number of the unconverted) be giving a large number of people the epitome of false hope.

  We affirm the universal wilI/desire of God that all be saved and none perish DESPITE countless examples and experiences such as: people’s rejection, their coming and going from hearing the Gospel which is the power of God, their feeling the presence of God and conviction, their observing the love of God through the church, many churches seeing minimal rate of conversions annually, many that give “Christian” a bad name by their conduct, claiming to be born again, new creatures with no evidence of a new life, and those who “ride the altar” with little to no change in their “walk” over the span of years, etc. We even maintain that firm position irregardless of millions belonging to unreached people groups who do not have missionaries, Bibles, churches, etc. Ultimately, we hold fast to our profession of faith in God’s will to save all in a world where presently, as in past centuries, it appears by all observable indications that there are more unsaved people than saved. (Currently, of course) The conclusion could be stated in the following manner: It almost seems as if no amount of negative, disappointing experiences and disagreeing voices could move us off of what the Word clearly reveals as the will of God concerning eternal salvation/forgiveness of sin. Thereby, if someone dies unsaved, we are conditioned to place the burden of responsibility upon the sinner’s choice/decision, without an inclination to blame/charge God for choosing not to save. Although the conversion (born again, new creation..) experience is undoubtedly a miraculous work of God and impossible apart from His power, the responsibility for experiencing His willing provision or not rests upon the human side of the equation. (Responsibility = God given ability to respond appropriately)

  WHAT IF after all hands went up, I were to speak up and ask: “How dare you say that my Grandpa is in hell for eternity because he didn’t believe/receive Jesus? Grandpa did more good and charitable deeds than many Christians I know! You mean to tell me that my Grandpa didn’t have to die lost? Or others I loved? This makes me uncomfortable to think that my friend went to hell though it was God’s will all along for him to be saved. Could we please not bring up this subject again? It’s too heavy and harmful to those of us that have loved ones who died unsaved! I can’t stand to think that it so easily could have been different by your simple, little prayer!” And just like that, the message that the world needs for more people to be saved gets avoided. If we only can preach things to which our experience has never been contrary, what in the Bible could we preach?

  Isn’t it ironically funny that we firmly maintain that everyone other than God is to blame if a person experiences by far the worst fate possible/imaginable of eternity in the torments of the lake of fire, but will not blame anyone but God when far less terrible suffering, eternally speaking, is experienced by any person (namely, experienced by saints: disease, premature death, tragedy, loss). It makes one wonder: “Why the resistance to human responsibility in other far less eternally costly/consequential areas?”

  If you could not sincerely, truthfully, genuinely, from the heart raise your hand to that previous survey question (concerning God’s will to save all), answer me this (think carefully): On what basis could you tell any one person that God wants/wills to save him/her? (With confidence, certainty, without hesitation) The unavoidable, inescapable answer is this: You would be left to some kind of subjective, extra biblical confirmation or reason for telling any one that it is God’s will to save them. Because after all, you could be wrong. (180 degrees wrong)

  I dare say that many of you who raised your hands, did so without the shadow of a doubt, or even a questioning push-back in the mind, etc, correct? Why? The clear reading of the Word has settled the question for you, instead of experience.

  Here’s a noteworthy thought: Even if granted that God may not will all to be saved, wouldn’t you want to stand before Him in judgment having erred on the positive side of exalting and magnifying His nature, character, holiness, integrity, justice, righteousness, love, mercy, grace, provision, heart, good will, etc to the broadest scope? After all, love thinks/assumes the best (1 Cor 13), instead of taking a chance of belittling and diminishing His will, due to interpreting His Word so as to make sense of common experience, observation of the condition of the world, etc. (ALL according to human reasoning) I tremble to think of maligning and misrepresenting God’s will, hoping to not offend any person, when He has made the greatest sacrifice and investment by far! (To His own unimaginable hurt and at His own incalculable expense) When you boil all this down, it really comes to questions such as: Do I honor Jesus’ Word and experience more than that of anyone else? Am I more concerned about people’s feelings and emotions than the Father’s in light of His Son’s agony? How personal has Jesus’ immeasurable suffering become to me?

  Imagine a person hearing that God apparently and very likely does not want all to be saved. (Realistically, this view is presented to be orthodox by very influential churches and leaders) Perhaps, He even predestined, ordained, planned, determined, etc that person’s every sin. Undeniably, this described person would have more reason to reject the call to repent and believe the Gospel, because the real possibility exists that this person thinks: “God may want sin more than salvation for me. Besides, who I am I to question if He did? And in light of the fact that I don’t desire to stop sinning nor sense enough motivation, maybe God doesn’t will my change of heart. Considering the fact that He evidently could give me sufficient desire and motivation if He so wanted. Given my age, perhaps, if it was His will, He would’ve already changed my heart by now.”

  Without argument, this above described person would have more of an erroneous “biblical” leg to stand on for their rejection of salvation, due to false doctrine/misinterpretation of course, compared to a person who hears that God is not willing that any, not one, perish but that all come to repentance. Which person senses less excuse and more responsibility to respond properly/correctly to the Gospel?

  Now get on the hot seat once more, and apply this same survey above to the topic of God’s will to heal! On what basis can any one person know that God wills to heal him/ her? (For just one example, if we cannot lay hands on a sick, afflicted body, knowing with the same certainty that the person shall recover as we would know with certainty that God forgives and cleanses every time we ask Him, then we do not yet have what God recognizes/considers faith or “believing” according to the certainty that His Word communicates about divine healing.)

To be continued in Part 9…

Additional Thoughts About Salvation and Healing

  We cannot afford to assume about faith. We must know what God considers to be faith by what He has said. To my current level of understanding, I personally consider the following to be the fullest description of faith (or what it means to believe): I am convinced/persuaded that it is God’s will and equally convinced/persuaded that as I believe/speak/act accordingly (meet the condition of God’s promise, etc) it cannot turn out otherwise.

  There is a difference between believing in Jesus and believing Jesus. For example, we ought to thank God that we find it easier to believe in Jesus as the Forgiver of sin and Giver of everlasting life. After all, we’ve not been in the afterlife or claim to be experts concerning what happens in the unseen, eternal realm, right? Therefore, we can easier believe “what” Jesus said about forgiveness and eternal life with a more objective interpretation. However, when it comes to physical healing and financial well being, it’s as if we say, ” Jesus, we know a little about what it means to suffer physically, mentally/emotionally, and fnancially.” So we have found it harder to “believe Jesus” in those areas. The tendency is toward a subjective interpretation. Whereas Jesus must be thinking, “Yes, you’re familiar with sickness and lack, but I’m pretty familiar with health and blessing. Trust me, I’m just as much an expert on those things as I am on the afterlife.”

  Medically/naturally speaking, if my Wife or children were sick (even life threatening condition), would you say that I, as the Father, should do everything in my ability to meet their need(s)? (Whether medicine or hospitalization) You would consider that a need, right? In fact, that care is included in my marriage vows. (“I do’s”). Well, if we say that God supplies all our needs, then is physical healing not a need for someone who is sick? Some may say, “You know, brother, God only promised to meet our needs but not our wants. Maybe God considers physical healing just to be a want, but He knows our greater needs.” First, show me that mentality in Jesus. Second, try that mentality as a father/husband: “I know what could relieve your pain, save your life, etc, but as your provider, I only supply what you really need, not just your wants. After all, Honey, going on to heaven is better for you than keeping you here. You wouldn’t argue that heaven is not your greatest need, would you?” I think any of us can see the problem with that reasoning. My point here is not to diminish the utmost importance of being eternally with God or to debate when to use medical means versus God’s power only, rather it is to illustrate the willingness of God to supply the need of physical healing and why we should not question His will in the matter, any more than that of an earthly father/husband. If when you were unsaved, God was willing to forgive you, how much more is He willing to heal you, now that you are His child? If He was merciful enough to forgive you when you were unconverted, how is He not merciful enough to heal you now that you are in His family?

  Please do not miss this next point! Perhaps the greatest contradiction/inconsistency is when we get offended by anyone daring to mention that a saint who went on to heaven before their time, due to disease, could’ve been healed by either their personal right believing or that of another believer ministering to them. All the while not one of us would hesitate for a moment to say that everyone in hell for eternity could’ve been saved if they would have just believed the right thing. (Regardless of all the nice, charitable thing they did more so than some Christians in comparison, they missed forever in heaven by not believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. One belief could have changed their eternal forever.) And we act surprised if someone gets offended by that commitment to Scripture (because the Word is clear, though not comfortable), but totally feel justified to get offended over someone’s faithfulness to Scripture concerning healing, which doesn’t even affect their eternity. Rather would only have been an undeniable testimony of their life and influence extended/lengthened by the power of God.

  Concerning being converted, sanctified, and receiving the baptism of the Holy Ghost, we recognize that if someone has not yet experienced, it’s NOT because:

– God said “No”/chose not to

– God said “It’s not my time yet, keep waiting”

– God sovereignly did otherwise than His Word promises

– God has His mysterious reasons, and we’ll understand by and by

  No, we acknowledge that we have conditions to meet in order to experience those provided things that are undisputedly recognized to be God’s will for everyone: saved, sanctified, filled with the Holy Ghost.

To be continued in Part 8…

31a. Everyone recognizes that salvation from sin is a chosen relationship with Jesus as our Saviour and Lord. (Lu 9:23, Jn 14:23, Rev 3:20)

  31b. Salvation from sickness is a chosen relationship with Jesus as our Healer. (Same references as above)

  32a. We teach that a person must have an ongoing relationship with Jesus to live a saved life and not just an experience. (Mat 10:22, Jn 15, Phi 3:10, Heb 11:6)

  32b. Many depend on a one-time experience of healing but never develop an ongoing relationship with Jesus to live in divine health. (Same references as above)

  33a. Relationship with Jesus produces maintained victory over sin and prevents enemy re-entry. (Jn 15, Gal 5:16, Eph 4:27, 1Th 5:23, Jud 24)

  33b. Relationship with Jesus produces maintained victory over sickness and prevents enemy re-entry. (Same references as above…also Jn 5:14)

  34a. Though sin is a common occurrence, we believe it should not be because it is against God’s original intent for humanity. (Gen 1:31, Ecc 7:29, Rom 8:28-29, Col 3:9-10, Rev 21:27)

  34b. Sickness is a common occurrence, and many believe it just has to be that way and there’s nothing we can do about it. Even though sickness is against God’s original intent for humanity, many joke about it, plan on experiencing it, etc. Do we treat sin this way? (Gen 1:31, Deut 28, Rom 8:28-29, Rev 22:1-3)

  35a. Jesus treated sin and sickness predictably the same. (Mat 18:13-33, Mar 9:25, Lu 4:38-39, Lu 9:55, Jn 15:22, Acts 10:38, 1 Jn 3:8)

  35b. Why do so many think a Christian is strange to treat sickness like Jesus always did? (Mat 28:18-20, Jn 14:12-14, Acts 28:8-9, 2 Cor 5:20)

  36a. We know the law of faith applies to salvation from sin. In other words, one must believe correctly about Jesus to experience forgiveness. One cannot believe that Jesus was only a man and not divine, as Islam teaches. Nor can one believe that a salvation prayer offered to Mary is just as secure and effective as one offered to Jesus. These beliefs are violations of the law of faith, and God will not violate His own law by validating them. (Jn 10:1, Jn 14:6, Acts 4:12, Rom 3:27, 2 Tim 2:13, 1 Jn 4:2-3)

  36b. Many forget the law of faith applies to healing also. In other words, correct believing does make a difference in whether we experience healing or not. Many believe God is specific in what we believe for salvation, but He is generic and loose with our beliefs for healing. (Mat 17:19-20, Mat 21:22, Mar 11:22-24, Mar 16:18, 2 Tim 2:13, Jam 1:6-7, Jam 5:15)

  37a. In modern history, ministry toward salvation from sin is more practiced and familiar to Christians in general.

  37b. Ministry toward healing from sickness is less practiced and familiar to Christians in general. There was never meant to be this divorcement. (Mat 10:7-8, Mar 16:15-20)

  38a. As with anything, more ministry experience fine tunes and increases effectiveness in our evangelism to the lost. It gets better through consistent use. (2 Cor 9:6, Gal 6:9, Col 1:10, Heb 5:13-14, 2 Pet 1:8)

  38b. If we prepared ourselves for and pursued more healing ministry, we would see increased effectiveness as well. You can’t reap from seed that hasn’t been sown. (Same references as above)

  39a. Christians would think one who is not active in soul-winning is unqualified to correct someone who is. (1 Tim 5:1 “elder”-not only speaks of age but experience, 2 Cor 6:3-10, 2 Cor 11:23, Jam 2:17-20)

  39b. All too many critics with little to no experience in healing ministry attempt to correct those with years of consistent experience. (Same references as above)

  40a. Evangelistic ministry toward the lost carries less stigma, less doctrinal differences, and therefore less practical hurdles.

  40b. Interestingly, healing ministry toward the sick carries more stigma, more doctrinal differences, and therefore more practical hurdles.

  41a. We don’t decide whether we should preach the Gospel to the lost by what the statistics say. Why? Because the Word is clear. (Mat 10:7-8, Mat 24:14, Mar 16:15-18, 2 Tim 4:2)

  41b. Why do so many decide whether healing ministry is for today or not based on statistics? Is the Word not clear enough for us? (Same references as above)

  42a. People who believe it’s always God’s will to save every sinner, and that we have the commission to proclaim the Gospel, do not receive nor appreciate a guilt trip and shame treatment for why they are not emptying out bars, sports arenas, etc. After all, eternally damned is worse than temporarily sick. Every Christian should care most for the eternal suffering of people, but not to the neglect/indifference for their present suffering. (Mar 16:15-18, 1 Cor 9:16, 2 Tim 3:12)

  42b. Why do people try to shame and guilt believers who believe it’s always God’s will to heal every sick person, and that we have authority over sickness. They ask, “ Why are you not emptying out hospitals, nursing homes, etc?” First of all, authoritative, faith-filled ministry is not usually welcomed by the hospital staff nor the families of the sick, just as bold, Gospel preaching is not typically welcomed in the places that need it most. (Same references as above with the addition of Lu 10:8-12 where Jesus recognized the possibility of people rejecting them and not receiving their ministry)

  43a. Are we setting Christians up for failure and disappointment by encouraging them to witness because it’s God’s will that all be saved? Is this risking the possibility of them forsaking their faith? What happens when most, if not all, reject the Gospel in a particular outreach effort? Do we conclude, “Well, my evangelistic experience didn’t look like the Book of Acts, so I guess powerful, effective evangelism was just a temporary sign to give the apostles credibility until the Scriptures were completed, and those kind of results ended with the apostles.” No, Christendom doesn’t say that. In fact, if a Christian spent 80 years sharing the Gospel and not one person converted, we would all say that it is still God’s will to save every sinner and that the Christian should witness again today, tomorrow, etc. (Mat 11:2-6)

  43b. Why do many think that it is setting a believer up for failure and disappointment to encourage them to lay hands on the sick in faith because it is God’s will that all be healed? So many worry that it will be detrimental to the faith in God if for some reason, someone doesn’t get healed. Why would a negative experience in healing ministry cause someone to forsake the Lord if a negative experience in outreach shouldn’t cause that? (Mat 17:19-20, 2 Tim 4:20 did these experiences terminate the faith and ministries of these believers? No!)

To be continued in Part 6… 

22a. It is unacceptable to make what the Bible says about salvation from sin fit our experience, if our experience is contrary. A preacher doesn’t stop believing and preaching salvation is the will of God because one of their children tragically dies lost. (Num 23:19, Psa 33:4, Psa 89:34, Psa 119:89, Mat 24:35, Rom 3:3-4, 2 Cor 1:17-20, 2 Tim 2:13, Tit 1:2, Heb 6:18, Heb 11:3, 6, 1 Jn 5:10)

  22b. Why do so many feel the liberty to make what Scripture says about healing fit their contradictory experiences? This is inconsistency. Those who do this need to examine themselves if they correct others (such as homosexuals, racists, etc) who refuse to agree with the obvious, inescapable reading of the Text in effort to defend/preserve their experience. Why is so much of our message on healing dictated by what we’ve experienced? A tragedy doesn’t change the truth. (Same references as above)

  23a. The Bible does not leave us with the option that a person can call upon the Lord in faith, believing and praying for deliverance from any kind of sin and God has the sovereign right to deny/refuse their faith. Yet, on multiple occasions, I have heard homosexuals boldly declare, “I’ve prayed and begged God to deliver me from this lifestyle, sinful desire, etc!” By this they imply that God denied their faith-filled prayer for deliverance. What better excuse/defense of their continued sin could they resort to? In other words, they’re saying, “I know what the Bible says, but God lied. Believe me.” Any true Christian would stand with God in this scenario. We don’t deny that they prayed, begged, etc but in order to stay true and faithful to Scripture we are forced to conclude that faith and/or repentance was lacking. However offensive this is considered, we recognize that this is the cost of commitment to the Word in a contrary world. (Every reference of “shall” and “will” concerning prayer, salvation, etc…i.e. Mar 16:16, Rom 10:9-11)

  23b. Why do so many believe we have the option available that someone can pray in faith, believing for healing, meet every condition of the Word, and God has the sovereign right to deny/refuse them? Sadly, it is considered unchristian and deeply offensive to even suggest that somewhere faith, authority, etc was lacking, when this is exactly to what Christ attributed every failure when asked or not (unbelief.) Do we really want each other to be Christ-like? (Every reference of “shall” and “will” concerning prayer, healing, etc…i.e. Mar 16:18, Jam 5:15)

  24a. Concerning salvation from sin, the results of the initial experience are expected to be seen afterward in the fruit. (Mat 3:8, Mat 7:16-20, Rom 6:22, Rom 7:4, Gal 5:22, Eph 2:10, Eph 5:9, Col 1:10, Jam 2:26)

  24b. Concerning salvation from sickness, the results of the initial experience should be expected to be seen in the fruit afterward. (Mar 4:28, Mar 8:23-25, Mar 11:22-24, Lu 17:14, Jn 4:52)

  25a. Since faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God, we recognize that the sinner needs to hear preaching that confidently declares,” Jesus bore your sin!” How many would have been saved throughout the church age without this specific preaching? Would the absence of it affect the numbers? If a person can’t be sure Christ bore his/her sin, how could they receive salvation by faith (Greek, “pistis” persuaded, convinced)? As long as it’s someone else’s sin, personal faith/conviction is inactive. (Rom 10, 1 Cor 1:21)

  25b. Why are we surprised that we see fewer healings when the bold declaration, “Jesus bore your sickness!” is rarely preached? And if it is preached, it’s a passing, uncertain sidenote. If a person can’t be sure Christ bore his/her sickness, how can they receive healing by faith? As long as it’s someone else’s sickness, personal faith/persuasion is inactive. (Mar 2:2, Lu 4:18-19, Lu 5:15, Lu 6:17, Acts 14:7-10, Rom 10:17)

  26a. We understand that since Christ bore our sin away, removed it far from us, etc, then we should not bear it. In other words, we shouldn’t tolerate sin in our lives because Jesus bore our sin, therefore we shouldn’t both bear it. (Psa 103:12, Isa 53, 1 Pet 2:24)

  26b. Why is there still confusion over whether it’s God’s will for us to bear sickness when the Bible uses the same language to describe what Christ has done concerning sickness as He has concerning sin? He bore/carried away our sickness and removed it. Just like sin, we should not tolerate sickness because Jesus bore it all. Again, we should not both bear it. (Isa 53, Mat 8:17, 1 Pet 2:24)

  27a. Genuine salvation from sin can be neglected and lost through unbelief, unrepentant sin, etc. (Heb 2:1-3, 2 Tim 2:12, Jam 5:19-20, 1 Jn 5:16)

  27b. How many people’s initial, genuine healing is nearly immediately lost and neglected due to doctrinal mindsets of unbelief, or sin? (Mat 13:19, Jn 5:14)

  28a. We teach a new convert that even if they commit a sin, have drug withdrawals, struggle against old desires, etc, it doesn’t mean they were never saved in the first place, or that they should just give up on victory over sin. We teach them to press on in faith, believing that their salvation was real and it is still God’s will for them to live free from sin. (2 Cor 5:17-18, Heb 10:23, Heb 10:35, 1 Jn 1:9)

  28b. Unfortunately, when physical symptoms, new doctor reports, or lies of the devil confront a person who prayed and believed they received healing, many think that God must not have healed him/her and it must not be His will for him/her to be free from sickness. Why are they not taught to press on in faith, believing that they really received healing and that they shouldn’t give up on the visible manifestation? After all, do people give up and conclude that it’s not God’s will for them to get better after the first medicine prescription or procedure didn’t work? No, they go from one medical option to another. Why discourage someone from going from faith to faith? (Heb 10:23, Heb 10:35)

  29a. Lying (contrary) thoughts, feelings, etc may come to a born-again Christian. They are real, but not true. (Mat 4:4, 2 Cor 10:5, Eph 6:16)

  29b. Lying (contrary) symptoms may come to a healed believer. They are real, but not true. (Same references as above…also Rom 4:17-21)

  30a. Even though immediate victory over every sin, addiction, etc is available, it is not always easy to appropriate. Even believers who have struggled with bitterness, grudges, or unforgiveness would have to admit and affirm that immediate victory was always available to them. That means one minute, hour, or day of bitterness was one too long and unnecessary. (Mat 5:23-24, Mat 18:21-22, Eph 4:31-32, Heb 12:15)

  30b. Immediate victory/deliverance over sickness is always available, but not always easy to appropriate. Many inconsistently conclude that because healing wasn’t immediate, it must not be God’s will to happen at all. They don’t apply that logic to someone struggling with sin. We should always aim our faith for immediate manifested healing, and be prepared to not budge from our faith if the manifestation is gradual or eventual, because we know that one minute, hour, or day of oppression is one too long. (Mar 8:22-25, Lu 17:12-19, Jn 4:49-53, Heb 6:12)

To be continued in Part 5…