How Did Jesus Heal?

To make a comparison between the gift of healing being claimed today and what the Bible teaches, we simply have to go back and look at Jesus' ministry.  Our Lord set the pattern for the apostolic gifts, and He did a massive amount of healing.  In Jesus' day the world was full of disease.  Medical science was crude and limited.  There were more incurable diseases than we have now.  Plagues could wipe out entire cities.

Jesus healed disease to demonstrate his deity.  How did He do it?  Scripture reveals six noteworthy characteristics of Jesus' healing ministry:

First, Jesus healed with a word or a touch.  Matthew 8 relates that as Jesus was entering Capernaum, a centurion came to Jesus and asked Him to help his servant, who was lying paralyzed at his home and suffering great pain (v. 6-7).  Jesus told the centurion that He would come and heal the servant, but the centurion protested, pointing out that if Jesus would just say the word, his servant could be healed (v. 8).

The Lord was amazed at the centurion's faith, particularly because he was a Roman soldier, and not of the house of Israel.  Jesus said to the centurion, "'Go your way; let it be done to you as you have believed.' And the servant was healed that very hour" (v. 13).

When Jesus fed the 5,000 (John 6), He had spent most of the day healing people in the crowd who were sick.  Scripture does not tell us how many were healed -- it could have been thousands.  But whatever the number, Jesus healed them with a word.  There were no theatrics, no special environment.

Jesus also healed with a touch.  For example, in Mark 5:25-34 we find the account of a woman with chronic bleeding who was healed simply by touching Jesus' robe.

Second, Jesus healed instantly.  The centurion's servant was healed "that very hour" (Matt. 8:13).  The woman with the bleeding problem was healed "immediately" (Mark 5:29).  Jesus healed ten lepers instantaneously right on the road (Luke 17:14).  He touched another man with leprosy and "immediately the leprosy departed from him" (Luke 5:13).  The crippled man at the pool of Bethesda "immediately became well," took up his pallet and began to walk (John 5:9).  Even the man born blind, who had to go and wash his eyes, was healed instantly -- though for his own purposes, Jesus accomplished that miracle in two distinct stages (John 9:1-7).  The healing was no less instantaneous.

People often say "I've been healed, and now I'm getting better."  Jesus never did "progressive" healing.  If Jesus had not healed instantly, there were have been no miraculous element sufficient to demonstrate His deity.  His critics could easily have said the healing was just a natural process.

Third, Jesus healed totally.  In Luke 4 Jesus left the synagogue and came to Simon Peter's home.  Peter's mother-in-law was there, suffering from a high fever.  Possibly she was dying.  Jesus stood over her, "rebuked the fever," and immediately she was well (v. 39).  In fact, she then got up and began to wait on them.  There was no recuperation period.  Jesus did not advise her to sip a little honey and hot water and take it easy for a few weeks.  Nor did He goad her to "claim the healing by faith" despite unrelenting symptoms.  She was immediately well and knew it.  Her healing was instantaneous and it was total.  That was the only kind of healing Jesus ever did.

Fourth, Jesus healed everyone.  Unlike healers today, Jesus did not leave long lines of disappointed people who had to return home in their wheelchairs.  He did not have healing services or programs that ended at a certain time because of airline or television schedules.  Luke 4:40 tells us, "And while the sun was setting, all who had any sick with various diseases brought them to Him; and laying His hands on every one of them, He was healing them" (emphasis added).  Luke 9:11 records a similar example.

Fifth, Jesus healed organic disease.  Jesus did not go up and down Palestine healing lower back pain, heart palpitations, headaches, and other invisible ailments.  He healed the most obvious kinds of organic diseases -- crippled legs, withered hands, blind eyes, palsy -- all healings that were undeniably miraculous.

Sixth, Jesus raised the dead.  Luke 7:11-16 tells us that while Jesus was at a city called Nain, He came upon a funeral procession as a widow went out to bury her only son.  Jesus stopped the procession, touched the coffin and said, "Young man, I say to you, arise!" -- and the dead man sat up and began to speak!  He also raised a synagogue ruler's daughter in Mark 5:22-24, 35-43.

People who tout the gift of healing today do not spend much time in funeral parlours, funeral processions, or cemeteries.  The reason is obvious.

Some charismatics, as we have already noted, claim that people today do sometimes come back from the dead.  Those cases, however, are nothing like the biblical examples.  It is one thing to revive someone whose vital signs stopped on a surgeon's table.  It is entirely another matter to come out of the grave four days after being buried (see John 11) or to climb out of one's casket at the funeral (see Luke 7).  Those are resurrections that cannot be challenged.  Charismatics who make such claims today do so on hearsay and with scant evidence.  They are guilty of trivializing our Lord's miraculous works.  Why is it that the only miracles ever done on television are the kind that involve no visible evidence?

Note, by the way, that Jesus did virtually all His healing and raising the dead in public -- often before vast groups of people.  His gift of healing was an authenticating gift.  He used it to confirm his claims that He was the Son of God in a way that also displayed His divine compassion.  Dispelling demons and diseases was Christ's way of proving He was God in human flesh.  John's gospel clearly demonstrates that truth.  John said all the signs and miracles Jesus wrought validated His deity (John 20:30-31).

The Gift of Healing is Gone, but the Lord Continues to Heal

The gift of healing was one of the miraculous sign gifts given to help the apostolic community confirm the authority of the gospel message in the early years of the church.  Once the word of God was complete the signs ceased.  Miraculous signs were no longer needed.  The apostles used healing only as a powerful sign to convince people of the validity of the gospel message.

In Philippians 2:25-27 Paul mentioned his good friend Epaphroditus, who had been very sick.  Paul had previously displayed the gift of healing.  Why did he not simply heal Epaphroditus?  Perhaps the gift was no longer operational or perhaps Paul simply refused to pervert the gift by using it for his own ends.  Either way, healing Epaphroditus was beyond the purpose of the gift of healing.   The gift was not given to keep Christians healthy.  It was to be a sign to unbelievers to convince them that the gospel was divine truth.

We find a similar case in II Timothy 4:20, where Paul mentioned he had left Trophimus sick at Miletus.  Why should Paul leave one of his good Christian friends sick?  Why didn't he heal him?  Because that was not the purpose of the healing gift.  (see also I Tim. 5:23 and II Cor. 12:7.)

Healing was a miraculous sign gift to be used for special purposes.  It was not intended as a permanent way to keep the Christian community in perfect health.  Yet today most charismatics teach that God wants every Christian well.  If that is true, why does God allow Christians to get sick in the first place?

In a world where believers are subject to the consequences of sin why should we assume that suffering is excluded?  If every Christian were well and healthy, if perfect health were a guaranteed benefit of the atonement, millions of people would be stampeding to get saved -- but for the wrong reason.  God wants people to come to Him in repentance for sin, and for His glory, not because they see Him as a panacea for their physical and temporal ills.

-- John F. McArthur, Jr.

Again, charismatics are wrong!

What is the Difference Between the Baptism and the Filling?

Charismatics often confuse spirit baptism, which places the Christian in the body of Christ, and the fullness of the Spirit, which produces effective Christian living (see Eph. 5:18, 6:11).

Nothing in all of Acts, Chapter 2, says believers asked for the Holy Spirit.

Acts 2:1-4 teaches two distinctive truths.  At Pentecost, Christian believers were baptized with the Holy Spirit into the body.  Then the Holy Spirit filled those believers to give a miraculous testimony -- the ability to speak in other languages.  Believers since that time have all been baptized with the Holy Spirit by the Lord Jesus Christ at conversion.  How are we filled?  When we yield to the Spirit who is already there, we have access to the Spirit's power and fullness.  Paul told the Ephesians to be kept filled with the Spirit as a constant pattern for living (5:18).

Nowhere in Scripture is the Christian taught to tarry and wait for the baptism. Nowhere in Scripture are we taught to get with a group of people who can teach us to speak in tongues.  Christians are admonished to keep being filled with the Spirit, but that is not the same thing as waiting to be baptized by the Spirit.  There is one simple key to knowing the fullness and power of the Holy Spirit in your life:  obeying the Lord.  As you walk in obedience to the word of God, the Spirit of God fills you and energizes your life (see Gal. 5:25).

Not only have believers been placed into Someone (Christ), but they have had Someone placed into them (the Holy Spirit).  As Christians we have the Holy Spirit.  Our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 6:19).  God Himself indwells our bodies (II Cor. 6:16).  All the resources are there.  The promise of the Holy Spirit has already been fulfilled for us.  The Bible is absolutely clear on that point.  There is nothing more to wait for.  The Christian life consists of yielding to the control of the Spirit who is already in us.  We do that through obedience to the Word (Col. 3:16).

Significantly, charismatic writers are not all agreed on how believers are to receive the baptism of the Spirit.  Why all the confusion and contradiction?  Why is it that charismatic writers do not quote the Bible plainly and let it go at that?  The reason no charismatic writer can do that is the Bible never tells how to get the baptism of the Spirit; it only tells believers that they are already baptized with the Spirit.  

One of the greatest realities the Christian will ever have is contained in two brief and fulfilling statements.  One is by Paul,  The other is by Peter:

"In Him, you have been made complete" (Col. 2:10).  

"His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness" (2 Peter 1:3).

There is no point in seeking what is already ours.

- John F. MacArthur

Pentecostals are wrong.  
Faith Movement are wrong.  
Victory Churches are wrong.

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!

Satan is responsible for what is going on in these churches -- not God.

Subsequence, Tongues, Seeking, Bah-Humbug!

The Charismatic Doctrine of Subsequence

Acts 2:4 is the charismatic touchstone, containing what many Pentecostals and charismatics view as the core truth of the New Testament; "They were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

Most charismatics believe this verse teaches that at conversion Christians receive the Holy Spirit only in a limited sense.  Therefore, they believe, Christians need to seek Spirit baptism in order to move to a higher level of spiritual life, being supernaturally immersed in the power of God's Spirit.  The experience is usually -- many say always -- accompanied by speaking in tongues and results in new spiritual motivation and power.

The notion that one gets salvation at one point and the baptism of the Spirit later is often referred to as the doctrine of subsequence.  Gordon Fee lists two Pentecostal distinctives "(1) the doctrine of subsequence, i.e., that there is for Christians a baptism in the Spirit distinct from and subsequent to the experience of salvation . . . , and (2) the doctrine of tongues as the initial physical evidence of baptism in the Spirit."  

In his thorough investigation of Pentecostal theology, Frederick Dale Bruner wrote, "Pentecostals believe that the Spirit has baptized every believer into Christ (conversion), but that Christ has not baptized every believer into the Spirit (Pentecost)."  Not only do most charistmatics believe that the baptism of the Spirit happens at some point after salvation, but most also believe that Spirit baptism is something Christians must seek.  Bruner goes on to say, 

The most important characteristics of the Pentecostal understanding of the baptism in the Holy Spirit . . . are; (1) that the event is usually "distinct from and subsequent to" the new birth; (2) that it is evidenced initially by the sign of speaking in other tongues; (3) that it must be "earnestly" sought.

Those three elements -- baptism of the Spirit subsequent to conversion, the earnest seeking of those who are baptized, and the evidence of speaking in tongues -- are characteristic of nearly all charismatic doctrine.  In most other areas of theology charismatics are vague,  but here they usually speak a clear word regarding what they believe.

Charismatics attempt to support their doctrine of subsequence from the book of Acts.  First Corinthians 12:13 ("For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free and we were all made to drink of one Spirit") cannot be used to prove subsequence because the verse simply says that all believers have been baptized by one Spirit into the body of Christ.  Indeed, it would seem clear that the baptism described in 1 Corinthians 12:13 cannot take place at a point in time after salvation.  Otherwise, what Paul says could not be true of all Christians.  No evidence such as tongues is mentioned, and no requirement of seeking the baptism is alluded to. 

Charismatics are also unable to use 1 Corinthians 14 to prove the tenets of subsequence, evidence, or seeking, because the chapter has nothing to say about any of those elements.  In fact, the only passages charismatics can use to support their doctrine of subsequence are found in Acts.  The epistles say nothing that can be construed to support the idea.

The truth is, even the book of Acts fails to support the charismatic view.  Only four passages mention tongues or receiving the Holy Spirit:  Chapters 2, 8, 10 and 19.  Only in Acts 2 and 8 do believers receive the Spirit after salvation.  In Acts 10 and 19, believers were baptized in the Spirit at the moment of belief.  So the doctrine of subsequence cannot be convincingly defended even from the book of Acts.

What about tongues?  Believers spoke in Acts 2, 10, and 19, but there is no record of tongues in Chapter 8.

What about the requirement of earnestly seeking the baptism?  The believers in Acts 2 simply waited prayerfully for the fulfillment of the Lord's promise (cf. 1:4, 14).  In Chapters 8, 10, or 19, no seeking is mentioned.   

The point is clear.  To say that the book of Acts presents the normal pattern for receiving the Holy Spirit presents a problem:  no consistent pattern is evident in Acts!  

It is true that Christians at Pentecost (Acts 2), Gentiles in Cornelius's household (Chapter 10), and the Jews at Ephesus who had only the baptism of John (Chapter 19) received the Holy Spirit and tongues followed.  But because those three events occurred does not mean they are to be the standard for every other Christian.  In fact, none of the passages we are discussing (Acts 2, 8, 10, or 19) imply that similar experiences are to be had by anyone else.   

If tongues were to be the normal experience, why were tongues not mentioned in Acts 8 when the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit!  Why does the text in Acts 2 through 4 not say that everyone who believed following Peter's sermons (over 5,000 people according to Acts 4:4) and received the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) also spoke in tongues?  In order for something to be normative, it has to be common to everyone.  

John Stott reasoned that:

The 3,000 do not seem to have experienced the same miraculous phenomena (the mighty rushing wind, the tongues of flame, or the speech in foreign languges).  At least nothing is said about these things.  Yet because of God's assurance through Peter they must have inherited the same promise and received the same gift (verses 33, 39).  Nevertheless, there was this difference between them:  the 120 were regenerate already, and received the baptism of the Spirit only after waiting upon God for ten days.  The 3,000 on the other hand were unbelievers, and received the forgiveness of their sins and the gift of the Spirit simultaneously -- and it happened immediately when they repented and believed, without any need to wait.

This distinction between the two companies, the 120 and the 3,000, is of great importance, because the norm for today must surely be the second group, the 3,000, and not (as is often supposed) the first.  The fact that the experience of the 120 was in two distinct stages was due simply to historical circumstances.  They could not have received the Pentecostal gift before Pentecost.  But those historical circumstances have long since ceased to exist.  We live after the event of Pentecost, like the 3,000.  With us, therefore, as with them, the forgiveness of sins and the "gift" or "baptism" of the Spirit are received together.

Subsequence -- not supported by Scripture !
Tongues -- grossly misinterpreted Scripture !
Earnestly Seeking -- simply false teaching !


God must be having a good laugh at what He sees Pentecostals and charismatics doing down here, or is He?

CHARISMATICS JUST DON'T GET IT!

Still looking for that book about the false teachings of the Baptist church !


For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library.  Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book.  All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com. 

Why Are Tongues So Popular?

Charismatic teachers and writers claim that speaking in tongues is the work of the Holy Spirit, that it is a sweeping new burst of power that has come upon the church in the last days.

How can that be? The tongues being spoken today are not biblical. Those who speak in tongues are not practicing the gift described in Scripture. Then why do so many pursue this practice with such fervor? Why do they seek to convince and intimidate others to start doing the same thing? A basic reason is spiritual hunger. People hear that tongues is a way to have a wonderful spiritual experience. They fear that if they have not spoken in tongues, they may be missing something. They want "something more."

Also, many people are hungry to express themselves spiritually. They have been coming to church for years but they really have not been involved. They have not been recognized as particularly spiritual or holy; and because they hear that tongues-speakers are thought to be holy and spiritual, they try it.

Another basic reason for the growth of tongues is the need for acceptance and security. People need to be in the "in group." They want to be among the ones who "have it," and they cringe at the thought of being among the have-nots who are on the outside looking in. It is very satisfying for some to be in the charismatic movement. It is a form of self-actualization to be able to say, "I am a charismatic." It makes many people feel that they are somebody, like they belong to something, like they have something others do not have.

Another explanation is that the charismatic movement is a reaction to the secularized, mechanized, academic, cold, indifferent society in which we live. The tongues-speaker feels like he or she is directly in touch with the supernatural. Here is something tangible that they can experience. This is not dry and academic. It feels real!

Probably the key reason tongues have exploded on the scene with such force is the need for an alternative to the cold, lifeless Christianity that permeates so many churches. People who join the charismatic movement often are those who are looking for action, excitement, warmth, and love. They want to believe that God is really at work in their lives -- right here and now. Dead orthodoxy can never satisfy, and that is why many people look for satisfaction in the charismatic movement.

Some might say "Why criticize them?" We do so because it is scriptural to be concerned about whether our brothers and sisters are walking in the truth. Although it may not seem very loving to some, the Bible is clear that we are to "speak the truth in love" (Ephesians 4:15). True love must act on the truth.

(from Charismatic Chaos by John F. MacArthur, Jr.)