Divine Healing and the Church
A deep dive into the theology underpinning miraculous healing in the Christian faith today.
Divine healing is one of the more contentious issues in the contemporary church. To be sure, across denominational boundaries and even within them, there is plenty of division on the subject. However, this division is often based on experiential rather than Scriptural grounds.
In this story, I will attempt to present an argument for healing gifts today, along with some fundamental principles that we can use in pursuit of the miraculous in our midst. To build a strong case, we will explore the following questions:
- What does the Bible say about divine healing?
- Does God heal today?
- Is divine healing guaranteed?
- What is the believer’s role in divine healing?
- What if healing doesn’t come?
If you would like to jump to any of these questions, click the links above.
My prayer is that God will use this study to fill believers with confidence to pursue divine healing in His Church. This is, admittedly, a very long story, but I hope it will be useful to someone!
Divine Healing in the Bible
Attempting to answer any questions or develop any sort of practical theology around healing without first gaining a broad understanding of what the Bible teaches us on the subject would be like attempting to build a skyscraper with no training, engineers or architectural blueprints; yet as believers, this is precisely what many of us do. Much of our theology regarding God’s ability to supernaturally give or take away physical or emotional maladies is either purely experiential or loose interpretation of singular verses out of context. In fact, from Genesis to Revelation, the Scriptures are practically bursting with guidance on the subject, if we’d only take the time to look. Let’s explore a brief but broad survey of the Bible’s relationship with healing and sickness before drawing out some key conclusions regarding its teaching.
THE TORAH
Immediately following the creation account, the Bible introduces us to a world without death. Although we cannot say with any certainty that sickness was utterly non-existent in a pre-Fall world, there is no doubt that death and illness have plagued the world since Adam and Eve’s original sin in Genesis 3.¹ Humanity’s subjection to disease, especially in primitive times, highlighted an acute need for a Divine Healer.
Fortunately, the Lord met their needs.
Abraham prayed and saw God heal Abimelech, his wife, and his female slaves (Gen. 20:17–18). Soon after Moses leads Israel from the dry banks of the Red Sea, the Lord declares that He is Jehovah Rapha, “the Lord who heals” (Ex. 15:22–27). In the Book of Numbers, the Lord’s anger burns against Aaron and Miriam, and the latter is subsequently infected with a skin disease (Num. 12). In the Old Testament, God inflicts and heals disease; indeed, He heals Miriam in response to Moses’ prayer. In Leviticus and Deuteronomy, God promised his people that faithfulness to his commands would lead to blessing, and disobedience would lead to curses, including sickness (Lev. 26; Deut. 28).
The first five books of the Bible introduce us to a God who brings death and gives life, who wounds and who heals (Deut. 32:39). This should not lead us to say that God is the only source of disease. As Michael Brown reflects, “It does seem clear from the Torah legislation, however, that there would be blind, deaf, and lame Israelites (cf. Lev. 19:14; 21:18), even apart from specific acts of judgment (cf. Lev. 26:16; Deut. 28:28–29).”²
THE OLD TESTAMENT HISTORICAL BOOKS
The Old Testament Historical Books shed more light on the link between the Lord and human health. Long life is often considered a blessing for obedience (Josh. 2:8; 8: 32; 1 Kin. 3:14; 2 Chron. 24:15). Samson and Samuel’s births are the results of God’s ability to heal barren wombs (Jud. 13; 1 Sam. 1–2). Ruth and Boaz are also “granted conception” by the Lord, resulting in their son’s birth (Ruth. 4:13). He uses Elijah and Elisha to raise the dead to life (1 Kin. 17; 2 Kin. 4). He cleanses Naaman’s skin disease (2 Kin. 5:14). These are the results of obedience, but there are also results of disobedience. The Lord afflicted the Philistines with tumours because they captured the Ark (1 Sam. 5:6). He allowed King Ahaziah to die because, after falling through the lattice in his upper chamber, He looked to Baal-zebub rather than God (2 Kin. 1:1–17). He struck Jehoram with the incurable disease in his bowels that would eventually kill Him because of his idolatry (2 Chron. 21:18–19).
THE OLD TESTAMENT POETS
In Job, arguably the definitive biblical case study on suffering, the author introduces Satan’s influence in the arena of sickness and suffering, albeit only because the Lord allows it (Job. 2:4–7). Job’s friend, Eliphaz, recognises the God who wounds and bandages; who strikes but also heals (Job 5:18). After his discourse with the Lord, Job lived to 140. He died ‘an old man and full of years’ (Job 42:16–17), another sign of the blessing of long-life for the obedient. David recognises God’s role as divine healer throughout his Psalms: He cries out for healing (Psa. 6:2–3), recognises the Lord’s restorative hand on his life (Psa. 30:1), and notes some relationship between sickness and sin (Psa. 41:3–4). An anonymous Psalmist reflects on God’s ability to bring physical and emotional healing to His people (Psa. 147:3). The Book of Proverbs reminds the reader of God’s promises in Leviticus and Deuteronomy:
“The path of wisdom is the path of well-being, protection, and life; the path of folly is the path of disaster, destruction, and death” — Proverbs 8:35–36
In the same way, a healthy fear of the Lord — and avoiding evil — heals the body and strengthens the bones (Pro. 3:7–8). In Proverbs 4, the reader is encouraged that the words of the Lord bring life and health (Pro. 4:20–22).
THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS
The writing prophets’ core message in the Old Testament was a familiar one: faithfulness led to blessing, but apostasy resulted in curses, carrying sickness and death, defeat and demise, economic destruction and exile in its wake.³ The Book of Hosea recognises the need to turn to the God who heals (Hos. 6:1).⁴ The prophet Isaiah, whose ministry overlapped Hosea’s, declared a similar message (Isa. 30:26). After hearing the Lord diagnose the deceitful heart that plagues the human condition, and that all who turn from Him will be put to shame (Jer. 17:9, 13), Jeremiah cries out to be healed (Jer. 17:14). The weeping prophet recognises his need for the kind of healing that can only come from the Lord.
But how would that healing occur?
Isaiah 53 informs the reader that it would come with the Suffering Servant who bore humanity’s sickness on His shoulders and carried their pains (Isa. 53:4). It would come with the Messiah who would bring about healing by His wounds (Isa. 53:5). This passage in Isaiah is a critical one that will warrant further explanation later. At this point, however, it is sufficient to recognise that through the Suffering Servant, both spiritual and physical healing would arrive.⁶ In the final chapter of the Old Testament, Malachi 4, God encourages His people that in this Servant, healing was on the way:
“But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings, and you will go out and playfully jump like calves from the stall.” — Malachi 4:2
There is little doubt that the God of the Old Testament was a God of healing, but it is in the New Testament that we see the beginning of an even greater wave of healing sweep across the planet.
THE LIFE AND MINISTRY OF JESUS
Of course, to arrive at a Biblical view of healing, we must observe the life of Jesus with great care. Christ’s healing ministry was, tellingly, extraordinarily varied. For believers today this is often both instructive and confounding.
If we assess Jesus’ methodology, we find a vast spectrum of approaches.
He healed a withered hand by stretching it out (Matt. 12:10–13).
He sometimes healed blind eyes by spitting in them (Mark. 8:22–26); other times, He spat on the ground, made mud, and covered the eyes with the resulting paste instead (John 9:1–38).
Occasionally, Jesus healed by laying hands on people, like the High Priest’s servant after someone cut off his ear (Luke 22:50–51) or the woman at the synagogue (Luke 13:10–17).
He healed a deaf and mute man by putting his fingers in the man’s ears and touching the man’s tongue (Mark 7:31–37).
He took some by the hand and raised them from their sickbeds (Mark 1:30–31; Matt. 9:18–26); others He raised to life from death itself (Luke 7:11–18; John 11:1–44).
Often, healing would come after Jesus commanded it (Matt. 9:1–8; Matt. 9:18–26; John 5:1–9); but other times, He would pray more than once (Mark 8:22–26), and sometimes He chose not to heal at all. This was the case for those at the Pool of Bethesda who, unlike the man who was healed, were not released from their afflictions (John 5:1–9).
Sometimes, He was with the person, and other times He brought healing from a completely different location altogether (John 4:46–52; Matt. 8:5–13; Matt. 15:22–28).
Jesus even chose to heal on the Sabbath, which would have been highly irregular at the time (Matt. 12:10–13; Luke 13:10–17; Luke 14:1–4).
When Jesus brought healing, the Bible tells us that his compassion for the sick was a factor at least some of the time (Mark 1:40–45; Luke 7:11–13; John 11:33–36; Matt. 20:30–34).
He healed the centurion’s servant because He believed (Matt. 8:5–13) and asked the man at the Pool of Bethesda if He desired to get well (John 5:1–9).
Jesus healed some because of their faith (Luke 8:43–48), while others, He said, were unable to be made well because of their little faith (Matt. 17:14–21).
Faith and belief in God’s ability to heal, as well as the desire to be healed, must play some role in divine healing. However, Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, where He presumably could have had neither the faith, the desire, nor the belief to be made well (John 11). Does this mean that belief on another’s behalf is sufficient if the recipient is lacking? Didn’t Jesus tell the disciples that with small faith, nothing will be impossible for them (Matt. 17:14–21)?
Like the Old Testament, the New Testament shows believers that there was sometimes a link between the forgiveness of sins and healing (Matt. 9:1–8), but when the disciples assumed that sin alone was the reason for a blind man’s afflictions, Jesus corrected them. Instead, He said, it was so that God’s works might be displayed in the man (John 9:1–38). We can conclude that sin may play a role in afflictions, but so might God’s sovereignty.
Notably, other potential causes of sickness in the Gospels are unclean spirits and demon possessions. Demon possessed people experienced a range of maladies, from an inability to speak (Matt. 9:32–33; Matt. 12:22), blindness (Matt. 12:22), fits of violence (Matt. 8:28–34), torment (Matt. 15:22–28), and even seizures (Matt. 17:14–21). A spirit disabled a woman for 18 years, leaving her bent over and unable to straighten up (Luke 13:10–17). Reassuringly, Jesus commanded unclean spirits to leave (Mark 1:23–28; Matt. 8:28–34), and even rebuked them in the process (Matt. 17:14–21).
THE EARLY CHURCH
Divine healing remained a vital component of the early church after Jesus’ crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension. Soon after Pentecost, Peter and John healed a lame man with a simple command: “in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, get up and walk” (Acts 3:1–10). When questioned about this, they are clear that it is “by the name of Jesus Christ” that the lame man was standing in good health (Acts 4:10)
In Acts 5, we read that “many signs and wonders were being done among the people through the hands of the apostles” (Acts 5:12). The sheer volume of miracles appears to have been so vast that there were sick people strewn along the streets in the hope that even Peter’s shadow might fall on them (Acts 5:15). It must have been quite a scene as multitudes came together from the surrounding towns, and all those who were sick or tormented by unclean spirits were healed (Acts 5:16)!
Joy filled a Samarian city after Philip preached the Gospel. He expelled unclean Spirits and made those paralyzed and lame well once again (Acts 8:4–8). After God afflicted Saul with blindness, Jesus sent Ananais to heal the man who would one day write the majority of the New Testament letters (Acts 9:17–19). With immediate effect, Peter healed Aeneas, a man bedridden for eight years (Acts 9:32–35), before raising Dorcas from the dead (Acts 9:36–42). Paul would later raise Eutychus from the dead after He fell from a third-story building (Acts 20:7–12)
In Acts 10, we see an indication that some sickness was the result of the “tyranny of the devil” (Acts 10:38), and in Acts 14, Paul was able to heal after seeing that the man in Lystra “had faith to be healed” (Acts 14:9). Shortly after this, the Jews from Antioch and Iconium carried out such a vicious attack on Paul that they believed He was dead. Yet, after the disciples gathered around Him, He got up and went into the town before continuing his travels the next day (Acts 14:19–20).
Could this have been divine healing?
Later, when Paul was with Silas, He commanded an unclean spirit in the name of Jesus Christ to leave a slave girl (Acts 16:16–18), and by Acts 19, even facecloths and aprons that had touched his skin were brought back to the sick, where diseases and evil spirits were forced to leave the afflicted (Acts 19:11–17). During one of his final trips, Paul prayed and laid hands on Publius’ father, bringing total healing before healing the rest of those on the island of Miletus (Malta) who were sick (Acts 28:7–9).
The letters that follow the Acts of the Apostles contain fewer references to divine healing, but they are perhaps no less significant. At a glance, we see that Paul discusses the ‘gifts of healing’ in his letter to the Corinthian church (1 Cor. 12:7–10; 27–30), and James encourages those who are sick to call for the elders of the church, who are to anoint them with oil (James 5:13–16).
Elsewhere, it is helpful to notice that there are numerous references to unhealed sickness. Paul first preached the Gospel to the Galatians because of an illness (Gal. 4:13). His letter to Timothy indicates that someone needed a natural solution: a little wine for their “frequent illnesses” (1 Tim. 5:23), and even left Trophimus unwell in Miletus, the very place where He healed all who were sick (2 Tim. 4:20). Some scholars would even argue that Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” was sickness (2 Cor. 12:7). However, this is not clear from the passage.
Does God heal today?
With this brief survey, we’ve established that divine healing features prominently throughout the pages of the Word of God. However, few, if any of us, have experienced the kinds of regular, verifiable, physical healing miracles that litter the pages of Scripture. We must therefore ask a vital foundational question: does God heal today?
Answering this question is both a complex and straightforward endeavour. To answer fully, we must define terms. Few believers would contest that God plays some role in healing today. In his sovereign mercy and grace, the Lord reveals medical knowledge to us, holds together the very cells that work together to bring healing, and determines our days (Psa. 139:16). As a result, the real question is whether God brings miraculous divine healing, and whether any of that healing comes in the form of special healing gifts bestowed upon the believer.
There are two primary positions on the subject: the cessationist position and the continuationist position. Generally, cessationists believe that divine healing, spiritual gifts, and other miracles have ceased. Continuationist believers hold that those gifts continue today. As we have already highlighted, many followers of Jesus allow experiences to dictate their position. While this can undoubtedly be helpful at times, the Scriptures alone must ultimately guide our theology. With that in mind, let’s examine both the cessationist and continuationist position to answer the question of God’s divine healing today.
EXAMINING CESSATIONISM
Argument 1: The gifts ended with the Apostles
Few that hold to cessationism would deny that miraculous spiritual gifts took place in the Scriptures. However, the first cessationist argument claims that miraculous spiritual gifts ended with the apostles and prophets. Many who hold this position believe the gifts were no longer necessary after the apostles and prophets had established the early Church’s foundations (Eph. 2:20). Now there are no prophets or apostles because believers have access to the inerrant, infallible Word of God; therefore, there is no need for miraculous spiritual gifts. As a result, they have ceased.⁶
In response, we must note that there are no specific verses in Scripture that definitively confirm whether the miraculous spiritual gifts have ended or continued.⁷ Similarly, it is impossible to say with biblical certainty that the gift of apostleship has ended. This argument relies on the assumption that all apostles must be eyewitnesses of Christ. Even in the New Testament, continuationist theologian Andrew Wilson writes:
…there were eyewitness apostles (the twelve, Paul, James) and people who never witnessed the resurrection but were referred to as apostles anyway (Apollos, very likely Barnabas, Silas, possibly Timothy, and so on), and that while the eyewitness category ceased with Paul, the other category didn’t. . . there is a huge gulf between saying ‘eyewitnesses of Christ have ceased, because the NT says so’ and ‘all miraculous gifts have ceased, despite the fact that the NT doesn’t say so’.⁸
The roles of the original Apostles, who saw the risen Jesus firsthand and were granted a responsibility by God to write His divinely-inspired Word, have ceased. However, there is reason to believe that some apostles were not eyewitnesses of the resurrection of Jesus and did not have the same role as the “upper-case” Apostles (1 Cor. 4:1–13; Acts 18:24–28).⁹ Granted, this is unclear; but there is no biblical evidence to suggest that these “lower-case” apostolic roles have ceased today either. Consequently, if the gift of apostleship is not definitively over, it stands to reason that the healing gifts may also continue.
Argument 2: Healings were immediate and never failed
In his book Strange Fire, John MacArthur presents a strong argument for the cessationist position. He contends that all healings were immediate and never failed:
When Jesus or His disciples healed someone, the sick were made well immediately. No recovery period was necessary — no physical therapy needed, no recuperation time required. Lepers were instantly cleansed (Mark 1:42), blind men were immediately granted sight ( Mark 10:52), and people who had been paralyzed one moment could leap for joy the next ( Acts 3:8). Some might argue that delayed healings did occur in Mark 8:22–26 (where a blind man was healed in two stages ), Luke 17:11–19 (where ten lepers were cleansed while on their way to see the priest ), and John 9:1–7 (where a blind man was healed after washing in the Pool of Siloam). But those incidents involved delays of only a few minutes, not weeks or days — and the delays were a purposeful part of the way in which Jesus intended to accomplish the healing miracle . . . The healing miracles of Jesus never failed. Neither did those done by the apostles in the book of Acts. In Matthew 14:36 all who touched the hem of Christ’s garment “were made perfectly well.” When lepers were healed, their recovery was total, such that they could pass a thorough inspection by the priest ( cf. Lev. 14:3,4,10). The blind were given 20 / 20 vision, the lame could run and jump, the deaf could hear a pin drop, and the dead were restored to full health. No New Testament miracle was ever attempted that was not ultimately a complete success.¹⁰
At first glance, MacArthur’s case seems strong. In fact, it is an argument from silence. The Gospels do not contain all of the signs and miracles that Jesus performed (John 20:30). Therefore, while it is certainly likely that He healed with total success, we cannot be sure of this fact. The disciple’s healing exploits are even less clear.
As we discussed at the end of our brief survey of the Scriptures, there are numerous references to unhealed sickness. For example, Paul’s sickness was not instantly healed (Gal. 4:13), and He left Trophimus in Miletus, where He had already healed many (2 Tim. 4:20). There are two conclusions to draw from these facts. We know Paul experienced the supernatural healing gifts, which means that either:
- He chose not to pray for his own (or Trophimus’) sicknesses, or¹¹
- His initial prayers failed and were not immediate.
That Paul would pick and choose whom to heal is not out of the question but certainly seems unlikely. Therefore it is reasonable to consider the latter option more convincing: that prayers for healing from all but Jesus are not always successful and not always immediate.
Argument 3 — Abuse in contemporary Church movements
Much of MacArthur’s attack on the continuationist position stems from a genuine issue in contemporary Christianity: the prosperity Gospel; also known as “Word of Faith” theology, or “health and wealth” teaching. This teaching teaches that the believer can be wholly healthy and affluent beyond their wildest dreams if only they would have enough faith. MacArthur is also critical of some of the more extreme Pentecostals and Charismatics who, He says, “elevate religious experience over biblical truth. Though many of them pay lip service to the authority of God’s Word, in practice they deny it.”¹² The argument is that because there are some abuses regarding divine healing, all reports must be false.
These criticisms are fair.
We will discuss the issue in greater detail later, but there is clear evidence that healing is not dependent on the recipient’s faith alone. Similarly, one only has to move in Charismatic and Pentecostal circles for a while to realize that some do indeed pursue religious experience over biblical truth. To be sure, this is problematic for both the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements and the global Church. However, the abuse of truth does not nullify truth itself. This argument does little to refute the gifts of healing today. It is impossible to prove that all divine healings since the first Apostles are false; therefore, it is impossible to claim that God cannot heal today due to the church’s misuse of the gifts.¹³
Argument 4 — There is no evidence that men and women have healing gifts in our churches.
In his article, “Why I Am a Cessationist,” Thomas Shreiner writes:
I doubt the gift of miracles and healings exists today, for it isn’t evident that men and women in our churches have such gifts. Certainly God can and does heal at times, but where are the people with these gifts? Claims for miracles and healings must be verified, just as the people verified the blind man’s healing in John 9.¹⁴
Like MacArthur, Schreiner’s argument appears cogent but is also flawed. To reason that miracles and healings cannot exist today because there is little evidence in a denomination that broadly refutes miraculous spiritual gifts is akin to asserting that God cannot exist because atheists have not experienced His presence. If the believer does not seek, they will not find (Matt. 7:7). In continuationist churches, there is ample evidence that such gifts do exist. However, if the sceptic presupposes that all healing gifts are false, they will naturally disregard such evidence, even if it is medically verifiable. As such, proponents of this argument risk fallacious circular reasoning in choosing predisposition over logic. The unfortunate fact that many of us have never experienced healing miracles should not dissuade us from God’s willingness to heal supernaturally today.
From the three arguments above, and those in a similar vein that we have not covered, we can conclude that the cessationist’s attempt to prove that the healing gifts have ceased is unconvincing.
EXAMINING CONTINUATIONISM
For the reasons above, some believers would lean toward a continuationist position. However, this alone is not enough. Why do Christians believe that God still heals through His followers today?
The Bible does not explicitly say that the miraculous gifts have ended
The Bible is replete with miracles. No evidence suggests that those miracles have definitively ceased. “If you were to lock a brand-new Christian in a room with a Bible and tell him to study what Scripture says about healing and miracles,” Jack Deere says, “He would never come out of the room a cessationist.”¹⁵ The cessationist position is often the result of experience rather than Scripture — the very thing cessationists criticize in the continuationist. How are we to handle the following passages?
¹⁴Is anyone among you sick? He should call for the elders of the church, and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. ¹⁵The prayer of faith will save the sick person, and the Lord will raise him up; if He has committed sins, he will be forgiven.¹⁶Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, so that you may be healed.” — James 5:14–16
Are Elders no longer able to heal the sick? Are we not to pray for one another so that we may be healed? 1 Corinthians 12–14 places no limitation on the spiritual gifts. On the contrary, 1 Corinthians 14:39 calls believers to “be eager” to pursue them. In Galatians 3:5, Paul speaks of the God who supplies the Spirit to the believer and works miracles among them. If God still works miracles among his people, why would healing not be counted as one of them?
We could go on.
Perhaps the most convincing Scriptural evidence that cessationists use to argue that the miraculous gifts have ended is found in 1 Corinthians:
⁸Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. ⁹For we know in part, and we prophesy in part, ¹⁰but when the perfect comes, the partial will come to an end. — 1 Corinthians 13:8–10
Some will argue that the “perfect” in verse 10 refers to the completed canon of Scripture. Continuationists argue that this refers to the return of Jesus. Which is correct? Based on these verses alone, it is unclear. However, when read in the context of the entire Bible, it appears that the continuationist view is more likely than the cessationist position. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable to argue from a Scriptural basis that God does heal today.
Is Divine Healing Guaranteed?
We’ve established that divine healing fills the pages of Scripture, and we’ve argued that God still heals today through supernatural means.
For most believers, however, divine healing is anything but a common occurrence. This leads us to a natural next question “Is divine healing guaranteed?”
Returning to the Word of Faith movement mentioned earlier, prominent personality Kenneth Copeland (among others) see healing as a divine promise that believers can claim in light of the atonement, as long as they have enough faith. If healing doesn’t occur, it’s because “they haven’t received revelation of their rights and therefore do not contend for them.”¹⁶ Copeland teaches that upon salvation, believers are redeemed from the curse: “death, sin, sickness, disease, poverty, lack, depression, addition — anything bad you can think of.”¹⁷ Copeland’s teaching may seem attractive at first glance, but this belief is patently and dangerously false for several reasons.
REFUTING WORD OF FAITH TEACHING
Perhaps the clearest argument that this teaching is false is that our experience does not correlate with Copeland’s teaching. As with the cessationist position, our experience alone must not shape our theology, but it can inform it to some extent. Indeed, in the Scriptures (as we witnessed earlier), Paul first preached to the Galatians because of an illness (Gal. 4:13); He suggests a little wine for a believer’s “frequent illnesses” (1 Tim. 5:23), and He leaves Trophimus unwell in Miletus (2 Tim. 4:20). Can we really claim that such a profound lack of faith exists in all but an elite few? If so, are the Word of Faith preachers of today more faithful than the Apostles? It seems highly unlikely.
The second argument against this position is that healing is not solely dependent on faith. As previously discussed, Jesus did indeed heal people because of their faith (Luke 8:43–48). However, He also healed people despite it (John 11) and taught that nothing would be impossible for the believer with even the smallest of faith (Matt. 17:14–21). We can conclude that Copeland and many other Word of Faith preachers overestimate the power of faith alone for divine healing. We will discuss this in more detail later.
Thirdly, Copeland suggests that immediate physical healing occurs in light of the atonement. Others suggest that the atonement brings only spiritual healing in the form of salvation. Which is correct?
HEALING IN THE ATONEMENT
Isaiah 53 is one of the most familiar passages in the Old Testament, prophesying the atonement of Christ. There are two key verses for the purposes of this paper:
³He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of suffering who knew what sickness was.
He was like someone people turned away from;
He was despised, and we didn’t value him.
⁴Yet he himself bore our sicknesses, and he carried our pains;
but we in turn regarded him stricken,
struck down by God, and afflicted.
— Isaiah 53:3–4
Hebrew readers would have understood that the words translated as sickness and pain — ḥŏlî and maḵ’ōḇ — “are words that almost always describe physical, rather than spiritual, pain and sickness.”¹⁸ Indeed, Matthew recognises the physical nature of this passage when He cites it in the context of miraculous healings at Capernaum (Matt. 8:16–17). The author sees that Jesus’ healing ministry is “itself a function of his substitutionary death, by which He lays the foundation for destroying sickness.”¹⁹
The idea of physical healing in atonement is not one that is specific to Isaiah. For example, Leviticus 14 describes making atonement for the cleansing of skin diseases.²⁰ God punishes the people in Numbers 16 with a plague but ceases after Aaron makes atonement for them.²¹ Similarly, as the suffering servant, Jesus brings both physical and spiritual healing in the atonement. The pertinent question, then, is not whether Jesus brings physical healing, but to what extent can we expect it today? Or to put it another way, “how much has the kingdom of God already come?”²² It is in answering these questions that denominational walls are often raised.
Phil Moore points to four standard views regarding the coming of the kingdom of God and the reality of expectation around healing. He describes them as follows:
- The “Classic Liberal View” which recognises that God can heal but asserts that He chooses not to, respecting the laws of the universe.
- The “Classic Cessationist View” says that God can heal today and occasionally does but does not grant the gifts of healing to believers since the ‘apostolic era’ has ended.
- The “Classic Pentecostal View”, reflecting the views of people like Copeland mentioned above, says that healing has been bought through the cross and simply needs to be received through faith.
- The “Classic Charismatic View”, which would explain the Kingdom of God as “now-but-not-yet”. As a result, believers sometimes experience the Kingdom “spilling out” from the future into the present through God’s grace but won’t experience it in all its fullness until the Second Coming of Jesus.
We have already refuted the Classic Liberal View, the Classic Cessationist View and the Classic Pentecostal View elsewhere. It would, therefore, seem that the Classic Charismatic View is the most likely. This certainly would explain why we see that some people are divinely healed, and sometimes, even those with immense faith are not. However, as Moore points out, this position is not without weaknesses in some finer details. Broadly speaking, for the purposes of this paper, this answer is sufficient in answering the question at hand.
Is divine healing guaranteed? In a word, yes.
There will undoubtedly come a time where “Death will be no more; grief, crying, and pain will be no more, because the previous things have passed away” (Rev. 21:4). Divine healing is guaranteed when Jesus returns as a result of his atoning sacrifice on the cross. However, until then we can remind ourselves of the truth that God has healed throughout Biblical history. We can be filled with faith, knowing that He does indeed heal today, and yet, in His sovereign love, sometimes He doesn’t.
Divine healing is guaranteed at some point, but to say that God will always heal this side of eternity is what Matt Chandler describes as an “over-realised eschatology,” where we attempt to designate what is intended for the Jesus’ return to the present.²³ As such, we must be careful to make such statements.
What is the Believer’s role in Divine Healing?
Equipped with this understanding of divine healing, we can now ask the question, what is the believer’s role here?
Caveat: It is only by the Holy Spirit that any miracles will occur.
Of course, we recognise the act of supernatural healing itself is the result of the grace of God Himself by the Holy Spirit, not some superpower bestowed upon the believer. As such, we must desire that the Spirit would move powerfully in our midst. Nevertheless, while the miracle is God’s alone, we still have a part to play in ushering it in.
It is worth mentioning that this is perhaps the most dangerous section of this paper. Some believers will attempt to prescribe precise methodology at this point, but as we have observed in Jesus’ ministry, healing miracles were anything but routine.²⁴ There is simply no evidence at all in God’s Word that indicates definitively how we are to go about experiencing divine healing. However, we know that:
- There is a need to take divine healing seriously.
- Faith and compassion on our part play some role in healing.
- We should both pray for and declare healing in the name of Jesus.
- There may be a demonic component that needs to be addressed.
- Elders have a particular responsibility regarding healing.
- We should eagerly desire the gifts of healing.
WE MUST TAKE DIVINE HEALING SERIOUSLY.
It is human nature to avoid discomfort. For numerous reasons, the believer may feel uncomfortable about the subject of healing and therefore evade the matter entirely. Experience may not align with what we read in Scripture; tenuous theology or rampant misuse in the broader Church may cause us to swim for safer waters. Perhaps we believe that God can but lack the faith that He will heal. Whatever the reason, we risk undermining our potential experience of God’s healing miracles if we don’t approach them thoughtfully today. We must take this call seriously, both as intercessors for and recipients of divine healing.
As we have already seen, healing peppers the pages of the Bible. The standard that Christ and the early church set indicate to us that healing is an essential aspect of ministry. Jesus commissioned the twelve disciples to heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers and drive out demons (Matt. 10:8), a commission that is no less relevant today. Healing is one of the spiritual gifts that Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 12:9. James encourages the sick to call for the elders to pray over them because “the prayer of faith will save the sick person” (Jam. 5:13–15).
The conclusion is unavoidable: we cannot ignore the clear scriptural call to pray for healing.
In the same way, we can infer from the life of Jesus that sometimes divine healing is more likely when we want to be healed. Jack Deere puts it this way:
Jesus asked the paralytic a question that has been difficult for some to understand, “Do you want to get well?” (John 5:6). I never understood the significance of that question until I started praying for the sick. I had assumed that all sick people want to get well, especially those who have chronic ailments like paralysis or blindness. But. . .I have found that a number of sick people do not wish to get well at all. In fact, their whole identity is bound up in being sick, and they are literally afraid of the changes that would take place in their life if they were made whole.²⁵
Of course, it is no bad thing to want to experience healing, and we should take Jesus’ question to the person with paralysis very seriously. His will to be healed was obviously a factor in his miraculous recovery. At the same time, we should keep Lazarus in mind; as a dead man, He unlikely exhibited any will to be made well.
The outcome: we need to take divine healing seriously, and sometimes, healing comes as a result of our desiring it before God.
FAITH IS VALUABLE BUT ONE FACTOR OF MANY. WE SHOULD STRIVE FOR IT, BUT NOT DEPEND ON IT ALONE FOR HEALING.
As we have already discussed, Jesus healed some people because of their faith (Luke 8:43–48), while others, He says, are unable to be made well because of their lack thereof (Matt. 17:14–21). Faith and belief in God’s ability to heal (as well as the desire to be healed) must play some role in divine healing. However, as above, Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, where He presumably could have had neither the faith, the desire, nor the belief to be made well (John 11). Does this mean that belief on another’s behalf is sufficient if the recipient is lacking? It is unclear. Similarly, Jesus tells the disciples that even with small faith, nothing will be impossible for them (Matt. 17:14–21).
It is theologically questionable and pastorally dangerous to tell a believer that God will not heal them because of their lack of faith.
To begin with, there is no way of knowing for sure that faith is the issue. If it was, could it not be the faith of the person praying rather than the person receiving prayer that is causing the problem? How can we know for sure?
Furthermore, even if it was somehow clearly apparent that a lack of faith was the problem, it is unlikely that the believer would suddenly have more faith just because the person praying told them that they should. This encouragement may in fact lead to a sense of discouragement or rejection and have an opposite effect than the one intended. Instead, consider pointing the believer to the cross, showing them the outpouring of miraculous healings in the Scriptures, as well as any miraculous experiences in your own life, highlighting the goodness of God. Allow faith to grow organically.
The outcome: we need to take faith seriously, and sometimes, healing comes because we have faith before God. The believer should strive to increase faith for healing, but recognise that there are other factors at work, too.
OUR COMPASSION MAY BE A COMPONENT OF DIVINE HEALING.
The Psalms declare that God is compassionate and slow to anger (Psalm 103). The Book of Lamentations proclaim that this compassion never fails (Lam. 3:22).²⁶ In Jesus, we see compassion in physical form. On multiple occasions, it was Jesus’ compassion that moved Him to heal the sick and the hurting (Matt. 14:14, 20:30–34; Mark 1:40–45; Luke:11–13; John 11:33–36).
We see no explicit exhortations in the Scriptures about the role of our compassion in seeing divine healing in our midst, but as those who are striving to live like Christ, it would certainly do us no harm to follow His example. According to those that knew him, prominent 20th-century preacher Smith Wigglesworth’s healing power sprang from his “love and compassion for those in need.”²⁷
The outcome: we do not know for sure to what extent, but compassion certainly may play some role in divine healing.
WE SHOULD BOTH DECLARE AND PRAY FOR HEALING IN JESUS’ NAME.
As mentioned earlier, some believers cling to a single methodology for divine healing. A division often occurs regarding whether one should declare healing or pray for it. Such division is unnecessary.
There is a strong case for declaring healing: Jesus promises that He will do whatever we ask in His name (John 14:13–14; Matt. 7:7). Importantly, it is worth mentioning that the word ‘ask’ here could also imply prayer. God calls us to do all things in the name of the Lord Jesus (Col. 3:17). Jesus gave the apostles authority to “Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those with leprosy, drive out demons” (Matt. 10:1, 8). He didn’t tell them to pray for healing. Peter declares, “In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk” (Acts 3:6b).
On the other hand, we find a different way in James’ letter:
¹³Is anyone among you suffering? He should pray. Is anyone cheerful? He should sing praises. ¹⁴ Is anyone among you sick. He should call for the elders of the church, and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. ¹⁵The prayer of faith will save the sick person…”
— James 5:13–14
Similarly, Jesus himself prays to His Father for healing (John 11:41–43). Peter knelt and prayed next to Tabitha before she was brought back to life (Acts 9:4). 1 Thessalonians 5:17 calls believers to pray continually.
The outcome: we must not create an either/or situation here. Jesus and the Apostles both pray for and command healing. Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that our role as believers is to do both as well.
THERE MAY BE A DEMONIC COMPONENT THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.
As we saw in our brief survey of Scripture, demonic activity was occasionally responsible for various afflictions. Some were struck deaf and dumb; others were prone to fits of violence and seizures. Crowds brought “those who were tormented by unclean spirits”, and God used Peter to heal them all (Acts 5:12–16). These are just a few examples of demonic activity in the Bible.
It is reasonable to assume that there is sometimes a demonic component to divine healing that we must address. At times, it may even be appropriate for what is popularly known as “deliverance ministry” in the contemporary church. Believers should be cautious and careful about diagnosing unclean spirits. Discreetly discern what is happening and rely on the Holy Spirit for wisdom here. It is beyond the scope of this paper to offer a thorough guide to praying for those we suspect are experiencing demonic attack. For now, it is sufficient to remember that there is a genuine spiritual dimension regarding our role in God’s divine healing.
ELDERS HAVE A SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO PRAY FOR HEALING.
James 5:13–15 is one of the few passages in Scripture that give specific instructions regarding healing. God calls all believers to pray (or declare healing) for the sick. However, James’ epistle also highlights the special responsibility of elders in this arena. Elders are “on-call” to pray over believers for healing and are even given instructions to anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. Elders may receive special healing gifts from the Lord, or they may possess a level of faith, compassion, or communion with God that helps usher in healing more quickly.
We should be cautious in making definitive statements here. What about the use of oil? Some contemporary Christians would baulk at the idea of anointing with oil today, but the Apostles set a precedent for it concerning healing in the Gospels (Mark 6:13). There is a recipe for anointing oil in Exodus 30:22–25, but it is unclear whether it is relevant to this context. No specific instructions regarding oil and healing exist, so believers would be wise, once again, to hold methodology lightly.²⁸
The outcome: Elders have a particular call to pray for healing. James also instructs elders to anoint with oil, but the precise methodology is unclear.
BELIEVERS SHOULD EAGERLY DESIRE GIFTS OF HEALING.
Paul directs us to numerous spiritual gifts in the Bible. In 1 Corinthians 12, He even includes healing as one of them:
²⁸And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, next miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, leading, various kinds of tongues. — 1 Cor. 12:28, Emphasis added.
Among other spiritual gifts, God has appointed gifts of healing in the church. What does this mean for believers today?
It is helpful to notice that the passage describes plural “gifts (χαρίσματα) of healing,” not a singular “gift (χάρισμα) of healing.” This distinction may seem subtle but has potentially significant implications for the believer. Gordon D. Fee remarks, “the plural χαρίσματα probably suggests not a permanent ‘gift,’ as it were, but that each occurrence is a ‘gift’ in its own right.”²⁹ If it is true that the gifts of healing are not permanent but rather individual gifts bestowed by God, then one might infer that the gifts of healing are more widely available than other spiritual gifts.
It also lends credence to the argument that divine healing is not always guaranteed or dependent on faith alone since God’s discretionary gifts are given for a specific instance, not permanently available. Nevertheless, it is still true that God may choose to bring about more healing miracles through some believers than others.
This does not preclude those with lesser experience from greater participation in divine healing in the future. In fact, as we have already seen, all believers should eagerly desire the spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 14:1), of which healing is a part.
The outcome: The “gift of healing” is not a permanent one. Some may have more significant experiences in this area, but these gifts are available to all, and as such, all believers should eagerly desire the gifts of healing that God bestows on His children whenever He wills.
What if healing doesn’t come?
Even with the most fervent prayers, God does not always bring divine healing. We may experience suffering, grief, or pain in this life, but how do we respond?
We remember that God can heal, He will heal, and even if He doesn’t heal in this life, He is still good.³⁰
GOD CAN HEAL.
As we have seen throughout this paper, we worship a God who heals. Throughout human history, God has lavished gifts of healing upon His people. Ignoring experience alone, we’ve argued from the Scriptures that those gifts are still available to us today. We can pray (or declare healing) with faith and compassion to a loving God who hears those prayers. We can eagerly desire healing gifts, knowing that God has granted healing such authority to us. We remember that these gifts are anything but formulaic. Whether we pray from a distance or lay hands on the recipient, ask or command, call the elders or anoint with oil, we can rest in the knowledge that the Lord can heal today.
GOD WILL HEAL.
Similarly, as we have seen, we have hope knowing that there will come a day when God will heal all believers. In the atonement, Jesus bore our spiritual maladies, but also our physical ones. In His sovereignty, God may decide not to usher divine healing into our situation today, but even so, we can rest assured knowing that one day we will be made well once more.
EVEN IF HE DOESN’T HEAL IN THIS LIFE, HE IS STILL GOOD.
Though we may not understand, we can recognise that God truly does work all things together for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purposes (Romans 8:28). We submit to an unfathomably great God who sometimes uses suffering for our good. Tim Keller explains:
Joseph was an arrogant young man who was hated by his brothers. In their anger at him, they imprisoned him in a pit and then sold him into a life of slavery and misery in Egypt. Doubtless Joseph prayed to God to help him escape, but no help was forthcoming, and into slavery he went. Though he experienced years of bondage and misery, Joseph’s character was refined and strengthened by his trials. Eventually he rose up to become a prime minister of Egypt who saved thousands of lives and even his own family from starvation. If God had not allowed Joseph’s years of suffering, he never would have been such a powerful agent for social justice and spiritual healing.³¹
At times, it may be tremendously difficult to wrestle with the reality that sometimes God permits what He hates to accomplish that which He loves,³² but we will greatly benefit from regularly asking ourselves the following questions:
- Do I really trust that God can heal me?
- Do I really trust that God will heal me?
- What is God teaching me in light of this pain or suffering, either in my life or someone else’s?
- How might this painful situation bring glory to God?
- What does it look like to live faithfully in this situation?
Conclusion
This paper intends to answer some central questions surrounding the complex issue of divine healing. We’ve emphasized the objective fact that healing is prominent throughout Scripture. We’ve argued that, based on God’s Word, He still heals today. We’ve studied the atonement and seen that one day, healing will come to those who believe. We’ve recognized that healing is not formulaic; it is not simply a question of faith alone or singular methodology. Instead, based on the ministry of Jesus and his Apostles, we saw that the act of divine healing is as broad and varied as the pain God cures. And if healing does not come to our loved ones or us this side of eternity, we can still live with a faithful expectation of the healing that is to come, striving to bring glory to our Lord in the process.
One may arrive at this point and feel disheartened, perhaps expecting a more clear methodology. Instead, I would encourage readers to be filled with hope. Hope in the power of the Gospel to bring spiritual and physical healing one day. Hope that we cannot possibly bring about healing in our own limited strength or with formulaic techniques. Were that the case, we would fall hopelessly short. Rather, it is only by Almighty God’s lavish grace that we receive gifts of healing. We certainly have a role to play, but knowing that healing does not depend on us and that there is the God of all Creation is with us is good news indeed.
Let us praise the God who heals!
Bibliography
[1] Bosworth considers it ‘clear’ that disease, ‘incipient death’, entered the world by sin.
F. F. Bosworth, Christ the Healer. (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 1948), 24.
[2] Michael L. Brown, Israel’s Divine Healer. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 95.
[3] Michael L. Brown, Israel’s Divine Healer. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 183.
[4] Chisholm, R. B., Jr. (1985). Hosea. In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books) Vol. 1, 1393.
[5] F. F. Bosworth, Christ the Healer. (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 1948), 35.
[6] Thomas Schreiner, “Why I Am a Cessationist.” The Gospel Coalition, Accessed December 23, 2020, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/cessationist/
[7] Phil Moore, “A Healthy Theology of Healing.” (n.d.), 4.
[8] Andrew Wilson, “Cessationism and Strange Fire.” THINK, Accessed April 14, 2021, https://thinktheology.co.uk/blog/article/cessationism_and_strange_fire
[9] Andrew Wilson, “Apostolic Authority: How Does It Work?” THINK, Accessed December 21, 2020, https://thinktheology.co.uk/blog/article/apostolic-authority-how-does-it-work
[10] John MacArthur, Strange Fire (Nashville: Nelson Books, 2013), 167; 171.
[11] Phil Moore, “A Healthy Theology of Healing.” (n.d.), 12.
[12] John MacArthur, Strange Fire (Nashville: Nelson Books, 2013), 16.
[13] Andrew Wilson, “Why Does Bad Theology Produce More Healing?” THINK, Accessed December 18, 2020, https://thinktheology.co.uk/blog/article/why_does_bad_theology_produce_more_healing
[14] Thomas Schreiner, “Why I Am a Cessationist.” The Gospel Coalition, Accessed December 23, 2020, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/cessationist/
[15] Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993), E-Book Location 618.
[16] Kenneth Copeland, “Paid in Full.” Kenneth Copeland Ministries, Accessed May 19, 2021, https://blog.kcm.org/paid-in-full/
[17] Ibid.
[18] Phil Moore, Straight to the Heart of Isaiah: 60 bite-sized Insights. (Oxford: Monarch Books, 2016), “What They Saw (52:13–53:12)” Accessed on Logos Bible Software.
[19] D. A. Carson, Matthew (Expositor’s Bible Commentary) (Grand Rapids: Zondervan. 1984), 205.
[20] F. F. Bosworth, Christ the Healer. (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 1948), 25.
[21] A. B. Simpson, “Diving Healing in the Atonement.” Alliance World Fellowship, Accessed April 29, 2021. http://awf.world/consult/a-b-simpson-divine-healing-in-the-atonement/
[22] Phil More, “A Healthy Theology of Healing.” (n.d.), 3–14.
[23] Matt Chandler, “Session 9 || Matt Chandler — What if I’m Not Healed, or, Is it Important that We Learn How to Suffer Well.” Vimeo, Accessed December 19, 2020, https://vimeo.com/364210285
[24] In 2014, I participated in the Singaporean offshoot of Bethel’s “School of Supernatural Ministry.” While there, I was taught a formulaic approach to healing that involved visualising living waters of healing flowing from you to the recipient. We certainly witnessed some profound healing miracles, but this teaching does little to align with the Bible’s teaching regarding healing and is therefore unhelpful.
[25] Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993),E-Book Location 692.
[26] Michael L. Brown, Israel’s Divine Healer. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 222–223.
[27] Albert Hibbert, Smith Wigglesworth: The Secret of His Power (Tulsa: Harrison House. 1993), 23.
[28] Andrew Wilson, “Session 5 || Andrew Wilson — Healing in James 5 and its Application to the 21st Century.” Vimeo, Accessed December 19, 2020. https://vimeo.com/363874086.
[29] Gordon D. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1994), 168–169.
[30] Matt Chandler, “God Can Heal, He Will Heal, but What If He Doesn’t?” The Good Book, Accessed May 18, 2021, https://www.thegoodbook.com/blog/interestingthoughts/2019/09/24/god-can-heal-He-will-heal-but-what-if-He-doesnt/.
[31] Timothy Keller, The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism. (New York: Penguin Books, 2008), 24.
[32] Joni Eareckson Tada, “God Permits What He Hates.” Joni and Friends, Accessed May 18, 2020, https://old.joniandfriends.org/radio/4-minute/god-permits-what-He-hates1/
