Category: What do you think?

Do Christians today heal the sick and raise the dead

Published on by Texas Gospel1 Comment

Floyd Rogers – Texas Gospel Volunteer, Christian writer

Miracles of Healing Matthew 9:18-36 (NASB)

18 While He was saying these things to them, behold, a synagogue official came and bowed down before Him, and said, “My daughter has just died; but come and lay Your hand on her, and she will become alive again.” 19 Jesus got up from the table and began to accompany him, along with His disciples.

20 And behold, a woman who had been suffering from a hemorrhage for twelve years came up behind Him, and touched the border of His cloak; 21 for she was saying to herself, “If I only touch His cloak, I will get well.” 22 But Jesus, turning and seeing her, said, â€œDaughter, take courage; your faith has made you well.” And at once the woman was made well.

23 When Jesus came into the official’s house and saw the flute players and the crowd in noisy disorder, 24 He said, â€œLeave; for the girl has not died, but is asleep.” And they began laughing at Him. 25 But when the crowd had been sent out, He entered and took her by the hand, and the girl got up. 26 And this news spread throughout that land.

27 As Jesus went on from there, two men who were blind followed Him, crying out, “Have mercy on us, Son of David!” 28 And after He entered the house, the men who were blind came up to Him, and Jesus *said to them, â€œDo you believe that I am able to do this?” They *said to Him, “Yes, Lord.” 29 Then He touched their eyes, saying, â€œIt shall be done for you according to your faith.” 30 And their eyes were opened. And Jesus sternly warned them, saying, â€œSee that no one knows about this!” 31 But they went out and spread the news about Him throughout that land.

32 And as they were going out, behold, a demon-possessed man who was unable to speak was brought to Him. 33 And after the demon was cast out, the man who was previously unable to speak talked; and the crowds were amazed, and were saying, “Nothing like this has ever been seen in Israel.” 34 But the Pharisees were saying, “He casts out the demons by the ruler of the demons.”

35 Jesus was going through all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every disease and every sickness.

36 Seeing the crowds, He felt compassion for them, because they were distressed and downcast, like sheep without a shepherd. 37 Then He said to His disciples, â€œThe harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. 38 Therefore, plead with the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into His harvest.”

If someone were to ask me about the purpose of the Book of Matthew, I would tell them one of the important themes of the book is to show that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah.  Matthew 9:18-36 continues this theme as it records healings and other signs Jesus did that fulfill prophecy. So, let’s ask a few questions.  Do the apostles of Jesus, or anyone else heal, give sight to the blind or perform miracles? Are these things upon which a doctrine should be made? Perhaps we should ask if some preachers today present inferences about what Matthew and others had to say as if their inferences are scripture itself?  Let’s delve into my inference (which I do not claim are as important as scripture) along with the questions I’ve posed.

I believe Matthew’s theme is made clear by his repeated use of the phrase, “…to fulfill that which was spoken through the prophet.”  Matthew 9:18-36 records Jesus healing the sick and blind. This is in harmony with the theme of demonstrating Jesus as the Messiah because prophecy says a time will come when the blind will see and tongue of those who cannot speak will shout for joy. His acts of healing serve a purpose. They fulfill prophecy. I think scripture shows us these acts are for something beyond improving an individual’s health (not to make light of someone’s wellbeing.)  Matthew records healings to reveal the nature of Jesus.  This idea brings up a few questions. Did anyone other than Jesus and his apostles have the power to heal? Are healings, raising the dead and other miracles something we see today?

The first question is easy to answer.  Matthew tells us Jesus instructed his disciples to heal the sick. The Bible also tells us the Holy Spirit gave others the ability to do signs and wonders as well.  This is Biblical evidence that some use as they argue that such things happen today; that is, the idea that of someone other than Jesus healed then we must be able to do these things.  Many use the same line of logic as they point to Luke  where Jesus gave 70 others power to do miracles as evidence that all Christians have the power to heal. One could also point to Acts 6:8 where the Holy Spirit gave power to perform, “great wonders and signs.”  I do not contradict what is written in the scripture when I ask if these scriptures mean God is obligated to give this power to all Christians; meaning, each and every Christian and not just those to whom he is speaking to or speaking about. Some say yes and point to Mark’s account which tells us, “…these signs will accompany those who have believed…” This is perhaps the strongest evidence some people use to say any believer can do miracles.  So, that’s a summary of one side.  Let’s look at Biblical evidence that some say show this is a wrong inference. We’ll begin with three observations of these scriptures.

Jesus’ instructions to his disciples are limited to the number of disciples. I say this because Matthew 10:1-9 stipulates a specific number. Acts 6:8 stipulates a specific person performed wonders and signs. And Mark was speaking to the disciples about the people they would lead to Christ, and he also stipulated a purpose for the healings. Mark says it was so they could identify who believed? Let’s look at this in context starting with Mark 16:16.

The one who has believed and has been baptized will be saved; but the one who has not believed will be condemned. 17 These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; 18 they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not harm them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

My point here is Mark tells us the miracles are done. He stipulated by whom: those who are saved as the apostles witnessed to them.  He also stipulated for what purpose: So the apostles would know who was saved. It does not say anyone else presenting the Gospel would see these miracles. That is an inference made by those who say miracles are for all people at all time. I am not denying God can heal anyone at any time. I am not denying that God can raise people from the dead.  I am not denying that God can give any individual whom he chooses the power to do miracles.  God DOES have the power to heal and could give anyone such power to serve his purpose.  This does not contradict my observation that Jesus and the Holy Spirit in these verses gave specific people power to heal to individuals so that they could do His will.  Nowhere in these verses does it say all Christians will heal or raise the dead. This conclusion could be reached through inference, but inferences bring the possibility of error.  It is also important to point out these scriptures do not contradict those who believe anyone can heal. But both conclusions cannot be right.  It is possible they don’t contradict either claim because they do not address either side as an absolute for all Christians throughout all time. Those who say either way based on these verses are inferring something from them.  I will repeat this for emphasis: Inferences are our ideas based on scripture and we could be wrong.

I’ve been to Baptist, Pentecostal, Catholic and many other church services and have never seen someone raised from the dead and I don’t know anyone who says they personally have done all of the signs and wonders mentioned in scripture. God may give someone the power to do a miracle. But my reading of scripture, and observations of the world around in light of those scriptures, imply that miracles are not for everyone throughout all time but for specific people, with a specific purpose that is part of God’s plan. Here’s another observation. I’ve been to many funerals and every time the individual who arrived in a casket also left in a casket.  Before we get off of this thought, I have some important questions. If every Christian could pray and raise the dead, would this result in people turning to God out of their own understanding? Does the scripture not tell us that saving faith is a gift given from the Holy Spirit so that no one can boast? Wouldn’t turning to God out of our own understanding be something other than a Gift of the Holy Spirit? How would raising thousands of people from the dead serve to do anything but have people turn to God by their own understanding at best, or worse, scare people into submission? Wouldn’t God be doing exactly what the anti-theists often falsely claim when they say the only reason Christians turn to God is because they are scared?   

I know some have created doctrines on this matter, and I am not attempting to do that here. I suggest this disagreement among Christians is the result of a bigger problem.  People tend to infer things from the Bible, then hold their inferences equal to scripture. There’s nothing wrong with inferring things from scripture as long as they are not presented as scripture.  The problem is when someone teaches an inference dogmatically.  I save such dogmatic judgements for things about which the Bible gives a clear direct command.  

Did Jesus raise a child from the dead or heal a very sick little girl?

I’ve not heard any preacher deny that Jesus performed miracles. But I have heard some make dogmatic statements as they disagree about which miracle Jesus performed in the verses above.   Matthew tells us of Jesus’ encounter with a little girl. Some say Jesus healed a sick child while others say he raised a child from the dead.  Why is there disagreement about what actually happened? I suggest it’s another case of inference taught dogmatically. Let’s delve into this a bit and keep these questions in mind:  Do these verses in Matthew fulfil scripture no matter which understanding is correct? Do these scriptures give a definite answer either way; and if so, what is the purpose of the miracle?

Those who say Jesus healed a sick child often point to verses in Matthew that say when Jesus arrived at the man’s house Jesus told the people who were there, she has not died, but was only sleeping. Jesus didn’t say she isn’t dead, he said she has not died.  Luke describes the girl as “dying.” But Luke does not say she was dead.  Mark tells us the girl’s father told Jesus, “My little daughter is at the point of death.” Beyond this, consider, touching a dead person’s body would have made Jesus ceremonially unclean for seven days according to the law, so wouldn’t this mean she had either risen from the dead by the time Jesus touched her or was not actually dead in the first place? These questions are built on the premise that Jesus healed a sick child. Now for the other side.

Those who say Jesus raised the little girl from the dead correctly note that Matthew records the man telling Jesus his daughter was dead.  They are correct in saying this is the man’s account. They often point to Mark who tells us when they arrived at the house someone told the girl’s father, “Your daughter has died; do not trouble the Teacher anymore,” This is the account of a person who met them as they arrived. I apologize at this point for giving more evidence on one side. I have not intentionally left out any evidence of which I am aware from either side of this argument and am open to anyone who wishes to add something for consideration. My writing is lopsided here because I’ve found more evidence for one side.

Jesus very clearly raises the dead in other scriptures, so whether or not he does so here, prophecy is still fulfilled. (1) I’m not trying to convince you either way.  A Biblical argument could be made either way. My point is that whether or not she was raised from the dead is NOT something upon which I would make a doctrine.  The encounter with the little girl is evidence that Jesus is the Messiah no matter which understanding is correct. 

On the way to the little girl’s house Jesus healed a woman who had just touched his garment. He also gave sight to two blind men and cast out a demon.  All of the healings in Matthew fulfill prophecy of the Jewish Messiah. Others healed at Jesus’ direction.  Others to whom Jesus gave the power to heal directed still more others to do so. All of this fulfills that which was spoken through the prophet. So, if someone wants to know if healings and miracles should be performed by every Christian throughout time, I think they first need to find a scripture that clearly states that they do without the need to infer something from that which is written.

What are your thoughts?

(1) The original post has been edited to add this footnote. Isaiah 26:19-20 tells us, “Your dead will live…” While we are clearly told in the New Testament that Jesus raised people from the dead, Isaiah does not specifically say Messiah would do this.  Isaiah appears to describe a future after Jesus’ second coming, but some say it speaks of the Day of Salvation; meaning, when Jesus arrived as Messiah.

The Book of Matthew

Matthew, fasting, and The Marriage Supper of the Lamb

Published on by Texas GospelLeave a comment

The Question about Fasting (From Matthew Ch. 9, NASB) 14 Then the disciples of John came to Him, asking, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?” 15 And Jesus said to them, “The attendants of the groom cannot mourn as long as the groom is with them, can they? But the days will come when the groom is taken away from them, and then they will fast. 16 But no one puts a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch pulls away from the garment, and a worse tear results. 17 Nor do people put new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the wineskins burst, and the wine pours out and the wineskins are ruined; but they put new wine into fresh wineskins, and both are preserved.” – NASB

Floyd Rogers

The accounts recorded by Matthew seem pretty straight forward on the surface. Matthew tells us of things that confirm Jesus as the Messiah. But there is a lot that can go unnoticed unless you do a slow reading of each account. I think the 9th chapter starting with verse 14 is a good example.  

Matthew 9:14 tells us that the disciples of John asked those following Jesus to explain why they do not fast. It’s important to notice that their question stipulated how the Pharisees fasted. Fasting was required by the law of Moses every year on the Day of Atonement.  But the Pharisees added more days of fasting to go beyond the law. Some say they wanted to show they were more observant than others. It could be they wanted to make it very clear they were following the law by going beyond it. A friend of mine put it this way, “They were showing off.” They didn’t just follow the law of Moses; they added a tradition based on the law.  I don’t think this is a small thing. The Pharisees did something some preachers do today: They added to the scripture. Traditions based on scripture may have good intent, but traditions are not scripture and should never be held equal to it. But why would the followers of John have asked about the extra fasting days?  Perhaps a better question would center on the reason behind the extra fasting days. Jesus asked such a question and prefaced it with a few others.

Some say Jesus’ questions were asked to give a deep answer to a somewhat shallow question. He first asked them if groom attendants mourned while the groom is with them or after the groom has left. He is eluding to something mentioned in the 22nd chapter.  Matthew speaks of a great banquet in the Kingdom of Heaven.  This is often referred to as the “marriage supper of the Lamb.” It seems Jesus used this opportunity to open their minds to the bigger picture.

Verse 15 tells us Jesus said to them, “The attendants of the groom cannot mourn as long as the groom is with them, can they? But the days will come when the groom is taken away from them, and then they will fast.”

Keeping this in the apparent context, speaking of the Pharisees extra fasting days and not fasting required under the law for atonement, Jesus uses a very Jewish way of communicating. Consider, a Passover Seder uses the eating of bitter herbs to symbolize the bitterness of slavery in Egypt. Participants are not just told of the bitterness experienced by slaves; they experience a small bitterness (from the herb) while hearing of the bitterness. The lesson is not only taught verbally but also through the senses. In Matthew the longing for food during the fast seems to be used to teach of the longing of the church for Jesus’ return. It also seems Jesus is letting them know his followers are not going to inflict this on themselves at this time because the bridegroom, Jesus, is still here. So, this is the bigger picture.  Now more directly to their question.

Jesus said in Matthew 9: 16 – 17, “But no one puts a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch pulls away from the garment, and a worse tear results. 17 Nor do people put new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the wineskins burst, and the wine pours out and the wineskins are ruined; but they put new wine into fresh wineskins, and both are preserved.” – NASB

I believe Jesus is speaking of the difference between the old traditions and what is to come. His answer may have been more obvious to the folks of his time who had experience with patches and wineskins, so let’s look at the literal meaning of Jesus’ metaphors. Cloth shrinks over time. In the first metaphor Jesus describes what happens if someone tries to patch old clothes with a new patch.  The garment on which it is sewn has already shrunk. A new patch (which has not yet shrunk) will tear the garment when the patch shrinks. Similarly, a new wineskin has the ability to expand or contract when filled or emptied of wine but an old one is rigid.  An old wineskin will break if you try to fill it with the same amount as you would a new one. The crowd Jesus spoke to had experience with patches and wineskins and understood the literal meaning of the metaphor, but did they understand what Jesus was saying?

The extra fasting added by the Pharisees assured that the works required by the existing covenant were done. While these traditions assured to others that the law was followed, consider the effect keeping these traditions would have once the law is fulfilled; something Jesus would do on the Cross. The tradition would become of no use.  Jesus’ fulfillment of the law tears apart and breaks the old traditions.

What are your thoughts?

Are Christians told to avoid spending time with non-Christians?

Published on by Texas GospelLeave a comment

Floyd Rogers

I visited a Pentecostal church back in the 80’s.  It was a very conservative congregation.  Standing outside near the front entrance was a shabbily dressed man smoking a cigarette.  He looked out of place in front of a church where folks were wearing their Sunday-best as they prepared to hear an old-fashioned hell-fire sermon. I’m ashamed to admit I hesitated to talk to the man who others ignored.  I was young, single, and what would the young ladies of the church think of me if the saw me talking to this visitor who seemed to be the kind of person the preacher warned you about? I won’t go into the details of this man’s story other than to say he was there because he had a relative who attended the church, and he was waiting to meet him after the sermon was over. I’m glad I stopped to talk to him. I think this is the kind of encounter Matthew wrote of when he wrote that Jesus spending time with tax collectors and sinners. It also shows that people today have the same kind of reactions and motivations that people had in Jesus’ day. It is something that opens the door to an important discussion of loving the sinner but rejecting the sin. Let’s look at some background and some of what Matthew had to say.

Tax collectors during Jesus’ time were not respected.  They were known to collect more than the allotted amount and keep it for themselves.  They were considered crooks.  The 9th chapter of Matthew describes how a Tax collector named Matthew was called to follow Jesus. It also records the unfavorable reaction of those who saw Jesus with Matthew as they gathered with other tax collectors. This is important: I think the big take here is the judgement people made at seeing this and what Jesus said in response. Verses 12 and 13 record Jesus saying to them, “…It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick.  Now go and learn what this means: ‘I desire compassion, rather than sacrifice,’ for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

I think these verses clearly tell us Jesus was with tax collectors and sinners to bring them the Gospel. I also think this scripture has implications. Consider, Matthew says Jesus was with them, but doesn’t say Jesus participated in their sin. It doesn’t record Jesus being in fellowship with them in the way 2 Corinthians forbids. While 1 Corinthians tells us, “Do not be deceived: “Bad company corrupts good morals,” doesn’t the context make it clear the writer speaks of “fellowship” with other church members who live in sin; that is, to accept the sin as having God’s approval? I think this speaks to corruption inside the church and is something quite different from Matthew’s point.  Matthew’s metaphor isn’t about corruption in the church. He speaks of bringing healing to the sick, a metaphor of bringing the Gospel to those who need it. To be clear here: Doesn’t Corinthians warn of condoning sin while Matthew speaks of loving sinners who need to repent? We may not know what conversations Jesus had with the tax collectors and sinners, but I think it’s important that he was there even though others would judge him for keeping such company.

In summary, Jesus’ work was not restricted to the temple.  How many people go to church, sing hymns, listen to a sermon, and study the Bible, but seldom, if ever, share the Gospel outside of Christian company? Jesus didn’t limit himself to worship inside a church. He did not avoid “those” people to protect his witness. He went out to call the unrighteous to righteousness. It doesn’t say he handed out bible tracts and walked away, or even encourage folks to go to the synagogue. Matthew said he ate with them knowing well that others who thought they were among righteous would look on in judgement.

What are your thoughts?

Why don’t Christian prayers empty hospitals?

Published on by Texas GospelLeave a comment

Floyd Rogers

Why don’t Christian prayers empty hospital wards?

The ninth chapter of Matthew begins with verses that tell of Jesus healing a paralyzed man. Matthew says people brought the man to Jesus. Other Gospels record him being lowered through roof to Jesus.  Matthew also tells of other healings.  I believe the context of Matthew tells us why we read of healings.  I also believe there are many biblical reasons why prayer doesn’t lead to empty hospital wards.

Let’s lay out the context of Matthew.  The Book of Matthew was written by a Jewish tax collector for a Jewish audience to convince them that Jesus is the King of the Jews.  Matthew writes down things that Jesus did to fulfill prophecy.  The “fulfill prophecy” part is very important. We know Matthew’s purpose because of the number of times he wrote that Jesus did something to fulfil that which was spoken by the prophet. The Old Testament prophets said that the Messiah will heal. Matthew’s premise is that Jesus did things to fulfill what was written by the prophet.  Do you know any prophecies that are not fulfilled unless a hospital ward is emptied?

One could debate if Jesus healed people solely to fulfill prophecy; that is, solely to show that he had the power to forgive sin and heal.  I’m not sold on the idea that it is an either/or situation. It seems more likely that it’s a little of both and one of the reasons we don’t see hospital wards emptied today. At this point it’s important for me to stipulate I am extrapolating from scripture. I might be wrong in my extrapolation and am open to anyone who has scriptural reasons to argue differently.  With this as my preface I suggest that we should consider that James tells us that our prayers will go unanswered if we ask for things simply because we want them. And even Jesus prayed in the garden before his execution, “Father, if You are willing, remove this cup from Me…” but stipulated, “…yet not My will, but Yours be done.” Jesus didn’t assume he needed to be delivered because otherwise he would die. He acknowledged that God’s will is more important.

Let’s reflect back on Matthew’s account of the man’s healing mentioned above.  It says, “And seeing their faith, Jesus said to the man who was paralyzed, ‘Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.’” When those around him had thoughts that Jesus had blasphemed in saying this, Matthew says Jesus healed the man, “…so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.”  The man who was healed had faith as did the people who brought him to Jesus.  His healing is part of a book that records Jesus’ actions that fulfill prophecy.  His healing was part of God’s purpose. I’m not implying that suffering fulfills God’s purpose. Suffering is the result of a world made corrupt through rejection of God.

There are things in this world I find unboreable. For me it involves watching my kids when they suffer knowing sometimes there is no way for me to help them. Jesus asked that he not have to go through the suffering on the cross, but he was executed anyway to fulfill God’s plan. Just as his suffering was the result of sin and the corruption it causes, so too is the suffering we all experience while in this temporary life on earth. I think our prayers are often more about changing us than they are about changing the world around us.

What are your thoughts?

Why do the Gospels tell us about Jesus calming the sea and waters?

Published on by Texas GospelLeave a comment

Floyd Rogers

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John tell an account of Jesus and his disciples in a boat when the wind and waves grew to a dangerous state. It must be an important account because all four Gospels record it.  Was it just to show us what Jesus could do? He demonstrated his power by calming the water.  But is there more to the story than this?

Matthew 8:23-27 New American Standard Bible

23 When He got into the boat, His disciples followed Him. 24 And behold, a violent storm developed on the sea, so that the boat was being covered by the waves; but Jesus Himself was asleep. 25 And they came to Him and woke Him, saying, “Save us, Lord; we are perishing!” 26 He *said to them, â€œWhy are you afraid, you men of little faith?” Then He got up and rebuked the winds and the sea, and it became perfectly calm. 27 The men were amazed, and said, “What kind of a man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey Him?”

Some have suggested that this scripture assures us that Jesus is always with us. But I think there’s a bit more to it than this.  Consider the apostles in the boat with Jesus were doing his work.  They were in God’s will.  But even though Jesus was in the boat with them, and they were on a mission for him, they doubted.  This is a very important distinction.  They were doing God’s work when they became afraid.

Scriptures that tell us we can do all things through God’s strength are popular, but I think they are often quoted without context, and there are a lot of scriptures that give us this context. James 4:3 tells us, “You ask and do not receive, because you ask with the wrong motives, so that you may spend what you request on your pleasures.” (NASB) God will strengthen, and give us what we need, when we are doing His will.

Our faith needs to be guided by God’s will, not ours.

What are your thoughts?