Limited Healing?

In the Western world, we first go to the doctor when we are ill and our security depends on our health insurance. But in the third world, they are forced to believe in God for miracles because there are no medical doctors. They have revivals in Nigeria and Argentina, for instance, where people instantly get healed of whatever ails them (teeth replaced, limbs restored, weight loss, eyes healed, leprosy cleansed, etc.). I have heard of instances where the dead are raised (in the name of Jesus, of course).

There is a tendency to be skeptical and incredulous, as it doesn't seem plausible to some. This is not wrong per se, but God rewards faith. Jesus said, "Nothing shall be impossible unto you." Also, he said, "Be it done unto you according to your faith." And, "If you ask anything believing..." He also said that we shall do greater things. You can't limit God or put Him in a box.

"By His stripes we are healed," said Isaiah and Peter. "Surely He took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows." (Is. 53:4) I've heard it said that the reason we don't see more miracles in the Western world is that we have HMOs. Asa was guilty of seeking the help of physicians instead of seeking the Lord for healing. God is no man's debtor and doesn't have to heal us, he may choose to leave us with a cross to bear like Paul's thorn in the flesh. Ps. 103 says that He heals all our diseases. There is no disease that God cannot heal.

However, Paul and Peter couldn't heal everyone. Look at Joni Eareckson Tada, the quadriplegic who isn't healed, yet God has used her to His glory. These cases are for God' will and glory. One reason we don't get healed is that we are concealing some sin. James 5:16 says, "Confess your sins one to one another and pray for one another that you may be healed..." There is also a place for the anointing of oil (James 5:14).

To say that God is only interested in our spirit is nonsense. 3 John 2 says, "Beloved, I pray that all may go well with you and that you may be in good health, as it goes well with your soul."  Soli Deo Gloria!

Seeking The Baptism?

NB:  Nowhere in Scripture are we admonished to "seek the baptism!"  What we ought to do is to "seek the Lord while He may be found."

Are we to seek to be baptized in the Holy Spirit? I'm sure you have come across some preacher who has challenged you about this on TV or radio but has you ever wondered if it is doctrinally accurate?

First of all, Jesus is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit. Secondly, baptism with the Holy Spirit and baptism in the Holy Spirit is also the same thing. Thirdly, the Holy Spirit does not baptize, as is commonly claimed from a mistranslation of 1 Cor. 12:13 which says, "by one Spirit you were all baptized." Actually, the Greek says, "in one Spirit...we were all baptized." The reason the translators put in "by" instead of "in" or "with" is because there would be two "ins" in one sentence, making for confusion.

Some Pentecostals believe that there is more than one baptism and especially that it is subsequent to regeneration. Eph. 4:5 says, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism." This is not referring to water baptism, as some would maintain, but to the baptism by Jesus at salvation. 2 Pet. 1:3 says that God has given us all things that pertain to life and godliness: There is nothing more to seek (except a spiritual gift, which is commanded). There is no second blessing! The point of contention here is that there are many fillings, enduements, unctions, and anointings; however, there is only one baptism. Actually, the blessing is not only manifested in tongues, but in prophecy or any spiritual gift.

The false teaching is that the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" is always testified by unknown tongues or glossolalia. They get this from experience or from taking doctrine from narratives in Acts like Cornelius or the Ephesians instead of from didactic portions that contradict their teaching. This early period was a transition period for the church and the "usual" conversion experience wasn't known yet. The principle of hermeneutics is to interpret the narrative in light of the didactic, not vice versa. We don't make our doctrines based on our experiences either, no matter how convincing--this leads to mysticism and heresy. The only sure knowledge we have is Holy Writ.

There is no 2nd-class Christian (there are some who don't know their gift, though). The Pentecostal view puts us in we/them mentality and separates believers and makes them judgmental and jealous rather than one in the Spirit. We are never to make our doctrine based upon our experiences but test our experiences by sound doctrine. Birds of a feather flock together, right? Well, that is what happens in charismatic circles where ignorance of sound doctrine often prevails and experience is key. I'm sure something happened to them if they claim a second blessing, but it is highly probable that they were having a revival or even getting saved in the first place. It has been said that revival is a baptism on a large scale; I say they are fillings or salvation on a large scale. Let us not dichotomize Christians where the Bible doesn't: baptized and non-baptized Christians. No Christian has a right to feel superior.

Finally, Pentecostals will tell you that tongues are for everyone, and will the Father give you a stone if you ask for bread? However, the Bible tells us that in 1 Cor. 12:11 that the Holy Spirit gives gifts as He wills (that is proof that the baptism in the Holy Spirit cannot be when you speak in tongues, because the Holy Spirit gives tongues and Jesus baptizes!) We are to seek the greater gifts, such as prophecy--not tongues. There is no biblical, exegetical proof that in Jude where it says praying in the Spirit means we are to pray in tongues or have a private prayer language--this is hogwash. We pray in groans too deep for words sometimes and if you want to say that is a prayer language, which only God understands, that is fine.   Soli Deo Gloria!