Church As Family

The word says that God sets the lonely in families. Families are a mark of his compassion and grace. Of all his inventions for the benefit of humanity, in my my mind, none beats the family. In America, however, we suffer a debilitating disease, which infects the broader West as well-- family has lost it's cachet and is not valued as highly as it once was. We have actually become anti-family in many ways, and our disease is wasting our society.

That situation is not limited to our families of birth but applies to our families of rebirth as well.

There seems to me to be a panic among religious prognosticators in the West concerning the future of Church. They read the tea leaves and blare their trumpets, "if something isn't done soon, we'll lose the next generation!" So, much discussion has ensued about the proper paradigm for the church in our day. What can be done to make the church relevant, resilient, and resurgent in the generations coming of age?

If God never said anything about the subject, our brainstorming might be appropriate, but he has spoken in his Word and we should at least have a clue. No model is offered there for church other than that of family. In any age, in any culture, church is meant to be seen as the family of God. Believers are brothers and sisters in the Lord, we all share one heavenly Father, and are instructed to love each other in a familial manner. If church is an institution, the institution it is has to be is the family.

The paradigm that works to produce the body God desires is the Church As Family. Fan clubs for religious superstars, social service agencies aiming to treat societal ills, social clubs giving members a place to belong, playgrounds, spas, mass entertainment venues, or religious businesses opening branches everywhere possible in an effort to dominate the market are not models taught by Jesus or described by the Word. Even if one found organizational success in adopting these unscriptural modalities, that would not equate to divine endorsement.

To be honest, I don't know why we even think in terms of trying to satisfy some element of population that isn't satisfied with a biblical paradigm. If those not satisfied don't drop their self-indulgent notions and submit to Christ as Lord and the Word as the rule of faith and conduct, do they even belong in the church? Church is the family of God, anyone not an actual brother or sister is merely a visitor. Some accommodation may be made for a visitor, but who turns their ongoing family-life upside down because a visitor drops in?

Some might say, "do it for evangelism," however, most evangelism doesn't occur within the confines of church services. Besides, evangelism is not presenting something other than Christ crucified and risen, nor calling for something less than repentance and faith concerning him. Believing in Christ and yielding to his Lordship is how we become part of the family. The unrepentant, the unyielding, those not surrendered, and the self-serving are not saved whether they're in church or out, accommodating them can only mean not accommodating Christ.  

Christianity isn't a popularity contest and following Christ isn't going to win anyone friends amongst those that don't follow Christ. The truth is what sets people free, and seeing brothers and sisters love one another is what makes the world know we're actually followers of Christ. If we actually want to build on the foundation Paul laid, then church has to be family. Anything else is wood, hay and stubble good for nothing but smoke and flame.

The Church As Family

My mother is going through some health difficulties at the moment. It looked like cancer for a while, but that has now been eliminated as a cause. That leaves us with a bit of a mystery as far as diagnosis goes, but I'm trusting that God heard the prayers lifted up for her and cursed that thing. During this difficulty, I have become acutely aware of what a blessing family is. My three sisters, my brothers-in-law, nephews and nieces and my wife have all rallied as we've circled the wagons and prepared for a fight. How would we manage without each other at a time like this?

As a pastor, my philosophy of ministry has always seen the church not as an organization, not as an institution, but as family. We are brothers and sisters, we have one Father, and one dynamite big brother. We are not co-consumers or clientele of a religious supermarket, we're not lemmings following a spiritual guru, we're not activists pursuing a cause, nor even a social club of Jesus aficionados. Those viewpoints of the church are held by some either overtly or tacitly, and always end up reflected, practically, in the way they "do church." The problem with those ideas is not that they are necessarily intrinsically evil, but that they are not scriptural and therefore cannot produce church life that is reflective of the scripture.

There are problems with my viewpoint, especially in regard to marketing and corporate nimbleness. If one has a desire to do this church thing "big time" my viewpoint is a disaster; nonetheless, I'll stick with it. Christ has not called me to "win the world," or to "take my city," or to "launch a movement." I don't see one single scriptural reason to believe he would call anyone to such grandiose visions-- human ego will have to get the credit for that! He has adopted me into his family, to love my brothers and sisters and to be loved by them, like we were blood. And by word and deed, to persuade others to join this family of love.

Giving breath to that reality is what church life is about. If that idea doesn't appeal to you, the next time your life is in desperate turmoil, call a church shopper, who probably won't know you from Adam, and see how likely she is to lay down her life for a fellow shopper. Would you go to bat for another Wal-mart shopper just because she's a Wal-mart patron too? Probably not, who would? But to lay down your life for an eternal sister that Christ, whom you love, laid down his life for, that I'm betting you probably would be willing to do, because family beats business or institution any day.

Believers In Divine Healing Can Go to a Doctor

With this we finish the series on the subject of divine healing.

Show Yourself to a Priest
In modern western society, the professional tasked with certifying the health of individuals who have been sick is the doctor. In ancient Hebrew society that was not the case, the priests performed that function. According to Moses, a person who was ill (with certain symptoms anyhow) needed to have a priest pronounce them clean before they could rejoin the commerce of normal life. That is why Jesus told some of the folks he healed to show themselves to a priest. It was the way to verify that healing had taken place in that society according to the Mosaic law.

I understand, anecdotally, that Kathryn Kuhlman followed that pattern in her ministry. If someone was on medication or in treatment, she told them to show themselves to the doctor and let him or her see the healing for his or herself. I applaud that approach. Afterall, we are not promoting pretend healings (ones that are present in words but not in body) any more than we foist pretend deliverances (ones where spirits are roped and bound but the folk haven't changed).

To those who are fellow charismatics, let's be honest: a healing either has occurred or it hasn't. Some may be delayed in appearing, but we were never tasked with making excuses for the inactivity of God by using wispy exercises in semantics if they haven't. If a healing hasn't occurred, we say it hasn't happened, YET!  Having folks confess healings that haven't actually occurred is just plain lying and more worthy of rebuke than anything Jesus' disciples did.

Healing has also been turned into a carnival and a sleight-of-hand show by some. Whereas Jesus and the Apostles drew crowds when healing, they never resorted to revving them up nor manipulating them emotionally in order to "build faith". My point is this: nothing akin to what is often practiced today in the name of healing and deliverance was even remotely testified to in the Bible, and if not there then why here? Where are the demonstrable results, anyhow, for such antics when the dust settles after they're done? 

When a healing occurs in someone who has had a prior diagnosis, we should want it verified so that all the glory can go to God. Jesus did. A physician may not be able to admit that God was the cause, but at least he or she can verify that what was, no longer is. The faithless will posit everything other than God as the reason, but at least they won’t be able to justifiably deny that something actually did occur.

Use Your Head, and That of Others
God has been known to provide food miraculously, without toil and sweat, sowing and reaping. Just because he has chosen to do that at times, doesn't mean he chooses to do that at all times. So a sensible believer sows and reaps, eats a balanced diet, and prays that God will bless the efforts. Generally, he does and we eat with thanksgiving.

God has been known to miraculously zap folk from one place to another or to allow them to pass through or over things they could not otherwise get by. Just because he has chosen to do that at times, doesn't mean he chooses to do that at all times. So a sensible believer flies or drives, walks into the depths only with scuba gear, and prays that God will grant traveling mercies. Generally, he does, and we thank God for reaching our destinations.

Should we be too good to use the fruit of sensible efforts, and demand nothing but the miraculous? Good diets, good habits, joy in God and peace with people go a long way toward providing our bodies with what they need to function well. Even though we have the earnest of the invigorating Spirit of God sustaining our dying flesh; a fatty diet, a taste for tobacco, or disdain toward a brother or sister will likely produce less than optimum health. So we do what makes sense and trust God to bless us.

Generally, we see the clear sensibility of using our understanding of how things work to aid our journey through life, and we do so with thanks to God. To that end, what's the difference between spraying bodies of water with a pesticide oil to rid the environment of a pesky infestation of gnats, and taking an antibiotic to deal with a bodily infection? Bugs in the wilderness versus bugs in us. Does faith in God’s provision of healing preclude using the knowledge of the physician? Before we exclude using the sensible, shouldn't we ask ourselves whether doing so is truly faith in God or just hubris in us?

The Bottom Line
The last thing believers want to do is displace their faith in God with faith in men and women in lab coats. It is an unspeakable joy to know that God is willing to exert his awesome power to address our mundane needs. He has purposely made effective blessing in the here and now (healing in this case) part of the atonement of Christ. Can we let the wonder of that sink in for a moment!

Does that mean that the blessings won by Christ can only come to us by way of the miraculous? I don't see that kind of sentiment anywhere taught in scripture. Trusting God is what we're asked to do by God. So, in the words of an old Keith Green song, which I think we can apply to the subject of divine healing well enough, "keep doing your best, and pray that it's blessed, and Jesus takes care of the rest."

Even the Lame Can Limp Into Glory

Continuing with the subject of Divine Healing, with a review of some pertinent scripture verses: Isaiah 53:3-5; 1 Corinthians 13:9-10; Romans 8:10-11; Ephesians 1:13-14; John 9:1-3; Luke 10:1-12; Mark 16:15-18; 1 Corinthians 12; Matthew 9:28-30; Mark 9:23-24; Mark 6:1-6; 1 Corinthians 11:27-32; James 5:14-20; Revelation 22:1-3

We can certainly be grateful for the manifold blessings that God grants us in this life. Even a partial list is impressive: sins forgiven, reconciliation with God, regeneration, participation in the work of God, answers to prayer, provision, healing. The list is partial, but so is the receipt of these blessings while we're in these mortal coils born of Adam's race. In this life, we're only capable of receiving the earnest (i.e. down payment) of our inheritance in Christ. Nothing comes to us perfectly or completely, because what is mortal must be put off before what is immortal, or perfect, can be put on.

This proves true for the Spirit of God, for our knowledge of God, for our faith in God, and for those bodily blessings made possible by Christ's death and resurrection. While in these dying frames, we live in the realm of the partial awaiting the day of the complete. Divine health is no exception to this rule! It has always been thus for the redeemed of God on fallen earth, and it will be so until the day we are raised to meet Christ in the air.

Look at those who have gone before: Paul had physical problems; Timothy had physical problems; Jacob had physical problems; David had physical problems. All of them had the same gracious Father we have, who granted them the same kinds of promises and benefits we depend upon. How can we avoid the same experience of bodily health they faced? If faith is the key, as I've claimed it is, which of us would seriously put our faith up against any of theirs?

We cannot avoid the thing (death itself) that more than anything else proves that this is not place of ultimate fulfillment. If death is unavoidable, then so is what comes as a result of it. Should we not walk in humility as we humbly accept what God will do for us while we are here? God can do virtually anything, that's certainly true, but how often, really, does he replace a detached limb, or separate a set of conjoined twins, or fuse a severed spine?

I have no doubt that there is an account of each of these kinds of conditions being miraculously healed somewhere at some time. Why not, is anything impossible with God? I see no reason not to believe that, should the Holy Spirit inspire the gift, any one of us could participate in such wonders being done today. That, however, is a far cry from saying we are guaranteed such results here and now, in this age where everything and everyone still dies.

Personally, I look in faith for the blessing of Moses and Caleb to be mine. Yet, in that pursuit I also know that a refusal to accept reality is not the same as faith, that bearing false testimony is not the same as confession, and that nothing in life is a reason to give up on God. So please, dear readers, don't settle for less than God's grace and faith provides, but understand this: even blind with only one arm to raise in praise, we can still limp into glory.

Addendum: A great post on this subject by a Southern Baptist missionary.

The Issue of Sin in Healing

Continuing with the subject of Divine Healing, with a review of some pertinent scripture verses: Isaiah 53:3-5; 1 Corinthians 13:9-10; Romans 8:10-11; Ephesians 1:13-14; John 9:1-3; Luke 10:1-12; Mark 16:15-18; 1 Corinthians 12; Matthew 9:28-30; Mark 9:23-24; Mark 6:1-6; 1 Corinthians 11:27-32; James 5:14-20; Revelation 22:1-3

Experience tells me that what I am about to share with you will cause some of you some anguish. However, since my commitment in writing this is to be boldly scriptural, I'm going to tell you what I think is scripturally true come what may. So give this a read, and if it upsets you, leave a comment. We'll talk.

In dealing with the subject of sickness from a scriptural perspective, there is no avoiding the fact that Jesus, Paul and James all connect at least some sickness or disability to sin within the inspired scriptures. Jesus and Paul do so fairly directly, James merely implies it, but all connect the two, at least in some cases, beyond a shadow of a doubt. None offer the universal correlation: "if one sins, one consequently becomes ill," but cause and effect does exist in some cases.

Jesus implies that paralysis was associated with sin in the past and that replaying such would have an even worse result. James nebulously mentions that if a sick person has sinned he will be forgiven in the process of healing (so a causal link is implied). Paul leaves no doubt by specifically stating that the sin of eating and drinking from the Lord's table in an unworthy manner leads to sickness and even death.

The concept is nothing new. We looked into God's ancient pattern of governance earlier in the series to establish that God wants his people well. If we look there again, we'll see that the sin and sickness connection is long established under the rule of God. God doesn't blame the Devil, doesn't take the side of the believer against the sickness that may come his or her way-- he flat out admits that he, himself, will strike those who are disobedient with illness. 

Furthermore, Isaiah said that sin puts us at odds with God, even out of earshot. Does that not go some way toward explaining why sickness can follow sin in a believer's life? If we need to ask for healing, which is what I have asserted, and since sin interferes with our ability to be heard by God; sin could certainly affect our ability to receive all that God has made available to us. Whether Old Testament or New, obstinacy in sin is said to have the ability to keep us in affliction.

For those of you who would have trouble envisioning God making us ill, let me point out that he would not have to act directly against us for sickness to follow sin. He would merely have to leave us to our natural lot in this broken world and sickness would follow. Can God bless or withhold blessing as he sees fit? Would he even be God if he couldn't? It is a fearful thing...

This concept may put a chill down your spine, but don't let it get you down. Even though death is part of the possibilities that Paul brings up, James makes it clear that if sin is associated with the sickness someone is experiencing, it will be forgiven him when he calls for the elders and the church prays for him. So, mistreating your brothers and sisters may bring illness your way, but calling on those brothers and sisters to pray for you can bring forgiveness and healing.

The Thorny Issue in Healing

Continuing with the subject of Divine Healing, with a review of some pertinent scripture verses: Isaiah 53:3-5; 1 Corinthians 13:9-10; Romans 8:10-11; Ephesians 1:13-14; John 9:1-3; Luke 10:1-12; Mark 16:15-18; I Corinthians 12; Matthew 9:28-30; Mark 9:23-24; Mark 6:1-6; 1 Corinthians 11:27-32; James 5:14-20; Revelation 22:1-3

Let's review the basics I've presented up to this point:

1. Humans experience sickness because they are born in bodies that were stricken with the curse of death due to Adam's sin;
2. Only by getting new bodies not stricken by that curse will Christians not be susceptible to illness;
3. The Devil attempts to take advantage of that susceptibility to bring us to greater depths of misery than we otherwise would experience, but he is not the ultimate author of sickness and disease;
4. In expunging the curse upon sinners through his own unmerited death, Christ undermined the foundation of illness;
5. Therefore, when Christians do experience illness, they can call upon God for healing in very much the same way they would call upon him for forgiveness if they had sinned.

This all sounds so simple and straightforward, but if I'm honest I'd have to admit that things don' t work that crisply and cleanly in the real world. God, apparently, juggles more variables in governing our lives than we can ever be aware of. Just when we think we have it figured out, and have identified all the relevant factors, the unexplainable (or maybe just the entirely too complex) comes upon us and we face that same awe striking reality Job did. Our understanding distills in those moments like Job's did in his--God is God and that has to be enough for us.

Some issues Christians face are just thorny. Like Job, the Apostle Paul had his moment of clarity (or resignation?) concerning such perplexities. Even though we anticipate God watching over our lives to bring blessing, there are times we are pummeled with everything but blessing. What can we learn from Paul's or Job's experience? Even though Paul did what any person of faith should do when faced with a physical attack (i.e. pain, disability, or sickness), whether directly attributable to the Devil or not, he got none of the relief the atonement of Christ would have been expected to deliver.

Let me sketch out the particulars of his circumstance in the hopes that we'll see this the same way: 1) Paul was afflicted by a singular source of irritation that "beat" his flesh (which I find hard not to see in physical terms as pain); 2) the Devil was the agent which visited this suffering upon Paul; 3) Paul prayed diligently in faith for "healing" (as I've posited should be our approach); 4) God had a spiritual agenda operating for Paul's benefit which acted synchronously, almost symbiotically, with the Devil's evil one; and 5) in the end, Paul celebrated his "beaten but unhealed", condition because in not succeeding in destroying him, it demonstrated God's miraculous power (perhaps as much as healing would have).

When physical suffering is clearly from the Devil, as in Paul's case, the certainty that it is not ours to bear is that much more definite. We are the blood-bought, blood-washed children of God. The Devil has no business nor any right in afflicting us. Operating from that perspective, Paul asked once for it to be gone, nothing. Twice, nothing still. Thrice the charm? Not in this case.

Paul's faith in God's deliverance through Christ was sure, hence his importunity. Certainly, he understood the implications of Christ's atonement as well as anyone ever did. If ever there was a candidate for the healing ministrations of Christ, Paul was that one. And yet God did not heal Paul, he gave him a word instead. It was a promise of victory even though it wasn't a promise of healing.

Huh? God promised that even though the affliction remained, it would not get the best of him. Despite that thorn, Paul would go on and God's grace would be sufficient to carry him through whatever the Devil threw at him. I'm led to conclude that overcoming can look different from God's perspective than from ours.

I know dear brothers and sisters in the Lord who are full of faith and lead outstanding Spirit-filled lives of love and faithfulness, yet they are chronically sick and feeble or are lame. Diabetes, in particular, is a stubborn culprit for many dear brothers and sisters in God's kingdom. Did a lack of faith either create their conditions or does it keep them in them? No, I don't think so, but I do think we, like Paul, need to express the importunity of faith before we resign ourselves to those conditions.

Healing has already been won for us by Christ. It was provided in his atonement. There will be no sickness in his coming kingdom. Then why should any of us accept a thorn, that by rights is not ours to bear? Without a word like Paul received from the Lord I don't see how any of us could.

What Should A Sick Christian Do?

We continue with the subject of Divine Healing, with a review of some pertinent scripture verses: Isaiah 53:3-5; 1 Corinthians 13:9-10; Romans 8:10-11; Ephesians 1:13-14; John 9:1-3; Luke 10:1-12; Mark 16:15-18; I Corinthians 12; Matthew 9:28-30; Mark 9:23-24; Mark 6:1-6; 1 Corinthians 11:27-32; James 5:14-20; Revelation 22:1-3

Christians can and do get sick, they get injured, they lose body parts or the function of them. Some are born with genetic or developmental defects or had disease passed on to them in utero. In light of what Christ has done for us, why? We have already touched on the general principle: the dying bodies we were born with are susceptible to such things. So what should a Christian do about sickness?"

My response is that they should call upon God. Call upon God, I must be joking, right? No, that is the biblical answer! There are so many things God does for us without us consciously asking (we all breathe air at his discretion, without asking), but there are others that take the word of our mouth expressing the faith of our hearts to get. Our natural bodies do combat sickness and recover from or adapt to its effects, Christian or not. So it certainly is possible to be healed without asking (i.e. coming to him to receive), but when sickness crosses a certain threshold, I would say that is the exception rather than the rule.

I think the example of Jesus is illuminating here: everyone who came to him, or was brought to him to seek healing from him was healed by him. Have you ever wondered what happened to the sick that heard about Jesus, but didn't bother to come themselves or had no one bring them? What happened to those that did not have faith that compelled them to come and receive? I know it's a supposition, but I'd say they stayed sick, even died that way.

The Bible says flatly, if you're sick it's time to pray, and specifically, to get the church to use it's power of agreement in prayer for you. So whether you look at the pattern of folk getting healed in the gospels, or you hear the teaching of James on the subject, the bottom line is the same: when those in the community of faith get sick, they must ask God for healing! Healing is provided in the atonement, but like the atonement itself, it is not applied to humans generally apart from a receiving faith communicated to God.

Of course, some reading this will say, "I asked, but nothing happened. Doesn't that undermine everything said up to this point?" This is going to be painful for some of you to hear, so brace yourself, but please read on. It is possible to ask things of God amiss or to do so without any real faith. The only time Jesus' power to heal was ever stifled was in Nazareth when he faced unbelief.

As far as we know, the only time the Apostles, in doing Jesus' bidding in the gospels, were stifled was when there was a lack of faith. I hate the expression, "faith healing," but there is a measure of truth in it. When we come and ask Jesus for anything, it will be unto us according to our faith. A double-minded man will receive nothing from the Lord, even though Jesus died to provide it.

When we come to God for healing, we must come boldly, believing he hears us, and realizing that those stripes laid upon the back of Jesus were laid there for our healing. It is God's determined will to act on our behalf and heal us: "by his stripes we are healed!" So when we call upon the elders to pray over us, we cannot merely hope that it will work, we must know in our heart that it will.

But honestly, how can anyone know that? Well, all true Christians know that forgiveness of sins was an outcome of Jesus' atonement. They have no trouble knowing what to do when conviction of sin and a guilty conscience strike them. They go to God, confess their sin, and appropriate the forgiveness won at the cross. Most Christians have little difficulty believing that God forgives them when they ask him to do so.

After all, they have the pattern of the Lord's prayer, they have the historical fact of the passion, and they have the specific teaching of an Apostle. When they ask God to forgive them, they do so with confidence and the burden lifts. Why should they approach healing any differently? We have the pattern of God's management of his flock, we have the historical fact of the passion (specifically, those stripes), and we have the clear teaching of an apostle.

So when we ask God to heal us, we should do so with the same confidence we have that he will forgive us. They are part and parcel of the same thing. But wait a minute, there are believing folk that remain in illness or disability, what about them? We'll tackle that in the next post on the subject.