Basic HTML Version
ciated with various religious
shrines and relics, as well as the
psychic surgeons of Brazil and
the Philippines, even primitive
medicine men, treatment by hyp–
notism and the likc?
Up until fairly recently such
"healers" were not taken seri–
ously by any appreciable segment
of Western socicty. And certainly
not by most churches. Now, how–
cver, interest is evident even in
sorne of the oldest mainstream
religious denominations, which
have "healing services" in thou–
sands of their churches.
"George Gallup says about 1O
million people practice the faith.
The spread is so extensive, adds
psychiatrist J erome Frank, that
more sick people may now be
treated by healers than by physi–
cians" (San Gabriel Valley
Tri–
bune.
June 22, 1979).
What is attracting all these
people- including serious rc–
scarchers? Obviously
something
must be going on in the various
sessions, encountcrs and "reviva!''
meetings. But what?
Whatever it is. a lot ofpeople are
convinced real hcalings are taking
place. And a lot of religiously
inclined people think it must be of
God since, they belicve, only He
can work miracles.
But is that assumption true?
l f it is, what about all the non–
rcligious "healers' '? How do they
function? On the other hand, if
God is not the only one capable of
performing "miracles," who or
what else would be able to cause
the manifestations so many
declare are "healings"?
Sorne say most of the "heal–
ings" are of the devil, especially if
they are brought about by nonre–
ligious "healers." But if the sick
are really made well, is that possi–
ble? Can the devil heal?
All Mlracles from God?
First of all, what is a "miracle"?
In its broadest definition, a mira–
ele is an occurrence that cannot
be explained by natural physical
laws.
lt
includes the idea of inter–
vention by a supernatural force.
God works miracles. Many
instances of His miraculous inter–
vention are described in the
20
from a woman "healer." Though
the report did not indicate what
her personal convictions may be,
it is doubtful she would have
many c lients in an officially
atheistic country paying $375 a
treatment if she claimed God as
her source of power.
o
Clearly whatever is behind the
l
current reviva) of interest in
.. "healing," it is not happening
~
(.:)
exclusively in the religious realm.
"STIGMATA,"
mysterious marks simu·
So God certai nly can not be
late nail holes in Jesus' hands.
responsible for all of it.
Bible. But thc Bible also talks of
"spirits of demons, working mira–
eles" ( Revelation 16:14).
1t
speaks of coming public amaze–
ment at " the working of Satan
with all power and signs and lying
wonders" ( 11 Thessalonians 2:9).
The devil and his demons are
able to do certain miracles. But
did you notice how the Bible
describes Satan's wonders?
lt
calls them
"lying
wonders"! They
are meant to delude and deceive.
God's law warns against heed–
ing anyone who teaches against
the law of God and who "giveth
thee a sign or a wonder, and the
sign or the wonder
come to
pass .
.."
(Deuteronomy 13: 1-2).
Thus the Biblc plainly says it is
possible for ccrtain ones to do
deceptive signs and wonders.
At the time of the Exodus, for
example, the pharaoh's magicians
and sorcerers, whose power cer–
tainly did not come from God,
were able to duplicate sorne of the
miracles wrought through Moses
and Aaron (Exodus 7-8).
The mere performance of a
sign or a wonder of sorne kind is
not proof that the act is of God.
In fact many so-called healers
don't even claim to be acting in
God's behalf. The January, 1980,
issue of
Cosmopolitan
pointed
out that "for every healer who
alludes to God and Christianity,
there is another who prefers to
think in terms of 'life energy' or
'vital force,' and who chooses to
be called a 'spiritual ' or 'psychic'
healer." UPI recently carried a
report that in atheistic Russia,
many in Moscow's intellectual
circles, including leading Soviet
politicians, receive treatment
But is He responsible for
any
of it? What if God's name is used
by one who professes to bring
about healing? More specifically,
what if the name of Jesus is used?
Does that assure that what takes
place has God's approval and that
it is Jesus' power at work?
Definitely not!
Jesus was very specific on this
point. He said a day of reckoning
is coming and
"many
will say to
me in that day, Lord, Lord [they
will call Jesus "Lord"!], have we
not prophesied in thy name?
[they will use J esus' name in
their sermons!] and in thy name
cast out devils? [they will
claim
to do this in J esus' name!] and in
thy name done many wonderful
works [including supposed heal–
ings]?" (Matthew 7:22).
And how will J esus answer
them? "And then I will profess
unto them,
1 never knew you:
depart from me, ye that work in–
iquity" (verse 23)!
Yes, J esus declared that many
wotrld come in his name, claiming
to do wonderful things. And yet
would not be servants of God
because they would be workers of
"iniquity." The word
iniquity
means "lawlessness." Here J esus
revealed the key as to how we can
discern who are God's servants
and who are not:
lf
one who
claims to be healing the sick does
not also preach and teach obe–
dience to God's laws as found in
the Bible, Jesus said God does not
know him. "Wherefore by their
fruits ye shall know them," Jesus
stated. "Not everyone that saith
unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter
into the kingdom of heaven; but
[and here is the decisive factor]
he that
doeth
the will [and that
The PLAIN TAUTH