The Healing Promise, A Charismatic Response

Healing in the Bible

Early on in his book, Mayhue reveals his understanding of the nature of biblical healings. These then form the basis of his rejection of modern-day charismatic healings. He is openly acting upon the presupposition that any modern-day healings would mirror the healings of the New Testament by sharing the same characteristics. If he can then demonstrate that there is a disparity between miraculous healing today and the healing seen in scripture, the conclusion would appear to be that healing today—if it occurs at all—is not a genuine work of God:

When God miraculously healed through the prophets, Christ or the apostles, these qualities, among others, characterised the healing:

1)   It was immediate

2)   It was public

3)   I took place on ordinary, unplanned occasions

4)   It included illnesses that were untreatable by the medical community

5)   It was complete and irreversible

6)   It was undeniable, even to detractors.⁵

The characteristics listed reveal a common understanding of biblical healings, particularly amongst cessationists. However, as we proceed, we will see that Mayhue has built his understanding of biblical—and contemporary—healing upon a foundation that is not only weak but non-existent.

The biblical section of the book begins with a “summary of Old Testament healing experiences.”⁶ Mayhue states that “only 20 specific healing incidents appear in the Old Testament record.”⁷ While this may be true, strictly speaking, it portrays a false impression of the biblical data. The Old Testament healing experience is not solely contained in records of specific “incidents.” To grasp the fuller picture we would need to include passages like the following:

See now that I, I am he, and there is no god besides me; it is I who put to death and give life. I have wounded, and it is I who heal; and there is no one who can deliver from My hand. (Deut 32:39)

The One forming light and creating darkness, causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these (Isaiah 45:7)

You performed miraculous signs and wonders in Egypt and have continued them to this day, both in Israel and among all mankind, and have gained the renown that is still yours. (Jer. 32:20)

In the light of such passages, I find it difficult to comprehend how Mayhue can claim that divine healings in the Old Testament “were few and far between.” On the contrary, it seems to me that the Old Testament suggests it is characteristic of God to heal.

Mayhue makes a valid point in stating that the “means of healing varied widely and numbered almost as many as the actual healings themselves.”⁸ Yet, in his quest to find a biblical “model” he is unwilling to let the data speak for itself. He sums up the Old Testament evidence by stating “If we set aside the highly unusual, one-of-a-kind circumstances out of the 20 incidents of Old Testament healing, we are left with eight healings.”⁹ Mayhue’s summary and conclusion—which is used to “define the Old Testament pattern by which we can compare today’s healings”¹⁰—is then based upon the eight healings that remain.

This is a strange methodology, to say the least. How can we claim to be assessing the biblical data when we write off 60% because it is “highly unusual”? If 60% is unusual, then it is precisely such “one-of-a-kind circumstances” which define the Old Testament pattern. In short, there is no pattern! Or, rather, the pattern is that God will heal how he sovereignly chooses to heal. He will not be confined to our models, systems or patterns.

Jesus and healing

We noted above six mistaken cessationist assumptions regarding healings in the Bible. Number 1 was that healing was immediate. Mayhue repeats this claim when examining the healing ministry of Jesus.¹¹ Yet, to come to such a conclusion is to ignore Mark 8:22-25; Luke 17:11-19 and John 9:1-7. Mayhue implies that these verses are merely the exceptions that prove the rule. He argues that the “delays in healing involved minutes only, and the men involved were totally healed.”¹²

There is no evidence to confirm or deny that the delay in healing lasted only minutes—and I am not sure how significant it would be if there were. How much of a delay does there have to be before we conclude that the healing was not immediate? Yet, it seems to me that the account of the lepers healed may have taken place over a number of hours. I am also tempted to ask what would have happened if the man born blind had walk away from Jesus at the point when he still saw men walking around like trees. The point is, there was nothing about Jesus’ healings that necessitated their being effective immediately.¹³

Tags: charismatic, featured, healing, promise, response

Category: Spirit, Winter 2005