Faith Healing vs Medical Science

D

Dark Virtue

New Member
This is an offshoot of another thread.

If a Christian is injured or ill, why do they go to the hospital?

Why not pray for healing or have a member of their church lay hands on them and heal them?

Christ said that followers and believers would be able to heal the sick in Mark 16 and several verses say that prayers will be answered.

So why not put that illness/injury in God's hands instead of relying on secular medicine?
 
God also said that He would provide food for those who believe upon Him.

Yet He does not say that the person in question should not go out and work the farm for that food.


I have known a lady for 7 years now, that the doctor's said would only live 8 months due to the cancer she had.  That was when she was 24.  She's in her late forties now.



Yes, God can heal us.  Yes it is good for the believers to pray for the sick.  But God also expects us to do our part.  If we (as in humanity) have the ability to cure diseases, repair injured organs and set broken bones, then we should partake of that ability.  

To not do so, is like the farmer, who expects God to provide him grain, when he refuses to plant his seeds.
 
Hmm, that danced around the question a bit.

Would God rather a believer heal themselves through Faith (prayer or hands on healing) or through Secular Science (medicine and hospitals)?

Why is there even a NEED for a Christian to utilize a hospital. Shouldn't God take care of all that stuff? If not, why doesn't He?
 
Not really. My statement is that God expects us to help ourselves as much as possible and trust in Him for the rest.


By ignoring medical technology, it's just saying that we are to lazy to try to do a little leg work in fixing our problems ourself.
 
So that's all it is, laziness?

Each and every operation has risk involved. A simple appendectomy could result in death.

Wouldn't it be BETTER to put your faith in God and have HIM heal you? I doubt God could screw something like that up.
 
no. what you are saying is, i won't do anything. not because i'm lazy, but just because i want god to do the whole thing. God has many ways of answering prayers. He helps people with medicine also. What you assume is that God ONLY works through "miracles". he does NOT.
tounge.gif
 
I didn't say, nor insinuate that God only works through miracles.

What is wrong with wanting God to heal you instead of a human doctor?

You aren't keeping the verses I was referring to in the OP either.
 
it is like saying. is the cup half full? or is it half empty? there is nothing wrong with God wanting to heal you instead of doctor. it just happens he uses medicine to answer prayers.
 
He doesnt need to do anything he just chooses to do it that way...

WHy does he love us? He surely doesnt have to but he chooses to..

Why does he use prophets instead of comming down here himself, he could probobly do a better job then the prophits.. but he uses them anyway.
 
Why indeed? But that's another question for another topic.

Byblos, your arguments would make more sense if it weren't for the fact that Jesus said his followers would be able to heal the sick. So why not turn to those followers capable of healing the sick?
 
Um, maybe they're dead by now. Are you talking about the Disciples or Christians in general. Of course we can heal the sick. Jesus has given us those abilites. Have faith like a mustard seed.....

People do turn to Christians for healing. Also, the power of prayer.
 
Rithkil, you're missing the point.

If YOU can heal, why don't you go around healing the sick? You just said you could.

Christians turn to HOSPITALS for healing first, not God.
 
Christian doctor anyone?
biggrin.gif


When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Mark 2:17

Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you. Colossians 4:14


Points to those verses? None, really! To search out heal, physician, medicine does not bring an answer. I can give my opinion, (I fully well realize what they say about those!) I think Benny Hinners and the like have made people shy away from healing. I also think that we pray for God to heal us and rush to the doctor before giving Him an opportunity. On the other hand, He wants us to be wise, therefore doctors are in order, as well as knowing when we need one. I wish I had a clear answer. I know God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. We can heal today! Why we do not see true evidence of it, I do not know. I do pray for the sick and have seen them healed. The simple going, anointing with oil, laying on of hands is not done today, and could/should be. When we look at Jesus and His miracles they were not for show. There was at least one time, when He sent them away to tell no one. The Bible says in the last days there will be a falling away. I take that to mean not just from Christ Himself, but from true Biblical principle.

For me, one bad apple, fortunately, does not spoil the whole bunch....I called a former pastor's home in the wee hours of the morning. I was pregnant and was hemorrhaging. She laughed and asked if I had called the ambulance! I had intended to, but I wanted to make certain I had prayers and considering the severity of the situation, I would have been comforted to have my Preacher there with my family. (yes, I was going to call them, too)

I love the stories of doctors being baffled, or better yet, knowingly telling you that the Great Physician has done a work that he could not do. Modern day miracles continue...

Great subject that only brings up more questions for me. As the day's of the LORD's return draw nigh, I think we have to be more cautious. I know II Thessalonians speaks of the Wicked one having powers.

lol Sorry, sort of thinking out loud. I do always pray and ask for prayer. I go to the doctor and do not go to someone who can heal because I am not that someone, nor do I know of anyone. Perhaps this, too, comes down to faith!

Sorry so long, I do try to give two cents, it always turns into more like two million:(
 
yet again all here have ignored the context of the verse. Jesus was speaking directly to the Disciples, and was instructing them in what they would be doing.

He was not laying down something that every christian would be able to do(lay hands on someone and they would be healed). Rather he was speaking to the Apostles (big A only ones that are actual wittnessess to Christ ressurrection).
 
LoJ, I respect your opinion, but how do you get what you're saying from the verses in question?

Mark 16: 15 He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."

Note that Christ was talking to the Eleven (v 14). In v 16, the WHOEVER does NOT refer to the Apostles, but rather to those who would hear the message. Verse 20 confirms that, "20 Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it."
 
The context, He was with the 11, and had been teaching them, this could be one of his last teachings before ascending into heaven. even when he does it is the 11 that he is with when he does ascend. its the context and languaged also used in greek that leads me to personally believe he was talking directly to the 11
 
I've already agreed that Christ was, indeed, talking to the 11.

Look at verse 16 though, it clearly speaks of two types of people. Those who believe and are saved, and those who do not and will be condemned.

Why would this have anything to do with the Apostles who were standing there in front of him? Weren't they already saved?
 
like i said i believe for the most part this was contended to the 12(including paul) and a few others.

There where more signs and wonders during the founding than now because i believe it showed who was really a person sent from God and one that wasnt. Where as now we have scripture to test those who claim to come from God. Then they did not they did have a few letters, but most of the writtings did not become common place till around the second century.

That goes into spiritual gifts. Tongues if you ask me is one of the "inactive" gifts. do people still speak in tongues? Yes, as much as some churchs emphasize? i doubt that. I believe speaking in tongues( just because of when and where in scripture it shows up), was something to help the people know a message was from God and not a false doctrine. Like i said though we now have scripture to confirm and use as our plumbline.
 
If these gifts were only meant for the Apostles, why did Paul find it necessary to speak to Corinth about these gifts?

If Mark 16 only applies to those specific Apostles, why do Christians use Mark 16:15 to prove their calling, to go out and preach the gospel?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top