A mini coloring book and small posters to help the Sunday school teacher tell the story of Elijah ascending to heaven in a chariot of fire.

• About this site

Printable Activity: 8 page mini coloring book and full-sized pictures to tell the story of Peter preaching the gospel for the first time to Gentiles - Cornelius and his family.

• About this site

Is going to the doctor a sign of a lack of faith?

• About this site

Grace Taufeek's Story - "...an ultrasound showed a mass around my spinal canal. I was confused, sad, mad, and scared as I was trying to realize what was really happening. I was quite scared – sometimes even to tears – but deep down, I always had a sense of peace..." (more)

• About this site

Becky MacLeod

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

PRAYER FOR THE SICK
Would it be right to accede to the request of a sick brother, to send for the elders of the church to pray for his recovery?

I should think that the question ought rather to be, “Would it be right to refuse such a request?” Surely the Scripture is very plain, “Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the Name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him” (James 5: 14, 15)." TARGET="_blank">James 5: 14, 15). We must not evade Scripture or twist it out of its simple meaning, as is sometimes done, because if taken as it stands, it may seem to favour some false notion. There is scarcely a heresy in the world which cannot quote some half-truth or twisted text in its favour.

No doubt James 5:14" TARGET="_blank">James 5:14 has been used as a basis for the many erroneous systems of bodily healing abroad to-day, and so some have fallen into the erroneous idea that it must be evaded. “For instance,” says one, “James does not give us ‘church truth.’ “ That is no doubt in a sense the case, but he seems to speak here of a church custom, for we cannot admit that “church” in its local and technical sense, means one thing in the Acts and another in the Epistles, and we accept without hesitation for ourselves to-day other exhortations of the Epistle. Another evasion, as it seems to me, is to ask, “Where in the scattered condition of the church are the elders?” The answer is that in nearly every scripturally-ordered assembly there are some who are known and act as such, and who bear the character of elders in a greater or lesser measure. Others point out that the epistle is addressed to the twelve tribes. Yes, but to them as actual or potential believers in Christ. See, for example, James 2:10" TARGET="_blank">James 2:10 “My brethren have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ. . . with (or along with) respect of persons.”

The Roman Catholic Church, of course, bases on this passage the “Sacrament of Extreme Unction.” But for this they have to read—”Is any among you dying?” because they only administer the rite to those in extremis. For anyone to recover after the reception of Extreme Unction is quite unlooked for and out of order, whereas the anointing in “James” is in view of recovery—”The prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up, and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him.” This last promise seems to give character to the whole passage. It is as though it were a case where the sufferer* suspected that the Lord was dealing with him on account of some sin, and sent for the doctors of the soul, rather than of the body. I do not know any faith-healing systems which teach the sick to send for the “elders of the church.” It is generally rather some leader, who professes to be a “Healer,” who sends for the sick; or else it is a faith-healing home, often under female control, where the sick are taken in as boarders, awaiting their turn to be healed at some public service, which savours rather of an advertisement for man than as a testimony for God.

One is, of course, not questioning the earnestness of many of these people, but is comparing their methods with our passage. Here it is the sick one who desires the fellowship in prayer of his brethren. These make no claim to be “faith-healers,” but they pray in simple fashion for the sick one, in submission to the will of God, anointing him with oil in the Name of the Lord. They cannot command the prayer of faith. It may not be the Lord’s intention to raise up the sick brother, but the prayer of faith (if they are able to offer it) shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up, and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him. Nothing is said as to other means being unlawful, and the word for “anoint with oil” is not the sacred word—used, for instance, in Hebrews 1:9" TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 1:9 (the “Christ” word). It is noticeable that the most outstanding example in the Bible of healing, granted to the prayer of faith—that of Hezekiah—was in no way incompatible with the use of means—a fig poultice. The faith-healing systems would entirely rule out this as a lack of faith. The case that follows in James 5" TARGET="_blank">James 5 is still more simple. Here there seems no doubt as to the cause of the illness, and there is no question either of physician or elders. “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another.” Any godly person will do, for “the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man” (though he be not an elder) “availeth much.” There ought surely to be more exercise among us as to the why and the wherefore of our sicknesses. They may not all be sent in chastisement, they may be part of our salutary and daily discipline, but there can be no loss in enquiring of the Lord, “Why am I thus laid aside?” We cannot leave the subject without a note of warning. Many erroneous teachings prevail to-day in the “faith-healing” world, e.g., that disease does not exist (how then cure what does not exist?); that disease in a Christian is a sin (!); that bodily healing is included in the Atonement (then why does any believer die?): and healing pilgrimages—little “Lourdes—are being encouraged to-day within the fold of the Protestant State-Church. The fact that cases of miraculous healing are claimed for all these systems, even if genuine, is not conclusive, for miraculous powers are not limited to the Spirit of God. We must test teachings, methods and results by the Word of God. What strikes the student of the faith-healing systems around us is the distant resemblance they bear, if any, to apostolic healings.

W.H.
* In order to have a full view of this whole subject we must not limit ourselves to this passage, but must Join with it such passages as 2 Corinthians 12: 7-9;" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 12: 7-9; Philippians 2:25-27;" TARGET="_blank">Philippians 2:25-27; 2 Timothy 4:20;" TARGET="_blank">2 Timothy 4:20; 1 Timothy 5:23," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:23, etc., in which there is neither mention of any miraculous intervention nor of sending for the elders. No scripture contradicts any other nor can it dispense with any other.

* The word is “weak”—the first condition noted in those under the chastening of the Father: “for this cause many are weak and sickly, and many sleep” 1 Corinthians 11:30)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 11:30).

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

Is it right to assert that our Lord died of a broken heart, in accordance with the words of Psalm 69:20" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 69:20?

It is surely very important “rightly to divide” the Psalms, as the rest of Scripture, distinguishing what may represent the actual experiences of the Psalmist, from what goes much further either to those of the future faithful remnant of Israel, or to our Lord Himself. Such a Psalm as Psalm 38" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 38 would apply all through, one would judge, to the faithful remnant, and perhaps in parts to Christ, but it is truly a shocking misapplication to attempt, as has been done sometimes, to interpret such words as are used in vv. and 7 of our Holy, spotless Lord. Even in the most clearly Messianic Psalms, a serious mistake is made in applying, or attempting to apply, everything to Christ, e.g., such verses as Psalm 40:12," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 40:12, and Psalm 69:5" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 69:5 (“Mine iniquities have taken hold upon me... they are more than the hairs of my head,” and “Oh God, thou knowest my foolishness and my sins are not hid from thee”). It is blessedly true that He bore our sins, but they were “ours” all the time, not His. “He suffered once for sins,” but it was also as “the just for the unjust,” for even as the sin-offering He was most holy (see Leviticus 6:29)." TARGET="_blank">Leviticus 6:29). There was never any confusion between Him, the guiltless, Holy One and those for whom He suffered—the guilty and defiled.
As for the special verse in question, I regard it as quite erroneous to maintain that our Lord “died of a broken heart,” even though some medical authorities have asserted it; but doctors differ here as elsewhere. How can it be possible to apply the ordinary diagnosis to One whose side had been pierced, since death, with a spear? Any symptoms might occur, one would think, under such circumstances. Above all let it be remembered we are speaking of One who strictly speaking did not “die of anything”, but laid down His life. He did not gradually collapse, as an ordinary dying man; “He dismissed His Spirit” (Matthew 27:50," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 27:50, lit, translation). He died “too soon” in fact, as all testified. He did not die of shock or heart attack, for as He died, He cried with a loud voice and uttered two memorable, articulate sentences: “It is finished,” and “Father into Thy hands I commend my Spirit.” But this being said, I see no difficulty whatever in applying to our Lord the words in question, “Reproach hath broken my heart.” They are clearly used in a figurative sense; for the verse runs on: “I am full of heaviness and I looked for some to take pity but there was none.” Is it not evident that our Lord continued to live after His heart was “broken” in this sense? Heart- breaks, as some know, are not always physical, but moral, and they may not be less poignant for that. But this is quite distinct from the sentimental and mistaken view combated above, that our Lord died in any sense from a broken heart.
W.H.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site