Quote:
Originally Posted by trevorjohnson  I don't know Joel...how do you interpret the passage in James about the annointing with oil?
I think that God has already authenticated his Word so that healing is not to be expected in our age. The NT is written.
God's miracles where not just to help people but to authenticate the message or the messaenger. These both have come... thus, no more miracles are to be expected. Sure He CAN do it, but what historically redemptive purpose would it serve? DOES He still do it..I don't know.
Plus, aside from being dead (or maybe having a leg cut off) most diseases can be cured without a miracle but only through providiential blessings of docters, medicine, and sometimes stragne twists of providence that - though weird - is not neccessarily miraculous.
A miracle, after all, must go against nature. If cancer cells ebb and flow naturally and morph and die naturally sometimes, then no miracle is needed for a providential disapearance or alteration to occur. |
OK...so perhaps the first premise is the one that is incorrect. Since miracles are bound up with redemptive history, and the canon is closed, we should not be praying for healing in the sense of a miraculous healing. Having thought about it further based on what you and Josh are saying, perhaps the reason the reformed catechisms have nothing to say about expecting miralces is that what we should really be concerned about is "what is my only comfort in life and in death".
I'll keep plugging away at thinking through this...really appreciate the time you have both taken.
__________________
Joel Batts
Christ Presbyterian Church (PCA) - Memphis, TN
"Why wasn't God watching? Why wasn't God listening? Why wasn't God there for Georgia Lee?"
- Tom Waits
But you, O God, do see trouble and grief;you consider it to take it in hand. The victim commits himself to you; you are the helper of the fatherless. - Psalm 10:14
|