Do you want to be well? Now, if you read Katie's blog from Monday, you may be wondering if you just accidentally clicked on it again. I assure you, this is not the same blog post, even though I chose to begin with the same question. While Katie was quoting Jesus from John 5, I am asking a legitimate question of you, our readers. What is it you really want? Do you want to be healed, or do you want a wellness that goes way beyond healing as we understand it? Normally, I try to get into some sort of story either from current events or from my life experience. But this week, there just happens to be a phenomenal story that is already in the Bible that just fits perfectly. I'd like to tell you about it.
In Luke 17:11-19, the story of Jesus' healing of ten lepers is recorded. There are many amazing things about this story and I encourage you to open your Bible right now and follow along. I'm sure I don't need to remind anyone how the Jewish people treated leprosy and those that possessed it. In this story, the lepers were hanging out TOGETHER "along the border between Samaria and Galilee". Guess what? Jews and Samaritans could not be seen near each other, according to Jewish custom. That means that it was only because of their common ailment that these 10 individuals who had been ostracized from their respective communities could actually have a community themselves. That could be another blog for another time. But for now, lets focus on the fact that Jesus intentionally traveled the road where he knew the outcasts of both societies would be gathered. While traveling down that road, the lepers stood at a distance (as they were required to do) and called out, "Jesus, Master, have pity on us!" This shows the faith the lepers had in Jesus' ability to heal them, though they didn't ask for it. They were well aware of their intense physical ailment and simply appealed to Jesus' compassion. So, they trusted in not only his ability to heal, but also his desire to appease suffering. When we cry out to Jesus, we must believe in both his desire and his ability to rescue us.
Next, Jesus demanded a physical demonstration of their faith. He told them to go and show themselves to the priests, which could have gotten them in big trouble had they done so and not been healed. Verse 14 tells us they were cleansed "as they went", not once they got there. In other words, once they showed faith through their actions, they were healed. But the healing wasn't permanent. The Greek word used in that sentence is "katharidzo", which is translated "to cleanse, make clean, purify, or declare ritually acceptable". What we are dealing with here is a physical healing of the disease of leprosy. As far as we know, those lepers all died at some point in the future. You may be wondering what my point is, and you'll see as we continue in the story.
After ten lepers receive this miraculous healing, something that absolutely saddens Jesus occurs. Only one of the ten lepers actually comes back to praise God and thank Jesus. He throws himself at Jesus' feet, in effect saying that his response to this gift of healing will be to serve. You can read about Jesus' disappointment that the other nine simply accepted their temporary physical healing and went on with THEIR plans, even while he is clearly pleased with the Samaritan who came back and showed his gratitude by action. The key for us is in what Jesus says to the one leper who did return and give God the glory. He says in verse 19, "Rise and go, your faith has made you well". At first glance, we would assume the "well" in that sentence would be synonymous with "cleansed" from verse 14. But there is actually one huge difference. The Greek word for "well" in verse 19 is "sodzo", which is translated "to save, rescue, deliver". That Greek word is where we get "soteriology", which is the study of salvation. Do you see the point of Luke's story? Ten lepers were miraculously "cleansed", which mattered for their lives only up to the point where their time in this world was up. But one of those ten was also "saved", which mattered for him long after his earthly life was over. The difference was in the faithful response through ACTION of the one who was so overcome by the reality of God's love for him that he abandoned whatever else had previously mattered and threw himself at Jesus' feet.
So where are you in this story? Are you constantly crying out to God for that temporary healing that only satisfies for a short time, just so you can go on living YOUR life the way YOU want to? Or are you so moved by what God has done for you that you are willing to forget about what once seemed important and worship and serve the Lord only? This Scripture seems to be clear that true faith is shown by action, specifically the way in which we respond to what Jesus has done for us. I can't make a theological statement about the salvation of others because judgment is God's domain, but you can decide for yourself from this Scripture what is required to be "saved". Do you want healing that is temporary or permanent? The choice is yours.
6 comments:
Interesting. So does that mean that we are sometimes saved "temporary" and at times forfeit salvation if we don't work on keeping it?
Logan said ... "Jesus demanded a physical demonstration of their faith. He told them to go and show themselves to the priests, which could have gotten them in big trouble had they done so and not been healed. Verse 14 tells us they were cleansed "as they went", not once they got there. In other words, once they showed faith through their actions, they were healed"
Actually, Logan, Jesus commanded the lepers to do that which the Law required ... "To go to the priests and show themselves..." as the method by which the priest can allow them to come back into the community once again. Their healing was not due to their faithfullness is listening to Jesus' command (a demo of their faith, using your words), but rather because of Jesus' willingness and desire to heal and restore that which is lost and broken.
So I would caution you in your insistance that one's actions brings forth one's healing. The logical conclusion, if you travel this road, is that if one is NOT healed, it is due to one's lack of faith.
I think the bigger point to the text is how Jesus brings forth the Kingdom of God to those that we (as good Jews of the 1st century) would least expect to have been included... the leper, the Samaritan, the outcast. Remember that for the 1st century Jew, if you were sick it was due to your disobedience toward God (a false premise of Judaism then).
And of course, the same holds true today ... our God comes to us, the broken, the lame, the leper, the Samaritan, the outcast, and He heals and restores... not because of our "faith", but rather because of His ...
Jesus Christ is the author of our faith, and the rescuer of that which destroys, ... sin, death, and the Devil.
To God be the Glory!
Mike,
Your question is a fair one due to the language and tone of the blog post. However, I believe this is something each person has to answer for himself. I'm not sure if you are insinuating that my blog implied that one can forfeit salvation, but I'm pretty certain that it was clear that there is a difference between being "healed" physically and being "saved". It's a heart issue for each person, not a theological one. Do we want temporary healing or permanent salvation? I believe the blog noted the difference.
Dean,
Excellent point. I almost mentioned that it had been required by Law, but did not want to do so because I was not aware of the exact reference in the Law and did not want to say something about the Law that I couldn't be completely sure of. I also agree that Jesus is the author of both faith and healing. The one point I would make to you is that Jesus himself was clear that our faith PLAYS A ROLE in miracles (of which physical healing of terminal diseases is one). Check out Luke 6:5-6, where Jesus cannot do many miracles in his own hometown because of the people's lack of faith. I wouldn't say that means that the power to heal is dependent on our faith, because it's not. But could we at least agree that for whatever reason in God's sovereignty, He has chosen to order things so that faith is necessary to receive the healing? Again, the distinction is that healing is done by God's power and His alone, but faith is required to receive it if God has in fact chosen to heal the person(s) in question.
Well, I would guess that it all depends on what you mean by "miracles". If you are referring to "sings" and "wonders" others believe that those ceased back in the 1st century. There's a distinction between God's providence and "signs and "wonders"
There is a tremendous difference between the popular definition of a miracle in our culture and the narrow technical definition of a miracle that theologians work with in their science. We can often have serious communication problems when people ask me whether I believe that God is doing miracles today. If by a miracle we mean that God is alive and well and running his world by his providence, affecting the course of human events, then by all means God is doing those things. If the question is asking whether or not God is answering prayers, then I would say emphatically, yes, God is answering prayers. If people are asking whether the providence of God is bringing extraordinary things to pass today, I would say absolutely. Does God heal people in response to prayer? I would say yes to all of those questions because I’m convinced that God is alive and well and doing all of those things. If we define a miracle as a supernatural work of God, then I would say that God certainly does supernatural works today. The rebirth of a human soul cannot be done by natural means; only God can do it through his power, and God is certainly doing that every day. If that’s what people mean by a miracle, then God is doing miracles today. Some people define a miracle so broadly as to say that even the birth of a child is a miracle because it’s a marvelous thing that couldn’t happen apart from the power of God. So they would define a miracle as any wonderful thing that happens by the power of God. If that’s the definition of miracle, then again I would say that, absolutely, God is performing them today.
However, we may be speaking of miracle in the technical sense of an action performed against the laws of nature— God circumventing the very laws he put into motion—for example, bringing life out of death or something out of nothing, such as Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead when his body was in a state of decomposition after four days in the tomb. No, I don’t think that God is doing that kind of miracle today. I certainly believe God could raise every human being in every cemetery in this world today if he wanted to. But I don’t think he is performing those kinds of miracles today. The chief reason he did those things in biblical days was to certify revelation as divine—to back up what he spoke with evidence of his authority. Since we now have the Bible, other, miraculous sources of revelation are no longer necessary.
Agreed ... Thanks for your comments my friend! Well said.
Thanks for the blog.
But you are saying, there are 2 types if healing, temporary and permanent, permanent is the eternal salvation.
I disagree brother, no one can get permanent salvation through healing. One needs to accept Jesus to get permanent salvation.
Also on the subject of Saved or Sozo in Greek, it is actually temporary.
How many times did God had to save children of Israel? They needed deliverance and to be saved many times.
Sozo is being saved for that current situation. Sozo cannot be permanent. For we all need to be sozo/saved all the time in our lives.
If you try to say sozo means permanent. So I will ask you, if you are saved, can you loose your salvation?
Thanks
Post a Comment