Blue Blooded Pentecostal

The following is a very long question. It was full of ALL CAPS when I received it. I have removed them because using CAPS on the Internet is equivalent to shouting at someone, rather than for emphasis. I reproduce the question and begin the answer.

How would you explain to a Blue Blooded Pentecostal who believes healing is by divine right of the atonement to understand that they do not have the right to believe that the atonement gives us healing but it does not mean we all automatically have the right to healing. I guess I am talking about the “name it and claim it” bunch. They believe that they can say, “By his stripes I am healed.” They think that this verse means that they have a direct divine right to healing because the Bible says they are healed. They will also say that we have the right to healing because the Bible says if any among you are sick let him call the elders of the church and anoint them with oil and they will recover. They mean if someone dies from cancer they have no faith or they had little faith or there could have been sin in their life. They do not see that God has a will and a plan and that he is in charge. Is any healing not by Gods grace and his will? We do not have any right to claim anything but Lord thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. I believe the dead can be raised the lame can walk, the blind can see. I desperately need to understand and be able to explain this with confidence. Please help me. All details and explanation would be greatly appreciated. I know that John Wimber and the radical middle have a different turn on this issue. I am half Pentecostal and half Baptist and this theology is about to blow my nerves.

This is a larger question than I have time to engage in. I might start by saying that it is not a forgone conclusion that “healing” is really an atonement issue. Maybe it is part of the “kingdom of God” theology. There in it becomes God’s right to heal who he wishes to heal when he wishes to heal them. The whole “name and claim” group is working on a humanistic belief that we can tell God what he has to do and not the other way around. Of course, it is important to point out that quoting a verse or part of a verse without the accompanying context of the verse is how “nerve blowing” doctrine is created. See my blog God’s EPIC Adventure for more information on this idea.

This kind of theology is often abusive at the very least. Those who teach it and practice it usually do not like to be held accountable. These “prayers” pass the results of the healing off to the one who is sick. So if I have condition “x” and am prayed for and not healed, the one praying has no accountability for the results and I would be told that I was not healed because “I didn’t have enough faith.” This is a sick and destructive theological answer. It seems verifiable in the ministry of Jesus that he didn’t heal every sick person in Judea. And whose faith was used with he healed the widow from Nain’s son of death? Surely not the dead son!

Send to Kindle

Books and eBooks by DrWinn

{ 0 comments… add one now }

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

Disclosure of Material Connection: If links are included in the posts above, some may be “affiliate links.” This means if you click on the link and purchase the item, I will receive an affiliate commission. I do recommend books and other resources from time to time. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”