Jesus
Identity As Healer
The Gospel of Luke and John begin by setting up the identity of
Jesus shown through the testimony of John.
The primacy of establishing Jesus’ identity suggests that His identity
plays a crucial role in defining the purpose of Jesus’ life on earth. In both gospel accounts Jesus does not begin
His public ministry until His identity is confirmed. This self acknowledgement of identity is
presented most clearly in the gospel of Luke when Jesus quotes the prophet
Isaiah:
Because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the
poor.
He has sent Me to proclaim release
to the captives,
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set
free those who are oppressed,
This
prophecy also functions as a mission statement defining Jesus purpose on
earth. Contained in this passage is one
primary task which is to proclaim the gospel and coming of the Kingdom of God. The passage also contains earmarks of the
coming kingdom which is the restoration of the bound and afflicted. This principle of restoration as a purpose of
the anointed one is clearly seen in the last statement, “To proclaim the
favorable year of the Lord,” which is a clear reference to the year of Jubilee.[2] Jesus affirms his identity and sets the tone
for his ministry on earth by quoting this prophetic mission statement and
signals the beginning of new things when he says, “Today this Scripture has
been fulfilled in your 1hearing.”[3]Jesus’
sense of identity defined His purpose for life on earth. An aspect of Jesus’ identity that is often
neglected is Jesus as Healer. Although
the healing aspect of Jesus ministry and identity are often overlooked, the
entirety of His purpose is made clear through Jesus’ role as Healer. In order to understand Jesus as a healer it
is helpful to first define healing.
Merriam-Webster defines the verb heal as, “to make sound or whole.” A second is, “to cause an undesirable
condition to be overcome.” The whole
concept of healing revolves around an aspect of restoration from a sick state
to a state of health or normalcy. When
applying this definition to Jesus and placing it in the context of scripture,
Jesus identity as healer makes His purpose clear. Man was created to be in fellowship with
God. The disease of sin broke man’s
fellowship with God. Man needs a cure
from the disease of sin to be restored and reconciled to God. Jesus the Healer, offers Himself as the cure
freeing man from the ailment of sin. “Jesus’
healing is to be understood, not as merely expressing Jesus’ compassion for the
needy, but primarily as a sign of the arrival of the kingdom of God as promised
in the Scriptures.”[4] Through Jesus’ sacrifice of Himself as the
remedy to the disease of sin man is restored into fellowship with God and
thereby made whole. The accounts of
healing found in Luke and John point to the identity of Jesus by fulfilling the
mission statement found in Luke 4:18-19.
Two Purposes Of Healing
In
the Gospels of Luke and John, there are two Greek words most often translated
as healing. The word ἰάομαι most often
taken to mean heal and cure is found in Luke several times and is the only word
translated as heal or healing in John.
Θεραπεύω is a Greek word translated to mean serve and heal. There are no instances of Θεραπεύω found in John;
however this word is used several times in Luke. Although both these words generally
communicate the same idea of heal/healing in the gospels:
It is
important that these different facets of the meaning of the word be realized,
because the biblical miracles of healing (apart from cases of demon possession)
show healing in its primary medical sense of the restoration to normal in cases
of organic disease. Any cases claimed as present-day miracles must show
comparably outstanding cases of the healing of organic disorders.[5]
Moreover,
the way the two words are used to introduce accounts of healing serve to
communicate different yet complementary ideas that clarify the identity of
Jesus.
How ἰάομαι Points To The Identity
Of Jesus
ἰάομαι
is the only word used for healing in the gospel of John. “Frequently, healings occur where there is
little or no faith in order to try to instill belief in Jesus as the Son of
God.”[6]
All
the healing accounts in John are meant to serve as signs pointing to the
identity of Jesus. In John 4:46-54 Jesus
heals a royal official’s son. Initially,
the official comes to Jesus hearing of previous miracles He had performed in
His last visit. The official only sought
Jesus out because he knew about Jesus reputation as a miracle worker. “His
primary (only?) concern is not with Jesus’ identity but with his son’s
well-being.”[7] The urgency and desperation of the official
is expressed in John saying that the man implored Jesus to come and heal his
son as his son was about to die. He knew
Jesus had the ability to heal his son but did not believe or trust that Jesus
would heal his son. The way Jesus
responds puts the official in a position where he must choose to acknowledge
the authority and trustworthiness of Jesus or not. Jesus response is, “designed to challenge
this desperate, concerned father to go beyond self-interest and to recognize
Jesus as more than a thaumaturge, thus summoning his Galilean audience to
acknowledge his true identity.”[8] Healing doesn’t occur until the royal
official has faith and understanding of the identity of Jesus. The healing of the official’s son serves as a
sign pointing to the identity of Jesus and demonstrates the immediacy and
sufficiency of Jesus healing. The royal
official discovering that his son was healed in the very instant that Jesus
spoke and said that his son would be healed demonstrates the immediacy of the
healing emphasizing Jesus power. Also
note worthy is the healing taking place without any type of third party intervention. Jesus spoke and it was so. There was nothing additional that the
official or anyone else had to do to effect the healing of the official’s
son. This physical healing from fever is
symbolic of the healing that takes place when a person places their trust in
Jesus. When a person trusts Jesus he
immediately receives forgiveness of sins and is regenerated by the work of the
Holy Spirit. Moreover, healing from the
disease of sin rests on the power of Jesus Christ alone. There is no other means or extra measures
that need to be done for healing from sin to occur. The trust a person places in Jesus is a
product of his understanding the identity of Jesus and acknowledging his own
identity without Christ to be sinful leading to destruction.
In
Luke 9:38-43 ἰάομαι is also used to act as a sign and instill belief in
Jesus. The disciples fail to heal a
demon possessed boy. Jesus response upon
hearing of His disciples failure to heal the boy is, “You unbelieving and perverted
generation, how long shall I be with you and put up with you?”[9] This suggests two things; first that the
disciples were unable to heal the boy because of a lack of faith and second
that the act of Jesus healing serves as a sign to instill faith. In the New International Greek Testament Commentary,
Howard Marshall suggests that Jesus response was an expression of Jesus
impatience with the lack of faith demonstrated by the crowd, the father and
disciples. When Jesus heals the boy it
serves to reassert his authority over spiritual forces by casting the demon out
of the boy. This passage in particular
draws attention to the fundamental cause of all illness. “It is somewhat unusual for Luke to refer to
an exorcism with the term ἰάομαι.
[10] Luke
usually confines ἰάομαι
to diseases.” The picture of the boy’s
physical symptoms for illness being cured through the exorcism of a demonic
presence serves as a microcosm of the entire human race. People are afflicted with disease and decay
because of the spiritual disease of sin.
All the things that go wrong in the world are merely symptoms of
sin. This understanding of how the
physical world is influenced by the spiritual leads into Jesus’ primary purpose
for being on earth. It also serves to
clarify how θεραπεύω is used to point to the identity of Jesus.
How θεραπεύω Confirms the Identity
of Jesus
Θεραπεύω
is characteristically different from ἰάομαι in that Θεραπεύω accounts point to
the service of Jesus. Rather than
instilling belief in Jesus through the act of healing itself, the healings or
service of Jesus points to His identity.
In Luke 4:40-44 Jesus’ identity is confirmed in showing how through His
acts of healing and preaching He fulfills the prophecy found in Isaiah and
stated by Jesus in Luke 4:18-19. Crowds
are gathering to Jesus bringing their afflicted to be healed/served by
Jesus. As Jesus heals, the demons he
casts out are proclaiming the identity of Jesus as the Son of God. The demons acknowledgement of Jesus
harmonizes with the actual act of Jesus healing and preaching fulfilling the
mission statement found in Luke 4.
Moreover, the pairing Jesus healing with preaching serves to clarify the
purpose of preaching. Just as Jesus
serves people healing them of physical disease, the act of Jesus preaching
serves people by treating their spiritual disease of sin. This idea of preaching as a method of healing
and restoration gains traction when Jesus asserts, “I must preach the kingdom of
God to the other cities also, afor I was sent for this purpose.”[11] The acts of healing lead to belief and open
the doors for people to receive Jesus’ gospel message. As the Messiah, Jesus primary purpose for
healing and preaching is to lead to spiritual healing from the disease of
sin.
The Connection Between Disease and
Sin
The
connection between sin and physical disease is made most clear in Luke as he, “regarded physical maladies as
springing ultimately from the influence of Satan, but nothing more than
personification of the malady may be present.”[12]In
the preceding passage of Luke 4: 38-39 Jesus heals Simon’s mother in law of a
fever. The word choice for this passage
points to a, “connection between sin and disease.”[13]Moreover,
another characteristic difference in how Luke describes the affliction is that
he personifies it using Ἐπετίμησεν
and μέγας
to say that Jesus, “rebuked the fever; as if He saw in the disease
some principle hostile to man.”[14] The choice of words hints at the underlying
link between sin and physical ailment.
Disease and sickness are not a part of the natural way God intended the
world to function. Disease is an
aberration which that runs contrary to the intended course of life. Death is the final product in the physical
life of the disease of sin. Death is an
aberration because it separates the spiritual from the physical. God originally created man to be a creature
of soul and flesh harmonized together, however the disease of sin caused the
inability for flesh to remain attached to the spiritual. The root cause of the separation of the flesh
from the soul is that the disease of sin has a spiritual origin. The symptom of sin afflicting the soul is
shown in the flesh through physical death.
Jesus Is The Only Cure
Jesus
is the perfect and only treatment to sin because he is an entirely human and
entirely God. The symptoms of sin are
physical plagues but the root and underlying cause is spiritual. Physical means of treatment are only topical
and do not cure the issue at hand.
Surgery is required to eliminate the primary cause of illness. The only solution and treatment is
spiritual. Jesus as entirely physical
and divine at the same time fully interacts with both the physical and
spiritual world. Jesus alone has the
authority and power that can,” free a
person from the evil forces that affect life.”[15] Jesus is
the only one able to act as the Surgeon to eliminate the ailment of sin thus
defeating the terminal symptom of death.
Jesus identity is wrapped up in the fact that He alone has the ability
to heal man restoring him to the original state he was created. Jesus alone is able to free those oppressed
and held captive by the disease of sin and return them to their original state
of communion with God.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Andreas
J. Köstenberger, John, Baker
exegetical commentary on the New Testament. Grand
Rapids,
MI.: Baker Academic, 2004
Bock,
Darrell L. Luke. 2 vols. Baker
exegetical Commentary on the New Testament.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994
D. R. W.
Wood and I. Howard Marshall. New Bible
Dictionary, 3rd ed. Leicester, England;
Downers
Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996.
Elwell,
Walter A. and Beitzel, Barry J.. Baker
Encyclopedia of the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI.:
Baker
Book House, 1988.
Godet, Frédéric
Louis and Shalders, Edward William and Cusin, M. D. A
Commentary on the
Gospel of St. Luke. New York: I. K. Funk & co.,
1881.
Green,
Joel B. et. all, eds. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity
Press,
1992.
Kostenberger,
Andreas J. John. Baker Exegetical
Commentary on the New Testament.
Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005.
Liefeld,
Walter A. “Luke.” In The Expositors Bible
Commentary, vol. 8, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein.
Grand
Rapids. MI.:Erdmans, 1997.
Marshall,
I. Howard. Commentary on Luke. The
New International Greek Testament
Commentary.
Grand Rapids, MI: Erdmans, 1978.
New American Standard Bible :
1995 Update.
LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995.
a Is 61:1; Matt 11:5; 12:18; John 3:34
a Is 61:2; Lev 25:10
[1]
New American Standard Bible : 1995 Update
(LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Lk 4:18–19.
[2]
Joel B. Green and others, eds.
Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press,
1992), 396-397.
1 Lit ears
[3]
New American Standard Bible : 1995 Update
(LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Lk 4:21.
[4]
Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker
Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1988),
938.
[5] D. R. W. Wood and
I. Howard Marshall, New Bible Dictionary,
3rd ed. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996),
453.
[6] Joel B. Green and others, eds.
Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press,
1992), 300.
[7] Andreas J.
Köstenberger, John, Baker exegetical
commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2004),
169-70.
[8]
Andreas J. Köstenberger, John, Baker
exegetical commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker
Academic, 2004), 170.
[9]
New American Standard Bible : 1995 Update
(LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Lk 9:41.
[10]
Darrell L. Bock, Luke Volume 1: 1:1-9:50,
Baker exegetical commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker
Books, 1994), 884.
a Mark 1:38
[11]
New American Standard Bible : 1995 Update
(LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Lk 4:43.
[12]
I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke :
A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New international Greek testament
commentary (Exeter [Eng.: Paternoster Press, 1978), 195.
[13]
Darrell L. Bock, Luke Volume 1: 1:1-9:50,
Baker exegetical commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker
Books, 1994), 437.
[14]
Frédéric Louis Godet, Edward William Shalders and M. D. Cusin, A Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke
(New York: I. K. Funk & co., 1881), Lk 4:38–39.
[15]
Darrell L. Bock, Luke Volume 1: 1:1-9:50,
Baker exegetical commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker
Books, 1994), 442.
No comments:
Post a Comment