I was listening to the radio this afternoon and stumbled onto a Catholic radio station discussing faith healing. The host was warning listeners to “run for the exit” if their church taught to pray for healing rather than going to the doctor. He claimed this teaching was very dangerous and not remotely biblical.
The show host then explained that God uses doctors, medicine and medical treatments to heal people. I’m not sure how God healed people a few hundred years ago when practices like bloodletting were commonplace. Or even 1,000′s of years ago when people died from easily treatable diseases. Apparently God was still perfecting his healing techniques.
According to Jesus, if you have faith you can not only miraculously heal people but also make a mountain fall into the sea. His disciples healed people, and Jesus often would tell believers that their faith had healed them.
Matthew 17:15-20
“Lord, have mercy on my son,” he said. “He has seizures and is suffering greatly. He often falls into the fire or into the water. I brought him to your disciples, but they could not heal him.”“O unbelieving and perverse generation,” Jesus replied, “how long shall I stay with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring the boy here to me.” Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of the boy, and he was healed from that moment.
Then the disciples came to Jesus in private and asked, “Why couldn’t we drive it out?“ He replied, “Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.“
Matthew 9:27-29
When he had gone indoors, the blind men came to him, and he asked them, “Do you believe that I am able to do this?”“Yes, Lord,” they replied. Then he touched their eyes and said, “According to your faith will it be done to you”
Luke 8:50
Jesus was telling the man: Don’t be afraid; just believe and your daughter will be healed.
This is only a small sampling of faith healing in the Bible. So explain to me how is it not biblical? Everyone knows Epilepsy is caused by a demon possession. Who needs Phenobarbital when you could have an exorcism instead.
Someone please point me to the verse that says, “when you are sick, have faith and go to the doctor to receive medical treatment.” According to the Bible, faith is all you need.
Thankfully, most people today aren’t insane enough to believe prayer will heal them. I do find it interesting how quickly people revert to their carnal instinct of self-preservation when their life is in danger. Christians don’t want to die, so they go to the doctor like everyone else. If they actually followed Jesus’ teaching, the average life span of a Christian would drop 30-40 years.
Tags: Bible, Blind, Doctors, Epilepsy, Fatih, God, Healing, Jesus, Medical, Miraculous, Mountain, Mustard Seed, Treatment
August 3, 2009 at 9:08 pm |
…let it also be said right now that medical healing is also getting equally as stupid and questionable. The entire industry is PROFIT DRIVEN. At times, it would seem that drug companies BENEFIT by having as many sick people as possible.
Case in point: Tamiflu.
Well, gee, another proof that man is created in His image, eh?
August 4, 2009 at 7:11 am |
Case in point: Tamiflu.
I have no idea why you think the existence of Tamiflu supports your argument. Please explain.
August 4, 2009 at 8:18 am |
It’s not the existence of Tamiflu, but rather the controversy that surrounded Roche’s reaction when it learnt that other companies (starting with India’s Cipla) were producing their own, brandless versions.
These brandless versions, by the way, were made to cope with demand in areas that Roche either refuses to distribute to, or areas with demand that Roche cannot keep up with. Naturally, as a patent holder, Roche got very, very upset.
(This is excluding the point that Tamiflu was horrendously expensive, too, and the poor from the countries that needed the drug could not pay for it.)
A similar controversy occured over the Glaxosmithklyne antiflu drug Relenza. At the time, both Tamiflu and Relenza were the only drugs that could combat Avian Flu.
It’s been long since resolved, but my point still stands: Profit driven. It took a controversy like this to persuade Roche to license Tamiflu production to other companies. It’s a prime example of “scientific healthcare” not really looking out for people – well, unless they have the money or make a lot of noise. <_<
August 4, 2009 at 8:26 am |
PS: Bear in mind that it was 2005, and Bird Flu just blitzed through all over the world in a matter of months.
August 6, 2009 at 1:37 pm |
Chicken:
What, pray tell, would you expect any company (pharma or otherwise) to be driven by if not profit?
I mean love of mankind is all beautiful and cuddly, but it doesn’t make a good salary.
August 7, 2009 at 8:19 am |
To be honest, I don’t know the answer to that question. Not that we are any much better. Nobody wants to work without a reward. If they can legislate the reward unto themselves, so much the better. Screw ethics, eh?
I fully hold God responsible for allowing money to be valued over goodwill and the LIVES of others. >_>
August 7, 2009 at 8:39 am
I thought the same thing, chicken. Drug research is incredibly expensive, and very often, after spending literally millions of dollars researching a promising treatment, it is found unsuitable. All that money has to be recouped somehow, and it’s not right for other companies to just copy the successful drugs and sell them at a much lower price! Having said that, my opinion of the big drug manufacturers could hardly be lower. I was hooked on Valium back in the early 70s when doctors (with the help of “bribes” in many cases) considered it the answer to virtually everyone’s problems, and it took me about ten years to wean myself off it, with dreadful side-effects and no help from anyone! The explanation given by the medical profession was that they didn’t realize how addictive it was, and that drugs like that should only be used for very short periods. But what are the drug companies up to now? As with alcohol and tobacco, they are pushing these addictive drugs as hard as they can in the Third World, as they are the answer to their prayers, ie a drug which, once they use it, the users will have to stay on for the rest of their lives!! It’s a funny old world!
August 7, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Drug companies are pushing addictive drugs in the third world? Where did you get this? If it’s going on, I’d like to know who is doing it. Such things would be nigh impossible in the US or EU, but I actually don’t know what regulations are in place relative to US or EU drug company’s behavior in third world countries.
Oh, want something drug related that really gets my goat? Homeopathic or naturopathic companies putting sugar water or some such in a bottle and selling with claims that it’ll cure EVERYTHING. And people buy that crap.
August 7, 2009 at 1:52 pm
I don’t know what you mean Leopardus. The Third World is a huge untapped market for them. Read this: http://www.benzo.org.uk/jegshock.htm
The above, of course, refers to world sales generally. The “Prozac” family of antidepressants are the new “cure-all”, and I fell out with several GPs over their insistence that I should take these. In particular, I can attest to having suicidal feelings almost as soon as I started taking both Seroxat and Lustral, which were two of their favourites at the time, and subsequent press coverage has proved me right!
August 7, 2009 at 1:53 pm
PS You’re right about homoeopathy, of course, but some people will believe anything!
August 7, 2009 at 2:19 pm
See also this: http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2003/06/23/pharmaceutical-corporations-accused-of-genocide-before-icc-in-the-hague.htm
It’s a rather long and involved report, but if you scroll down far enough you will come across this tit-bit: “Another mechanism by which the accused systematically expand their markets is to deliberately cause addiction in order to increase drug sales…In order to expand their global sales of these addictive drugs, the accused even praise them through full-page adverts directly to the public.”
August 7, 2009 at 2:24 pm
I can see nothing wrong with that web address, unless I have left a gap somewhere! Can you check it please BEattitude, as we can’t edit!!
August 7, 2009 at 10:50 pm
@barriejohn, that address is unreachable.
@lLeoPardus, regulation documents are simply WORDS. Just as the Bible is. If nobody enforces it, or the enforcers have one or both eyes shut, then they are MEANINGLESS.
August 8, 2009 at 12:17 am
As we can’t edit I was rather hoping that BEattitude could rectify my mistake, whatever it was! If you put “newmediaexplorer pharmaceutical corporations” in your address bar, though, it’s the very first thing that comes up!!
August 8, 2009 at 1:50 am
Re barriejohn’s link:
You used hyphens rather than underscores.
Here is the correct version, copies and pasted.
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2003/06/23/pharmaceutical_corporations_accused_of_genocide_before_icc_in_the_hague.htm
August 8, 2009 at 2:25 am
Thanks. You’d think that the codes would all be standard, wouldn’t you? The internet is so frustrating that I sometimes feel like giving up on it!!
August 9, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
chicken:
The regulations for the pharmaceutical industry are very strongly enforced. In part because they are easy to enforce. Pharm companies have to keep very thorough records and it’s damn hard to cook the books. … not saying impossible; just damn hard.
barreljohn:
Looked at your links. The person who wrote one of them has no scientific training and her PhD is an honorary one from Alternative Medicines Research Institute. The other link has a lot of pro alternative medicine crud on it. I don’t consider either source credible. If you could find the WHO doing investigations into what you’ve said, or maybe a governmental investigation, that would lend credibility to it. Right now though it sounds too ‘conspiracy theory like’.
August 10, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Whilst I agree that some “alternative” medicines are nothing more than quackery, I would not dismiss all the claims of their supporters out of hand. And Joan Gadsby is respected worldwide for her work on drug addiction, so I think you would be wrong to dismiss her claims out of hand as well. If we followed your route we would have no investigative journalism whatsoever! I suppose if I were to quote Dr Vernon Coleman, who does have medical qualifications , you would just say “Ah, but he’s a maverick”, just because he doesn’t toe the party line. (And I don’t agree with all that he says either.) The problem of tranquillizer addiction in Africa and elsewhere has been reported here in the UK on TV and in the newspapers. The story put about in the 1960s/70s was that as the drugs were tested on animals their addictive nature could not have been known in advance of their use on humans. That’s all well and good – so what’s the excuse now?
August 10, 2009 at 3:50 pm
The problem of tranquillizer addiction in Africa and elsewhere has been reported here in the UK on TV and in the newspapers.
OK. I’d be interested in references to reputable sources on this. Again, if you can point to a solid investigation by an organization like the World Health Organization or the like, that would be really helpful.
Dr. Vernon Coleman was new to me. Spent some time looking up some of his work. I will say that some of his stuff could be taken as proper questioning of medical practices. Overall however I must conclude that he is a deliberate liar. And the lies he tells are harmful. He is making a living off the all-too-widespread medical ignorance of people. Ironically, he makes a living by telling people about the fraud and deceit of the established medical/pharmaceutical community by practicing fraud and deceit. I really can say very little that is kind about him, since on balance he is rather monstrous.
Looked at a bit more of Gadsby’s work. She seems to be mostly focused on the problems with overprescription of anti-depressants. Frankly I agree that they are overprescribed. I am not sufficiently versed in the addictiveness of such drugs to comment on that much (though of course I do know that almost any psychoactive drug can be addictive). I did not see anything by her about the third world on the benzo.org site. If you have anything like that, especially something like a recognized organization doing an investigation, I’d be interested to read it.
After reading a bit more, I think that on balance Gadsby is relatively balanced. She is a bit agendized, but it does not appear, at least in what I read, to be making her horribly bent. Given how common it is for people to become utterly prejudiced about their personal hobby horses, I must credit Ms. Gadsby for not succumbing to that foible. (She may have done so a little, but not glaringly so.)
Anyway, thanks for pushing me to read Gadsby a bit more. Sorry I could not be at all kind about Coleman, but his ilk honestly angers me.
August 4, 2009 at 3:17 am |
I see this as an example of how little people really know the bible. Even many that claim to have read the bible in full can believe in it fully. Even when they claim they have faith most know that you have to get real help from other people not some being you pray to. Of course they then claim that the doctor was how god answered it. Of course when they pray and the doctor screws up it was his fault not gods.
August 4, 2009 at 8:57 am |
Jesus is not above using faith healing methods himself:
As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”
Jesus answered, “Neither did this man sin, nor his parents; but, that the works of God might be revealed in him. I must work the works of him who sent me, while it is day. The night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” When he had said this, he spat on the ground, made mud with the saliva, anointed the blind man’s eyes with the mud, and said to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which means “Sent”). So he went away, washed, and came back seeing. (John 9:1-7)
I’ve seen local faith healers use spit (and urine) for a variety of cures, but none could claim to help the blind see.
August 4, 2009 at 10:41 am |
I mentioned this in your previous blog post after someone said that refusing medical care is not, actually, a measure of faith.
My reply then seems fitting here, as well. These people have so much faith and trust in their God that they take these words to be literal because there’s nothing that says they can’t. There’s nothing that says that these passages claim to be metaphorical or allegorical. They have so much faith that it overrides their common sense that these diseases will kill their children if they don’t get medical attention. Their faith is so strong that it even breaches their natural inclination to get their children the help they need.
We know that these parents love their children. Of course they do. Otherwise, they wouldn’t call upon the power of an omnipotent God to heal them. They genuinely feel like that is the best and most effective option available. To have so much faith that you would turn your child’s life over to God’s mercy is absolutely mind-boggling. However, I have yet to hear someone say that you can have too much faith in God. If all it takes is faith like a mustard seed to move a mountain, these people’s faith should move heaven and earth to heal their child.
And yet, these children invariably die or are forcibly removed from their parents’ care and given proper medical treatment. We have to ask ourselves why. Does God punish them for taking Him at his word and not showing more discernment? Even though the Bible puts so much stress on having faith and trusting all things in God and that God cares more about the hairs on your head than you can comprehend, He will let your children die because you trust Him too much?
Of course, there is a simpler answer: God is not real and, thus, can’t answer prayer to heal children.
August 4, 2009 at 2:51 pm |
There have been two recent cases of children being allowed to die by “Christian” parents who were “praying for them”.
See http://freethinker.co.uk/page/3/
August 4, 2009 at 3:30 pm |
You are wrong for few simple reasons. I’m sure since you seek truth, and not just sensationalism, you’ll post an apology for your mis-representation of Christianity tomorrow…
1. Not everything that was said to the Disciples is meant to be normative for all of Christendom. If I tell my brother something, and you overhear, are you then to assume I am talking to you as well? Of course not. This is like taking a line that Romeo says to Juliet and assuming Romeo was talking to you specifically.
2. God uses many different methods to accomplish His will. God can certainly use a Doctor to heal you, in the same way he used a group of immoral brothers and slave traders to accomplish His purpose and will in reference to Joseph (see Gen. 37).
3. Do you see how illogical is is that you used a couple of misquoted Bible verses to prove a Biblical radio host wrong? This is like me using the Descent of Man to prove Creationism.
I know you are already convinced against all logic that there is no God, but if Antony Flew can come to recognize that logically there has to be a Deity, than maybe you will someday too.
August 4, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
In regards to number 1, where in the bible does it say that it isn’t literal? Why do many christians claim that the bible is god’s word to man?
To #2 again where does it say this? Why is it that god needs doctors? Shouldn’t any of us with the faith in your god be able to do anything a doctor does? The bible does say it only talk a small amount of faith to have your pray answered.
How have they been misquoted?
August 5, 2009 at 4:02 am |
Baconsbud,
I never said it wasn’t literal, just that the verses in question were done in a specific time in history, at a specific place. Does Jesus heal today? Definitely, but we cannot assume that how something was done while He walked the earth is how things are done today.
Jesus told one man he healed to wipe mud on his eyes, another was told to dip in the water, and others just get the phrase, “get up and walk”. He didn’t heal everybody the same, so we can safely assume that Doctors assisting in the healing process are fully in accordance with his will.
August 5, 2009 at 4:15 am
What does time and location have to do with this? You are talking about a being that is claimed to be all knowing. Time and place wouldn’t be a factor if he is writing or having an instruction book written. It would apply to all times and places. If it just applies to a set time and place then there should be more instructions for the new situations so we fallible humans don’t screw it up.
August 4, 2009 at 6:45 pm |
1. This teaching is published in a book that Christians use as a basis for their faith and instruction for a Christian life. If it wasn’t for “all of Christendom”, why put it in the Gospel at all? Who cares if Jesus told his disciples that only they could have special superpowers if they had faith?
2. Why didn’t God use medicine to save people from a few hundred years ago? Why do we get special treatment? The lifespan in Jesus’ time was in the mid thirties.
3. How have I misquoted the verses? You’ve only discussed one. The other two show Jesus telling “all of Christendom” that their faith and prayers to God will heal them.
Next time you want to accuse me of misrepresenting something, try actually having a valid point.
August 5, 2009 at 4:19 am |
The Book is most definitely “FOR” all Christendom, it just wasn’t TO all Christendom. If your still having problems with this, I’ll expound more later.
Your “average lifespan” is probably based on a worldwide average. The middle-east was higher, right around what David says in Psalms of “70 years” for a healthy person (Ps. 90:10). If it really was only 30 years, then Jesus was already an old man, so His dying really wasn’t as much of a sacrifice.
August 5, 2009 at 9:53 am
By Jesus committing suicide while fully knowing he would be alive again in three days would not equate to much of a sacrifice. On that we agree.
I didn’t claim every person died in their 30′s. Obviously some people lived into old age.
This was the average life-span of the time, regardless of what King David claimed. This was due to the extremely high infant and child mortality rate pulling the average life expectancy numbers down.
God apparently was too busy to work through “doctors” of the time to save these babies and young children.
Wikipedia on historical Life expectancy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy
August 7, 2009 at 9:24 am |
I, too, looked up that page on Wikipedia, BEattitude, and, like you, thought it enlightened us not one jot! We don’t want average life spans, as they are hopelessly skewed by infant mortality rates. It’s obvious, as the writer says, that people who survived to adolescence tended to live quite long lives in the past (barring accidents, wars, or plague!). What we really need are tables that show the median or mean life spans. Does anyone have any ideas?
August 6, 2009 at 1:39 pm |
Not everything that was said to the Disciples is meant to be normative for all of Christendom. If I tell my brother something, and you overhear, are you then to assume I am talking to you as well? Of course not. This is like taking a line that Romeo says to Juliet and assuming Romeo was talking to you specifically.
So does your bible have asterisks and footnotes to tell you when god is talking to you and when he’s talking to Peter?
August 4, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
Neither Jesus nor his disciples are here to do the healing as described in Matthew. Why shouldn’t God use doctors to heal?
There is an old medical saying – “God does the healing and the doctors collect the fee”. If you have ever been close to someone who is seriously ill you realize that what the doctor provides is treatment – and this is not quite the same as healing.
August 4, 2009 at 5:55 pm |
The doctors are providing treatment, and the body is healing itself! You don’t think it’s magic, do you?
August 4, 2009 at 6:49 pm |
All biblical healings are instantaneous and completely miraculous. Medical healings are slow, painful and often have terrible permanent side effects. Science and medicine are not a miracle. It is the result of hundreds of years of research and repeated trial and error.
August 4, 2009 at 11:20 pm |
All of the arguments are pointless when you come to a crucial question: Why is God punishing these parents for having faith? They are putting absolute trust in God and He is letting their child die because of it. And you know what? Maybe they don’t have the mental capacity to tell that the passages in the Bible don’t apply to them. How would they know otherwise? There is nothing in the Bible that tells them that God doesn’t work in the same way He did in the New Testament.
So, in your mind, is God punishing these parents for their naivety or their faith? There’s nothing malicious or evil about what these parents are doing. They sincerely believe what they read in the Bible and want the best for their kids. Honestly, if God existed and answered prayers like He did in the New Testament, I would favor that, too. Like theBEattitude said, why would you subject your child to lengthy, painful procedures when it is supposedly documented that God can heal people instantly with a little faith?
August 4, 2009 at 11:52 pm |
Not that any argument like this helps the kid any.
The point is, human medicine is still imperfect – and, has a good chance of being driven by greed rather than goodwill. <__>
Therefore, the only thing we can hope for, or TRY to make sure of, is that we never, ever fall sick. Because NOBODY. NOBODY. Will take care of us when we do.
August 4, 2009 at 11:54 pm |
Ok, never use Japanese smilies here. Because this one got cut off:
“God may possess power greater than human medicine, but most of the time he can’t even be half-assed to lift a finger. >_>”
August 5, 2009 at 3:13 am
So that’s what they are chicken! You learn something new every day!!
August 5, 2009 at 10:58 am |
This is off topic, but if I recall you said you were in Iowa. Did you see this: http://richarddawkins.net/article,4132,Iowa-Atheists-and-Freethinkers-launch-awareness-campaign,Pat-Curtis—Radio-Iowa ?
August 5, 2009 at 12:27 pm |
Nice. First Gay Marriage attacks Iowa, now Atheists. People are going to stop thinking Iowa is full of simple minded farmers.
February 19, 2010 at 12:23 pm |
Mind if I throw in a couple of cents to the discussion? I hope that I may have something germane to contribute, perhaps not new to all readers/posters of this forum, but I didn’t detect it in the comments so far, so I thought I’d go ahead and stick my neck out like this:
Actually, in the spirit of a picture is worth a thousand words, the painting of Jesus guiding the hand of the surgeon comes pretty darn close to the way I view things. For me “faith healing” and “medicine” are not either/or but an integrated, holistic “both/and”. So I would not necessarily share the opinion of the Catholic radio host who would “run for the exit” nor would I hesitate to use the best medicine available.
This isn’t a pragmatic chuck-theology-when-my-life-is-on-the-line thing as some may suggest. My theology (I make no claim for others) compels me to use medicine. In short, my theology on this issue goes like this: God can and does work miracles (instantaneous, complete, unexplainable by any science ancient or modern), but most of the time he wants us to thoroughly exhaust what he has already given us first or at least in conjunction with a request for a miracle.
I have a 3-yr-old daughter. It’s easy for her to say, “I don’t know,” in reply to questions. It’s easy for her to say, “I can’t find it; you find it!” But it’s my job as a parent to prod her into using the brains and resources already at her disposal. That’s a rough analogy: I believe that God has given me my brains, and everyone else their brains, and the complete panoply of culture, scientific/medical knowledge, etc. For me to say, “To use medicine means I have no faith in God,” is like throwing these gifts of God back in his face. It’s being a crybaby and rebellious. So I think the “faith-only” people are immature at best and – here I would agree with a lot of your posters – dangerous and irresponsible at worst. You can imagine that I support religious freedom (including the right to not believe anything or anything in particular), but I do draw the line e.g. when people’s lives are at stake – yes, I would support intervention when parents refuse vaccinations or other treatments. (Oh, boy, this actually brings up the whole autism-vaccination debate, which I really don’t want to get into here, except to note that there’s lots of people who decline medicine for non-religious reasons. Also, when talking about involuntary interventions, I am stating a general principle and not rendering a blanket judgment on all cases.)
By the way, my theology is flexible enough that I am quite happy using the services of atheist/agnostic doctors – if they’re good and I trust them – over against someone who aligns with my beliefs up and down the line but is kinda shaky medically, clinically or interpersonally. I believe that God gifts everyone whether they acknowledge him or not, much like the world’s always been round even when most folks thought it was flat.
Right now I’m addressing what is more or less a sub-topic. You’ve tagged this post under “conflicting Bible teaching of the week”. I just wanted to point out that for some of us there may be a tension (it may not always be comfortable, and may leave some questions unanswered for the time being), but there is no conflict for me here.
(By the way, I wonder if when you heard the Catholic radio host he had a chance to express his whole mind on the topic of miracles/faith healing. The concept of miracles and healing is very well-grounded in Catholic tradition, including up to the modern day with crying statues of the Virgin Mary, pilgrims visiting Lourdes getting healing, etc. I suspect that his more carefully stated position would actually be closer to my own, that is, beware of those who spurn medicine as somehow beneath a Christian, but being open and even praying for miracles.)
The larger issue which you and other posters seem to be raising, however, is theodicy – “How can God be x when I see y happening?” That is a question that we all must wrestle with – why life doesn’t meet expectations, why theory doesn’t match experience. (It’s not just a religious question; anyone who thinks and plans and feels and breathes runs into the same thing.) I’ll happily respond to all serious correspondents on this, as it is probably getting off-topic for now, but I will make one good-natured by basically serious shot across the bow: Beware of starting with the assumption that God (or life, or people, or…) has to make total sense to you. A god (sic) that you completely understand is not a god worthy of your worship – it means that you are your own God. And there are real consequences for going either way (demanding that God/god/life/etc. make total sense to you, vs. contenting yourself not so much in knowing but in being known).
Thanks everybody for contributing and posting and reflecting. I appreciate the attitude of honest inquiry and openness here.
May 29, 2010 at 6:13 am |
I agree Brad. I’m 31 and have allowed myself to be put in hospital on a very potent medication treatment for a serious illness. I too loved the picture at the top. It comforts me.
I have worked in this medical industry before I became unwell and yes I concur that because of “trial and error” treatments at times and systemic blunders people have died plenty but I don’t see the people who set out to try to help as having any evil intent whatsoever. I also have been a believer in God and his desire to heal most of my life, whether it be through the hands of medical doctors, miraculous healing, or slow restoration. My faith is in rhe fact that He is a kind God who longs to heal us. But the crunch of it is this … I am not God, I am not sovereign over all – but no matter what the outcome for me… I will love him and know I am loved. I hope that for all of you.