Who would have known that a couple of guys from Columbine would come from behind and put guns to the spine of some innocent people – the teachers, the students. The feet of the teachers are screeching through rooms. The mood has been set by the fear of the villains. The bombs and the threats are by Eric and Dillon. America’s villains. Generic you’re feeling? It is not. It is the plot for a pair that is chilling in the glorious heavens, standing for Christ in a crisis. I know that it’s rare what I’m feeling, excitement incited – declaring the Pilgrims’ faith and their fate that I’ll share with my children. Cassie and Rachel, the past of the patrons that passed through the ages in Africa, Asia. The Master that saved you, the laughter, the hatred. Jesus predicted that the masses would hate you. So, don’t think it strange if a change might occur. If it does, are you ready and prepared for the curve and a turn for the worst? Would you fight, would you fall, would you die for the Christ? That’s the price of the call!

Frustrated by the snares and the toils, parents annoy you. Truth of the matter is we’re arrogant, spoiled. America’s soil has soiled us, sort of. And pastors insist on declaring us royal. And it’s true that we are but we take it too far to the point where we break and we take down the bar and forsake all the parts of The Faith that are hard to embrace after all. We’ve outsmarted the martyrs. We race up the charts. If you trace it to the start, you will find that the way to escape from the dark and your wake is to carve off the weight and the heart of the truth, until everybody loves you. Jesus said woe to you, old and new saints, that hold a view that you can go through The Faith with nobody loathing you. That’s a view that you only can hold when your home is the States. So, don’t think it strange if a change might occur. If it does, are you ready and prepared for the curve and a turn for the worst? Would you fight, would you fall, would you die for the Christ? That’s the price of the call!

The bones that are picked are the bones that depict that they combed through their homes with the stones and the sticks. The aromas – a stench – so they rose up against them at home and at Rome throwing stones at the Christians. Got a hold of them, gripped them, kicked them, scarred them, saw them, sawed them, they were thrown in a pit with the toads and the vermin. I’m rolling the clips. It’s urgent the scourges, the groans from the licks, the anger, the stranglers, the hangers, the danger for all of the Christians that rolled in a clique ended up in the teeth of the beast that would feast on the saints that would preach. They were thrown over cliffs. This is not known to exist in the States or the place where the home is just bliss. This song is intense because it’s truth and I’m trying to convince you that no one’s exempt. Yet no one’s equipped. Got our phones on our clips. Our focus is both on our loans and our cribs, our fitness, our business has grown in a pinch. Would you fight, would you fall, would you ball up your fist? Would you falter or march to your grave because you’re saved and your life is in Christ and to die is to gain? Would you die in His name for the rise of His fame despising the shame because you’re promised to reign?

Lyrics from Legacy by Da Truth, a Cross Movement Records artist.

So far, we have seen that work of Jesus atoning on the cross was for the sins of His children. As noted in 1 John 3:8, He has destroyed the works of the devil which is the mastery of sin. Those who abide in Christ, who are no longer children of the devil, will stop practicing sin. This is the work of the atonement, the destruction of sin’s mastery over us. John argued that we are unable to practice sin if we are children of God.

If we argue that sickness and poverty was also atoned for, then we equate sickness and poverty with sin. Thus, it would be right to warn a poor or sick person that he is not saved. Paul would be wrong to tell Timothy to drink some wine for his sick stomach and frequent ailments (1 Tim. 5:23). He would also need to question his sonship in Christ since “the thorn in the flesh” was never removed – even after consistent prayer (2 Cor. 12:7-10).

No, these ideas are absurd. Timothy wasn’t living in sin. Paul wasn’t a child of the devil. Moreover, the blind beggar of John 9 was only healed of his blindness, not his poorness. Jesus had no home or finances to afford one (Lk. 9:58) nor did he have money to pay His taxes (Matt. 17:24-27). This idea is so absurd that it puts the entire Bible into question. What else could we say to all of the disciples who were martyred or left without anything but rocks?

Not only are these ideas absurdities, they are also premised on a faulty foundation – the nature and origin of evil. They suppose that all evils are from Satan and therefore, sin. But the Bible says something far different.

The proponents of this idea pose the question: Who should we blame for all of the evils in the world according to Genesis 3? They are expecting the answer to be Satan since since Adam sinned after the temptation of Satan and there is a law of cause and effect.

So begin there. Let’s look at what happens in Eden. There are only four characters to consider as the story unfolds. And we must blame at least one for the evils that we suffer today. There is God, Satan (appearing as a serpent), Adam and Eve. Since God holds Adam responsible for Eve’s actions, we will reduce the count to three (less Eve).

The question is, “Who do we blame for the evils we see today?” First, God created Satan and Adam. Then tells Adam to not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:16). Second, Satan appears and bears the mark of sin (he is deceitful). So, at some point before now and after he was created, he sinned against God. However, his sin has not effected the rest of creation (there is no curse on creation). Adam was not suffering any evils, except the temptation of Satan.

It is worth our effort to ask ourselves at this point, if the serpent is bringing evil into the garden, a land upheld by God for man, then God had to have allowed it. In other words, the very fact that Satan is tempting Eve means that God permitted and, since He is Sovereign and Omniscient, preordained it to happen. So, the first evil is seen in Satan as part of God’s ordained plan. This evil is of Satan’s doing and God’s ordination. We blame Satan first, then (due to the cause and effect) we blame God (not for doing evil, but for making a being who could do evil and then allowing the being to be evil).

Third, Satan tempts Eve and Adam stands by passively witnessing it (which is arguably an evil thing to do since he was her protector and accountability). He then submits to her by taking the fruit after she eats (another evil thing to do since it is a distortion of God’s design). And Adam eats and breaks the command of God.

Knowing this, God comes down to the garden and asks what happened (but, not because He didn’t know). He asks Adam since he was holding Adam accountable. Adam blames Eve. Eve blames Satan. And so do the believers of the “adding to the atonement” teaching.

Now, at this point, and in my opinion, if we blame Satan, we are no more smarter than Eve. If we blame Eve, we are no more smarter than Adam. Both of them were trying to escape the wrath of God and not thinking godly. I would suggest that if you do the same, you are guilty of the same. This is sinful reasoning.

So, God curses Satan because he tempted Eve (Gen. 3:14-15). He curses Eve because she disobeyed God and didn’t submit to Adam (Gen. 3:16). He curses Adam (and all the Earth) because he disobeyed God and submitted to Eve (Gen. 3:17-19).

From then until now, suffering has been a reality in this world. The question is not who did Adam blame or who did Eve blame, but who did God blame? The answer is simple, the immediate blame rests on those who did wrong. God cursed all of them for what they did individually. Then cursed the whole of creation for what Adam did individually.

But this doesn’t answer the question of evil’s origin. We first noticed evil in Satan. Then we noticed it in Adam. Then we noticed it in Eve. Then the Fall occurred. When I was taught the teaching of adding sickness and poverty to the atonement, I was told to consider the cause and effect relationship in the story of the Fall. In other words, what caused Adam to sin? What caused Eve to sin?

Not to get too complex, but the issue of evil existing does not depend on the issue of Fallenness. We notice evil before the Fall of Adam. Moreover, evil is not necessarily sin, the breaking of God’s command as we just discovered.

We saw evil when the serpent questioned God’s command and was being deceitful. We saw evil when Even questioned God’s command. We also saw evil when Adam passively watched his wife be deceived, tempted, and sin. But the law of God was broken when Adam took the forbidden fruit from the hands of his wife and ate it. This is what God commanded him not to do.

So, whether you disbelieve God’s divine design of man and woman and their roles or not, you must reconcile the fact that evil was in the world before the sin of Adam. Moreover, the curse of creation did not come until God judged Adam. So there is a time lapse between sin and the suffering that the world sees even today. In other words, God cursed the whole of creation, not Adam.

Still, to resolve the issue of blame, let’s see how God answers the question. Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, argued that Adam is to blame for the sins of mankind. “For as in Adam all die” (1 Cor. 15:22). That is to say that we are all represented in Adam. We are being held responsible for what Adam has done because Adam was our representative.

“Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned … Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.” (Rom. 5:12-14)

We are all sinners and we will all be judged just as Eve was judged for her sin. We can blame Adam for his sin that made us all sinners. However, we are not removed from our own sin. We sin because we are sinners. And we will be punished for our sin. We are all guilty.

However, if you want to force the blame to one cause, then you must blame God. For it was God who created all things and created all things in a way to function. God is not evil, but He made man (and angels) with the ability to do evil.

Notice that in the Romans passage above, Jesus is the second Adam (as far as our timeline is concerned), but the first Adam is called a “type” which is a shadow of the real thing. In actuality, Jesus was first and before the existence of man. Adam was made in order to shadow Jesus. In other words, God ordained the atoning work of Christ and then ordained Adam to bring it about because a shadow does not appear until the object of the shadow does.

The origin of evil is not the origin of sin. The question of who brought evil into the world is not the question of who brought sin into the world. Isaiah 45:7 reads, “I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the LORD, who does all these things.” Amos seems to agree, “Does disaster come to a city, unless the LORD has done it?”

Ecclesiastes 7:14 says, “When times are good, be happy; but when times are bad, consider: God has made the one as well as the other.” And finally, Lamentations 3:37-38, “Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come?” The word “calamity” is the word for evil (as translated in the King James Version).

Apparently, some evil is the immediate work of God. This is natural evil. Another evil is moral evil. This is a the desire and action of doing contrary to God’s law. Another word for this kind of evil is sin. Sickness and poverty are not categorically called moral evils. They are natural evils.

There is more to be said, but the point is this: Evils are not all from the devil nor man, some are from God. The final cause of all things, however, belongs to the Lord. He has preordained that all these things happen in order that we understand and know God as the one who “practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth” (Jer. 9:24). Ultimately, things that are good or bad, will bring God glory because this is the reason that they were made. It may show His justice or it may show is mercy, but either way, it will show Him.

So, to answer the question stated at the beginning, “Who should we blame for all of the evils in the world?” If we pointing blame to the first cause, then we blame God. If we are blaming the immediate cause, we blame man. The devil was all apart of the divine plan. We can only blame him for being an agent to help bring things about.

In closing, sickness and poverty are a result of the curse God placed on His creation. We are all cursed because of Adam. We sin because we are sinners because of Adam. We are held guilty before God because of our sins and our association with Adam.

For this, we need the perfect Adam. We need the one who Adam shadowed. We need Christ. So Christ, atoned for our sins. If we believe, we then adopted into Christ and out of Adam. We are then in association with Christ.

Still, here we are in this cursed land and in our cursed bodies. The curse remains. But our association has changed. So we live and die here with sickness and poverty and other natural evils because God has permitted it and ordained it to happen for His glory.

The third and final passage that was key in communicating the idea that healing and financial blessing is a portion of 1 John 3:8. It reads, “The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil.”

The argument is simple. “What are the works of the devil? They are evils like sin, sickness, poverty, and the like. So, God comes to destroy those works in the atonement.” When asked to explain how these works can all be attributed to the devil, the response was, “In the garden of Eden, man was led to sin by the temptation of Satan. Where else did these things originate and who brought them here?”

The origins of certain evils are worth their attention alone. So for now, let’s focus on the proof text. Our end is to determine exactly what the “works of the devil” are in the context of John’s letter.

While the context of the letter is helpful, the immediate paragraph and will chapter suffice. The theme is clear and easy to understand. Verses 1-3 speak about our being in Christ and like Christ.

“See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are.” As Christians, we share in the grace of God and are called his beloved children. Thus, if the world does not know Him, they will not know us (3:1).

The lack of recognition of the world also leans itself to the fact that we are not yet glorified in our bodies. “Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him.” So, until the Lord glorifies us, we will suffer evils just the rest of God’s creation. No particular evils are within the context of this letter, except the evil of transgressing against God.

One could assume that John would include natural calamities in this verse since we suffer those until the Lord’s return. But, that is not his focus. His theme here is sin and the Children of God. His point is that the two shouldn’t go together. “Everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure” (3:3).

In verses 4-11, John draws a distinction between those who are children of God and those who are children of the devil. In his summary, he says “By this it is evident who are children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God” (3:10).

The six verses leading up to that explain his argument. He provides several logical statements that help us correlate between that works of the Lord and the works of the devil. The first is this: “Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness” (3:4). Simply put, if you practice sin you are practicing lawlessness which is the breaking of God’s commands.

John adds a sort of foot-note to that, “You know that he appeared to take away sins, and in him there is no sin” (3:5). Therefore, verse 6 concludes, “No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him.” This is the same statement said in to different ways. No matter how it is said, the truth is this: if you are a Christian, you do not practice sin since Jesus appeared to take away sins and in Him there is no sin. Notice the use of recognizing and knowing Him is employed to identify one with those in verse 1 who are not children of God.

The logic goes like this: Jesus takes away sins. If you abide in Him, you will not keep sinning. If you do keep sinning, you do not abide in Him. Jesus has not taken away your sins.

The following verses do this all over again. “Little children, let no one deceive you.” He says this because no matter who you abide in, you are a little child. You are a child of God or a child of the devil (3:10).

“Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil” (3:7-8). This more or less the same thing communicated in verses 4-6 except it is in the context of doing right instead of wrong.

Here is the logic: If you practice righteousness, you abide in God since God is righteous. If you practice sin, you abide in the devil since the devil sins. God destroyed the works of the devil, so you cannot abide in God and do the works of the devil. This just doesn’t add up.

John’s math is clear. If you are in God, you will live in righteousness. If you are in Satan, you will live in sin. The works of God is righteousness. The works of Satan is sin. Whichever you practice will determine who your father is. You will either be a child of God or a child of Satan.

Thus, verse 9 reads, “No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God.” Notice the use of the word “cannot” which refers to ability rather than will. God destroys your ability to practice sin. In Satan, you have no ability to practice righteousness.

I think the theme is clear. The context is the practicing of sin and righteousness and how our practices help identify our father (as noted in verse 10). Therefore, the works of the devil should be clear. They are practicing sin. Or better put, the mastery of sin. The works of the devil are the inability to practice righteousness and the full ability and inclination to practice sin.

No where in this chapter, or the entire epistle for that matter, is sickness or poverty mentioned. And, in case you are still not entire convinced, notice 1 John 3:8 parallels an earlier verse and see if that answers the question in and of itself:

Jesus “appeared to take away sins.” (3:5)

Jesus “appeared to destroy the works of the devil.” (3:8)

John goes to great lengths to communicate his points. He says the same thing over and over and then again in a different way. There is really no reason why we should miss his point. The works of the devil are what Jesus appeared to take away. He did so at the atonement.

What did He take away? If it were sickness and poverty, then Christians should not suffer sickness and poverty the same way the world does. For we would be unable to do so. However, if it is the mastery of sin, then Christians should not practice sinning the same way the world does. For we are unable to do so.

An excellent argument falls out at the bottom of the examination of the text. To say that Jesus destroyed sickness and poverty, would lay a burden on many who profess to believe in Him. Thus, the danger ensues. As mentioned before, when a person does not experience the healing and financial blessing that the atonement seemingly provides, he or she may think that they are not a child of God.

This is easy to see. Simply substitute sickness and poverty everywhere you see the word sin. If the text still makes sense, then maybe you have a case. However, you will also make sickness and poverty a synonym for lawlessness. And by doing so, you equate sickness and poverty with sin. Thus, it is appropriate to tell a person who is sick or broke, that they are living in sin until they get healthy and get more money. Because, as John argued, he who practices sickness and poverty is a child of the devil (3:4, 8, 10).

And this leads us to our final examination. It is not over any specific key passage. Rather, it is over the truth about evils and their origins.

The second key passage cited as a proof text for this teaching is John 10:10. It reads, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly.”

The argument builds upon the last phrase “have life and have it abundantly.” It contrasts the phrase with “steal and kill and destroy.” The reasoning goes, if the thief is taking away from us by causing sin, sickness, and poverty, and Jesus came to do the opposite, He should be reversing these things. And especially this, Jesus didn’t come to give life and life only. (This is noted to be spiritual life in eternity.) He also came to give that and more – namely, a prosperous physical life in opposition to what the thief does.

However, a closer examination of the text will reveal something quite different. As done with Isaiah 53:5, let us get a context on the passage in order to set our minds in the place to understand.

First of all, there is no disconnection between chapter 9 and chapter 10 of John. The narrative just continues. So a better place to start may be in the chapter before. There, we find the story of when Jesus heals the bling beggar. In verse 2, the disciples asked Jesus, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” He negates both saying, it was so that “the works of God might be displayed in him.” (So this whole incident was preordained by God to happen for a particular purpose which, I think, unfolds in chapter 10.)

Jesus heals the beggar. The beggar does not know who healed him since he was blind when Jesus touched him. Seeing the beggar now healed, the people there take him to the Pharisees. The Pharisees were already after Jesus because he was a threat to their rule. So they ignored the healed beggar, cast him out of the synagogue and went straight after Jesus. They cared nothing for the beggar (Jn. 9:13-34).

Jesus heard that they cast him out and goes to him. He tells the beggar who He is and the beggar worships Him (Jn. 9:38). Jesus says, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” Then He accuses the Pharisees of being those who will become blind.

The point here is that Jesus is giving sight to the blind and causing blindness to those who think they see. The Pharisees, who pomp around as the enlightened ones who see and know, are coming into judgment.

Now, in chapter 10, Jesus speaks to the crowd for they were all watching. It is a mixed crowd made up of Pharisees, Jews, the disciples, the healed beggar, and more. Jesus speaks to them in a “paroimia” which is more of a simile than a parable. He says this:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber. But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.”

It is important to see the subjects of the story. They are the sheepfold, the door, the thief, the robber, and the shepherd. Our goal is to find out who the thief is and where Jesus is found in order to understand John 10:10.

We need to be natural and general with our interpretation of the story since it is just simile. The purpose was to communicate a truth to those who would understand and to hide such truth from those who were not meant to understand. As indicated in verse 6, the Pharisees did not understand. This story, then, is a judgment to them.

Judea was very familiar with shepherds and sheep. The land was a plateau and dry. There was little grass except out in the pastures. Each day, a shepherd would lead the sheep into the sheepfold so that the Gatekeeper (or Porter) would watch over them during the night. The next morning, the shepherd will go and call out to his sheep. They would hear and recognize his voice and follow.

During the night, thieves and robbers would attempt to climb the walls to get the sheep. The thieves would steal them and the robbers would kill them for meat. But the shepherd was the only one who could go through the gate and draw the sheep out.

In this story, the sheep are the Israelites. The shepherd is the Messiah, Jesus. The thieves and robbers are the Pharisees (and any one else who would seek to cross the wall). In the second part of the story, Jesus refers to Himself as the door as well (Jn. 10:7,9). So, it is through Him that the sheep enter and it is He that leads them out as their shepherd.

The contrast here is the true and false shepherds. Christ is the true. The sheep here is voice and follow. The Pharisees are the false (Jn. 10:8). They climb the walls to steal, kill, and destroy the sheep (just as they did with the healed beggar).

So, in this context Jesus says to the people who understand, “I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly” (Jn. 10:9-10). Jesus adds, when the wolves come, the false shepherd “flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep” (Jn. 10:13).

What is clear is that the thief in verse 10 is a simile to those who are self-appointed shepherds. They care nothing of the sheep. They come in the wrong way and steal rather than lead. Jesus, in contrast, is the true shepherd and the door by which the sheep come to eternal life. The thief is not Satan nor suffering. However, the false shepherds do cause suffering.

Thus, the question is this: What does it mean that Jesus came so that the sheep he leads out will have life and have it abundantly? A good indication, to get us started, is found in the verse before where it says in the simile, that those who are saved “will go in and out and find pasture.”

Is the pasture symbolic of earthly prosperity? Does it refer to healing and blessing? John wrote much about “life” in his gospel. In fact, the word appears in the fourth verse of the first chapter: “In him was life, and the life was the light of men.” This is a reference to Jesus.

John’s use of life throughout his gospel is not limited to physical or spiritual eternity. At times, he references the quality of life. And this is where the examination has its real value. What kind of quality of life is John meaning when he calls it abundant?

There are several passages to turn to in John’s gospel, but I’ll mention one. Back in chapter 6, John describes the story of the feeding of the five thousand. The crowd is following Jesus as he ministers and travels. Seeing the multitude of people hungry, Jesus feeds them by performing a miracle. He multiplies a young boy’s basket of bread and fish. The entire crowd is fed and then some.

The crowd, impressed with what just happened, pressed toward Jesus. So He withdrew to a mountain by Himself. The next day, a portion of the crowd found Jesus again and followed him for more food. But Jesus gives them none saying, “You are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life” (Jn. 6:26-27).

Jesus then calls Himself the “bread of life” (Jn. 6:35). But they grumbled because they wanted more food. They pressed Him several times and He still gave them no more. He only said that He was the food they needed. The word “life” is used many times here in reference to Himself rather than earthly provisions – in particular, food. Jesus denies them food in order to emphasize Himself as the necessity.

So life is meant to mean a quality of living that surpasses all considerations of natural life. It is the special quality of relationship that Jesus established between God and man. From this powerful quality of life flows freedom, knowledge, truth, and love that cannot be experienced through any other means. This is the life abundant. This is the extra stuff that is communicated in John’s gospel when he speaks of having life in Christ. It is the quality of trust in God. It is living beyond and through current sufferings.

So, the reference to going in and out and finding pasture makes more sense. It is not finding food since you can have none and still have such abundant life. You can live without natural provisions and experience abundance in Christ. Rather than healing and financial blessing, “go in and out and find pastures” refers to the freedom and safety those in Christ experience when the thieves come to steal, kill, and destroy.

In the context of John 10, these thieves come to take away the quality of relationship with God that Jesus came to give. They seek to harm people as they did the beggar. They seek their own gain and will cast the sheep out. And when the sheep are out, they are vulnerable to the wolves. But the sheep that are in Christ are safe in Him.

Matthew 24:24 says, “For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.” Those in Christ are safe in Christ. When the false shepherds come to deceive, the sheep that were drawn out by Jesus will not suffer such deceit. It is not possible. They are safe to go in and out and find pasture.

There is more to be said about this. Ezekiel 34 sheds a lot of light on this subject and shadows this exact story that we find in John 9 and 10. It is a prophecy against the shepherds of Israel. Jesus is the true shepherd that draws His sheep out through the gate and into a life of abundance where they enjoy a quality of life and relationship of trust in God.

In Christ, we are satisfied by Him since He is the bread of life. We need Him only. The things of this world, be they poverty or sickness, will come and the sheep following the Great Shepherd will enjoy abundance in God. “The cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful” (Matt. 3:22).

The abundant living that Jesus came to give is security, safety, and a quality of relationship in God whereby the Christian trusts and is satisfied in Him above all of the things that happen. This is how the disciples understood it. They were there when Jesus said these things.

The disciples suffered terrible persecution in their last years as all but one were martyred. Peter encouraged the suffering believers to keep the inheritance of heaven in mind as they bore the trails here on earth. Paul suffered many things even near death (1 Cor. 11:23-28). And, he could not heal his young disciple, Timothy (1 Tim. 5:23). All of them experienced something quite different than natural prosperity. They had a love and a relationship with God that exceeded anything that this earth could offer. This is the abundant life.

Three key passages were brought up in order to argue the belief that healing and financial prosperity are made available in the atonement. They are Isaiah 53:5, John 10:10, and 1 John 3:8. At this moment, I’ll focus my attention on the first one.

Isaiah 53:5 reads, “But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed.”

The argument says that the literal interpretation of this verse requires us to believe that Jesus suffered physically so that we can be healed physically. In other words, the word “healed” is interpreted with its most strict meaning and not figurative or metaphorical. It literally means, “to make healthy and whole.”

In the common use of the word today, we might find the word to be restricted to physical wholeness. However, in and of itself, the meaning of the word does not require physicality. In fact, an English dictionary gives one meaning as “to free from evil” which pays mind to matter. This is true especially when there is no object declared in the context as is the case here in Isaiah 53:5.

The writer does not tell us what is healed. Otherwise, we would not be discussing this now. The object of healing is not mentioned, but is implied. And, in my opinion, it is clear.

Nevertheless, the real issue is not over the English word heal but over the Hebrew word rapah. It is used in Isaiah six other times (Is. 6:10; 19:22; 30:26; 57:18-19) and in over half of these occurrences it refers to spiritual repair. Elsewhere in the Old Testament, the word is used the same way. Jeremiah 3:22 reads, “Return, O faithless sons; I will heal your faithlessness.” And, Psalm 107:20 says, “He sent out his word and healed them, and delivered them from their destruction.”

So, to begin with, the word translated into “we are healed” in Isaiah 53:5 is not restricted to physical repair only. To take the word at its most strict sense does not require it to refer to physical healing. Rather, it only requires the making whole of some thing.

The question is then, what is the thing that is healed? What is the object of the healing that we have because of the stripes that Jesus suffered? Without investigating the surrounding text, we have reason to believe that it is either physical healing or spiritual healing based on how the word is used in other passages.

When we study the context of Isaiah 53, I think that we discover a spiritual theme. It is dealing with Christ’s intercessory work between God and man. It is about He paying the physical price for our spiritual well-being. In fact, Peter interpreted verse 5 in this way, “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned – every one – to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all” (1 Pet. 2:24).

Notice the pattern that Isaiah provides in our text. He parallels the affliction of Christ with the redemption of man. He was “wounded” for our “transgression.” He was “crushed” for our “iniquities.” His “chastisement” brought us “peace.” And lastly, His “stripes” made us whole. He healed our souls.

It is important to note that all of this is translated into the past tense. The Hebrew verb forms here indicate that these are actions that are done once and not ongoing. So it is inappropriate to say that “by His stripes we are being healed” as would make sense if it were meant to be understood as physical healing. Rather, Jesus suffered the afflictions, died on the cross, and healed us once for all – spiritually. This is healing is actual and real. It is not coming and going.

If it were meant to be physical healing and meant to be coming and going then we must also understand our status before God the same way. Our peace derived from eternal hope will come and go. So will our salvation from sin. Physical healing brutally changes the meaning of the passage.

Still, this is not to say that physical healing is never experienced. It is safe for us to argue that the healing noted in this passage extends from the spiritual over into the physical in some ways. For example, knowing that we are once for all delivered from the guilt of sin, we can rest our anxieties because of our eternal hope. We can be emotionally and mentally sound no matter what our physical experience might be. But, to be fully healed in every sense of the word will not be a reality until we are resurrected. Therefore, healing is a benefit of the atonement, never an irrevocable gift.

Still, the fact remains that Isaiah 53:5 is not giving us any guarantee that we can experience physical healing this side of heaven. To say otherwise brings about all kinds of damage to the text and to our faith.

Although this matter relates to the core of Christianity, it is outside of what we call “essential truths” or those doctrines that a Christian must believe to be saved. Still, it is definitely close. In fact, at first glance, I was convinced that it was essential.

The line dividing this from the essentials is so thin. And this teaching comes radically close to crossing it. From a distance, I would not be surprised that most Christians considered it essential until further investigation. The atonement is the focal point of the Christian faith. It is the crease in the middle of a book to which all pages are bound. The Old Testament looked forward to it. The New Testament looked back. The atonement is the center stage, the main attraction, where God most glorifies Himself and demonstrates His power and nature. Yes, this issue is cutting it real close.

The fact is, in regards to the atonement we must believe that Christ died for our sins, vicariously paying our debt to the Lord. In doing so, Jesus made salvation available to those who believe. As far as the atonement, this is what we must know and believe in order to be saved. Adding to this by making healing and financial prosperity available at the same time, complicates things, but does not render your faith useless. No, you can be saved and believe these additions.

But make no mistake, these complications can be severe and fatal to some. If one believes that Jesus made salvation, healing, and financial prosperity equally available on the cross, then one may have expectations that are not met by God. And, if such expectations are high, one might walk away from Him.

Here is an example. Suppose I told you that Jesus died for you and wanted to give you salvation and a lollipop. You, being a lollipop lover, agreed. I mean, this is like having your cake and eating it, too (only it is a lollipop). You sign up for this Jesus and love him and your new life. But, after months have passed and you have not received your lollipop, you start to wonder.

At best, you are wondering what you did wrong. Did you believe enough? Did you have enough faith? Did you say the right thing? Did you do something to offend God so that He is not so gracious? At worst, you are wondering if you are really saved and if this Jesus is really God. If he hasn’t given me my lollipop, has he not given me my salvation either? Is Jesus a liar or unable to follow through on his promise? If he can’t grant me some candy, can he do the greater and save me from hell?

This sort of thinking sets people up with wrong expectations. The dangers are not necessarily at the time of decision, but afterward. Some people might think that they got a Jesus that they didn’t sign up for.

Of course, this is not far-fetched. There are scenes throughout the Scriptures where something similar happens. Take John 6 for example. A crowd numbering more than 5,000 is following Jesus. So He gathers with the disciples on a mountain top and sees the crowd. They are hungry. So Jesus takes the 5 loaves and 2 fish and feeds them (Jn. 6:9). The crowd was satisfied and impressed with Jesus.

The following day, some of the crowd remained at the foot of the mountain where they were fed the loaves and fish. Seeing Jesus, they pressed Him again for food. This time, He didn’t grant them anything, but to say that He should be their satisfaction, not food (Jn. 6:26-40).

The people grumbled, argued and eventually, “turned back and no longer walked with him” (Jn. 6:66). Apparently, Jesus doesn’t always give people their earthly desires and it results in the turning away. This was such a reality that immediately after this, Jesus turns to his twelve disciples and says, “Do you want to go away as well?”

Another story, and one that doesn’t require much telling, is the story of the rich young ruler. He came to Jesus with an eagerness to follow. Jesus tells him to give all the riches away first. Luke 18:23 says, “when he heard these things, he became very sad, for he was extremely rich.” The rich young ruler turned away just like the crowd.

Stories like this teach us that if we set people up with expectations of which there is no guarantee, we are possibly leading them to a different Christ altogether. We are leading them to a Jesus that will let them down.

Equating salvation with physical healing and financial blessing and making them equally available by the atonement is not necessarily essential at its core. However, as these biblical accounts detail, it can definitely change the outcome.

Suppose Jesus were to tell them that he would make them rich and keep their tummies full. I think that these stories would have had a totally different ending. And Jesus would not have said, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God” (Luke 18:25).

The dangers are real, but they are not for everyone. Those who add healing and prosperity to the atoning work of Christ while believing that salvation is the real prize, will likely not suffer this doctrine. However, those who signed up, basing their trust in this gospel and later find it untrue, will be like the crowd or the rich young ruler if God doesn’t intervene.

In short, the orthodox view of the atonement is safe – even if it were wrong. This new view of atonement is unsafe. The dangers are grave and they lie at the heart of Christianity – even unto our eternity.

Up until then, I knew of only one meaning for the word, “having a wicked or evil character.” But, thanks to the pop culture of that time, it now can mean the total opposite. In those days, we would compliment another’s bike or skateboard by saying that it was bad. We didn’t mean to say that it was evil, we meant that it was pleasing to see.

There are many words that have had their meanings altered throughout our history. This happens as culture groups emerge and influence society. It has happened for years – even before the American pop culture was born.

In more recent years, the same thing has happened with the word hell. An emerging culture took this word a bit further than it was originally defined. In the Bible, this word refers to a place of punishment of the wicked after death.

However, it has been used figuratively to refer to anything that is severely uncomfortable to someone. For example, someone who suffers a grave sickness might call that sickness their hell. I suppose that early on, those who used the word this way did not really mean to suggest that it was as bad as the biblical hell. Yet, as most word meanings develop over time, the word hell became less of a figurative word while used in the same way.

Unfortunately, these cultural changes sometimes influence the church in a bad way (that is, not in a good way). This has been the case for some preachers. As the word hell was used to mean things other than the spiritual place of punishment, these preachers have reread the Bible with new meanings.

So, as Christ has come to save people from hell, these preachers would preach that He has come to save people from things like poverty, sickness, drugs, low paying jobs, ugly spouses, speeding tickets and more. In fact, if the word hell means anything that makes you uncomfortable, the list can go on and on.

The harm in this is obvious. If you change your hell, you can then change your savior. To the one who is poor, Jesus is money. To the one who is sick, Jesus is healing. To the one who is married to an ugly woman, Jesus is the pretty girl. To the one who needs a better job, Jesus is that better job.

This is not to say that Jesus cannot or will never ordain that you get a promotion or be healed from some sort of illness. It is to say that those things are never Jesus. And Jesus is never them. If your hell is poverty, Jesus is not your savior. If your hell is ugliness, Jesus is not your savior. However, if your hell is the same as that in the Bible, a place of punishment for the wicked, then Jesus can be your savior (1 Tim. 1:15).

He is not into making you a “better” person, He is into making you a perfect person, a holy person. Sometimes, he uses sickness, poverty, and even ugliness to remind you of which savior He is.

Christ, You’re excellent, worthy,
I praise your Father. He’s made me a vessel of mercy.
Now show your glory’s weightiness to your church
And we’ll reflect back the radiance of your worth.
You have the power to rule and destroy,
But you’ll bring us in your Father’s presence where there’s fullness of joy,
And pleasures forever – never competitors,
Ever can threaten to sever you as my heavenly treasure.
It’s my endless endeavor to honor Him.
I want to sing because you’re so Sovereign and Conquering.
My vows due so I bow to ascribe value to my God and King.
We can’t compare your worth to pieces of gold.
You’re keeping me whole.
Worship’s a feast for my soul.
He’s in control I can’t explain how this suits me.
I feen to behold to gaze at your beauty.
And inquiring in your temple,
Face to face and praise your grace with no desires that are sinful,
You shed mad blood to cleanse cat’s crud,
You said that was your stead-fast love.
My master snatched this cat from tragic sadness,
Gave me ecstatic gladness.
He lavished matchless compassion
That attracts like magnets attached to cabinets.
You bought and claimed my weak blind soul
Like “going once, going twice, three times – sold -
To the God-man whose dressed in glory!”
Now I rest assuredly because His death secured me.
A front row view of his majestic splendor,
Which will never bore me I’ll be impressed forever.
He’s a consuming fire yet He’s tender.
He’s Jesus Christ the most blessed treasure.
A front row view of his majestic splendor,
Which will never bore me I’ll be impressed forever.
He’s a consuming fire yet He’s tender.
He’s Jesus Christ the most blessed treasure.

Lyrics from The Excellency of Christ by Timothy Brindle, a Lampmode Recording artist.

David was an adulterous man who murdered and slaughtered many men (1 Chronicles 22:8). He was also a poor father who didn’t manage his household well.

Abraham (who is mentioned to have great faith) lied about his wife becuase he was scared and lacked trust in God’s protection. He shamed his wife. He brought dishonor to God. Jacob’s sons (Judah and his brothers) were heads of the tribes of Israel and were sinful, weak, and unfaithful.

Tamar, the Canaanite daughter-in-law of Judah, lost here husband and brother-in-law to God’s wrath. She was a liar and tricked Judah into sexual relations. She was a prostitute. Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth were Gentiles (not God’s chosen people).

These were just a few of the names in the lists. We somtimes cringe at the grave sins they committed and forget that we are sinners just as much. Our sins may not be as morally tragic, but they are sin nevertheless. They are an offense to God. They are just as bad. We are no better than they that make up the lineage of Christ.

Still, they have a special grace being in the lineage of Christ. Independent of their choices and thoughts, God selected them as His heritage. His grace has been poured out throughout the Old Testament in each of their stories and it climatically pours once again in the birth of Jesus.

The list is more than a list of ancient names. It is a testimony to God’s grace and to the ministry of Jesus who “did not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matt. 9:13). John MacArthur asks this question, “If He has called sinners by grace to be His forefathers, should we be surprised when He calls them by grace to be His descendants?” An excellent question.

So what is it that we can learn fromthis line of old names? God has come to graciously save sinners. His lineage attests to this. Glor to God.

“The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.”

Matthew 1:1

Later in this chapter, Matthew accounts the time when Mary (mother of Jesus) was in conception. An angel appears to Joseph (Mary’s betrothed) and says to him, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins” (Matt. 1:20-21).

The name Jesus has a particular importance to it since it means “God saves.” The angel told Joseph to name Him for that very purpose – Jesus was being born to save God’s people from their sins. The name is equivalent to the Hebrew name Jeshua (or Jehoshua). In Hebrew they would say, “Jehovah (Yahweh) saves.”

In Greek, “Jesus the Messiah” actually reads, “Iesous Christos,” which is literally translated “Jesus Christ.” Contrary to some people’s thinking, Christ was not Jesus’ last name. It means as the NASB translates. His name is Jesus, and He is the Christ (or Messiah). The term messiah means, “anointed one.”

In the Old Testament, Israel’s prophets, priests, and kings were anointed. They were messiahs, if you will. However, Jesus was all three. He was prophet, priest, and king. Matthew calls Him “the Messiah” as He is the supreme head and true Messiah. There is no other messiah like Him. In fact, the others were only metaphors of Jesus. They pointed to Him. So the Jews had long expected the Anointed One to come as their great deliverer and monarch.

Jesus is also called, “the son of David.” This is a term familiar to the Jews. It refers to the Davidic Covenant. In 2 Samuel 7:12-13 God says to David, “When your days are complete and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your descendant after you, who will come forth from you, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.”

The promise points to Jesus. He is the descendant of David and heir to the eternal throne. He is the King of the Jews, the Messianic King. Therefore, since Matthew is showing Jesus’ legal right to the throne by being in the direct lineage of David, he is showing prophecy fulfilled. Jesus, the descendant of David, is the King who will reign on the throne forever.

Lastly, Matthew calls Jesus “the son of Abraham.” This also refers to a promise made in the Old Testament. In Genesis 22:18, God says to Abraham, “In your see all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.” Again, it is pointing to Jesus.

To a Jewish reader, these two names would be the two great starting-points of a true genealogy of the promised Messiah. Abraham was the first from whose family it was predicted that the Messiah would come, so David was the last. Together, both descriptions of Jesus affirm Him to be the Christ (the Messiah and King).