Isaiah 53 Makes Healing On Demand as much as Salvation on Demand, by faith, by the same accomplished atonement and intercession of Jesus Christ. If you negate one (usually healing) then you logically negate forgiveness of sins by the blood and intercession of Jesus Christ.
Some might complain, like a David Hume empiricist slut,[1] that this is not what I see and observe. Yet this presupposes that empiricism is a starting point of knowledge. Such a starting point would logically be a more foundational point than Scripture, because it would end up evaluating Scripture by it’s content. If you could stop humping on empiricism for a moment, then you might see the perverted rebellion and disgrace you are committing against God. I ask, when have the abysmal deficiencies of empiricism ever been answered? You know the Scripture gives infallible testimony of observations being wrong? You know this, right?[2] Ah, that’s right, you are already judging the Scripture with your observation anyway, so I guess appealing to the Scripture as a starting point, is wasted with a pervert like you.
You say that commanding people to have faith to receive healing that is given in Jesus’ bloodshed, puts too much of a burden on people? Are you serious? You cannot be that stupid. Wait, maybe you are? If you claim not to be a Christian, I cannot be judged by you, and so I do not care. If you claim to be a Christian then you have shared the gospel and done evangelism, correct? Ok. Wait, you still don’t get it do you? You have the audacity to burden people with the eternal state of their souls, being their responsibility to have faith in God’s atonement, or else burn in the torments of hell, and suffer eternal damnation. You burden them further by telling them that their loved ones (parents and children) have the same responsibility of faith, so that they are burning in Hell, if they lacked faith in God’s atonement. Yet, you dare say that I am burdening people with the “temporary” responsibility of healing by their faith in God’s atonement? How dense can you get?
Christ Our Healer:
“That Isaiah 53:4 cannot refer to disease of the soul, and that neither of the words translated “sickness” and “pain” have any reference to spiritual matters but to bodily sickness alone, is proven by Matthew 8:16, 17 – ” . . . and He cast out the spirits with His word, and healed all that were sick; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias, the Prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.” This is an inspired commentary on this 4th verse of Isaiah 53, plainly declaring that the prophet refers to bodily ailments, and therefore the word “sickness,” choli, must be read literally in Isaiah. The same Holy Spirit who inspired this verse quotes it in Matthew as the explanation of the universal application by Christ of His power to heal the body. To take any other view is equal to accusing the Holy Spirit of making a mistake in quoting His own prediction.
From You and Me to Calvary
In the 4th verse, the word “borne” (nasa) means to lift up, to bear away, to convey, or to remove to a distance. It is a Levitical word, and is applied to the scapegoat, that bare away the sins of the people. “The goat shall bear (nasa) upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited; and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness” (Lev. 16:22). So Jesus bore my sins and sicknesses away “[outside] the camp” to the cross. Sin and sickness have passed from me to Calvary – salvation and health have passed from Calvary to me.
Again, in this 4th verse of the Redemption Chapter the Hebrew verbs for “borne” and”carried” (nasa and sabal) are both the same as are used in the 11th and 12th verses for the substitutionary bearing of sin, “He shall bear (carry) their iniquities,” and “He shall bear the sin of many.” Both words signify to assume as a heavy burden, and denote actual substitution, and a complete removal of the thing borne. When Jesus bore our sins, our sicknesses and our pains, He bore them away, or removed them. Both these words mean substitution, one bearing another’s load.
On this point, permit me to quote from “JESUS OUR HEALER written by the Rev. W. C. Stevens. He says:
This prophecy presents healing as, an integral part of the vicarious Atonement . . . Now, whatever be the sense of these two Hebrew verbs (nasa and sabal), the same sense must be applied in both cases, namely, of sin-bearing and sickness-bearing. To pervert the sense in one case would give liberty to pervert it in the other. And that the sense of the verbs as relating to sin, not only here in this prophecy, but everywhere else in the Old Testament, is strictly vicarious and expiatory, no evangelical student disputes. This prophecy, therefore, gives the same substitutionary and expiatory character to Christ’s connection with sickness that is everywhere given to His assumption of our sins.”
(FF Bosworth, Christ Our Healer)
—–EndNotes—–
[1] For more see Vincent Cheung: Systematic Theology, &, Presuppositional Confrontations, &, Captive to Reason. And See Gordon Clark, A Christian View of Men and Things.
[2] See, Vincent Cheung. Presuppositional Confrontations. 2010. Pg 70.
Oshea Davis 