THE VARIOUS VIEWS TAKEN TOWARD THIS PASSAGE

THE VARIOUS VIEWS TAKEN TOWARD THIS PASSAGE

Interesting and illuminating are the views that have been taken toward this pass­age of Scripture and the rite which it presents. These views relate to the actual practice of the form, the kinds of healing involved, and the various sources from which the healing comes.

1. Actual practice. It will be amazing to the average reader that so many views as demonstrated by practice can arise over a passage that on its surface seems to be so clear. There are at least six.

(1) Protestant view. In general Protestants eliminate the application of the service by totally ignoring this passage. Professing Christendom largely falls into this class. (2) Spiritual view. This view explains away the application of the service to physical ills by interpreting it figuratively. The majority of Protestant commentators explain it this way.

(3) Catholic view. By interpreting this as a rite, known as extreme unction, for those about to die, the Catholics explain away the true meaning of the passage, and make it refer to a spiritual preparation for death,

(4) Hyper-dispensational view, those who draw sharply the dispensational lines insist that this passage and provision must be restricted to Jews, and that, perhaps, even for the millennium, and the Church is thus excluded.

(5) Wholesale view. Certain cults and sects today lay great stress upon healing and sweep away all restrictions, opening up physical healing to any and all who may be afflicted. This is generally held by those who advocate the gift of healing.

(6) Orthodox view. Though this view is not widely held, it restricts the physical heal­ing to those who have believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the view which the writer holds and will present in this message.

2. Kinds of healing. To the average reader it may seem quite strange that more than one view could be taken on this point. But as a matter of fact there are two.

(1) Spiritual healing. This is for the most part the general view among Protestants, basing their contention on the supposition that James is speaking figuratively of spiritual healing. The Catholics follow this interpretation specifically, and use this passage as authority for the rite of extreme unction when one is being prepared spiritually for death.

(2) Physical healing. While this is the view that is the easiest to glean from the pass­age, few hold it. But of those who do, some think the application is for any and all ills that beset believers, while others think that this provision was made for ills of a more or less serious nature.

3. Source of healing. The division on this point is also very interesting in the light of what the passage says.

(1) God and oil in relation to spiritual healing. Those who insist that the healing is spiritual will on the one hand trace its source directly to God, making prayer and anoint­ing figurative, while others, such as the Catholics, will trace the source to the oil, making this form sacramental.

(2) Anointing, gift of healing, prayer and physical healing. Three views are held as to the source of physical healing.

Medicinal view. Those who hold this view insist that it is the oil that brings about the healing, for oil serves as a medicine.

Healing gift view. The advocates of this view argue that the prayer of faith is the same as the gift of healing spoken of in 1 Cor. 12:9, 28.

Prayer of faith. Those who take this position insist the Scripture clearly states it is the prayer of faith that saves the sick. Such prayer is God-given in each case the invalid is healed. This is the view which will be supported in this treatment.