Miraculous Healing by Henry Frost - Chapter VI

James, as the president of the church council at Jerusalem, had connection with the church when it was largely Jewish, both in personnel and character (Acts 15:13-29; Gal. 2:9).

James wrote, not to Gentile Christians, but to Jewish ones, addressing his epistle to “the twelve tribes scattered abroad” (1:1).

James wrote to Jewish Christians when they were yet meeting in synagogues, the words, “If there come into your assembly,” being literally, “If there come into your synagogue” (2:2).

James wrote in a transition period, when the Old Testament was giving place to the New, and as a Christian Jew to Christian Jews. He thus continued in part, as Christ did when He was on earth, the teaching of the Old Testament, where grace and faith have place (1:6-8), but obedience, works and visible signs have prominence (1:22-25).

James, in applying Old Testament truths to New Testament conditions, looks upon Christianity, not from the inward point of view, but from the outward, and thus emphasizes legal and ceremonial observances. This leads him, among other similar statements, to define pure and undefined religion as visiting the fatherless and widows in their affliction and keeping oneself unspotted from the world (1:26, 27), a definition which falls far short of what the Holy Spirit revealed to Paul who wrote at a later date (Rom. 12:1, 2; I Cor. 15:58).

James wrote his letter soon after the Gospels and the Acts were written and before any of the other epistles were penned. His epistle, therefore, is the first which was written. For this reason, it stands, historically and spiritually, just after the Gospels and the Acts. Hence it links these books with the later epistles of Peter, John and Paul. It is thus a primary, midway and partial revelation as between the early Christian church, where Jewish conditions prevailed, and the later Christian church, where Gentile conditions prevailed. This does not raise the question as to whether or not the Epistle of James is inspired any more than a similar statement in respect to the Old Testament or the Gospels would raise the question as to whether or not they are inspired. The question is simply one of time, place, meaning and application.

James, it is to be noted, directed those who were sick to call for the “elders of the church” (5:14). These elders, in the synagogue congregation, were always men, and were a formally elected and officially designated ecclesiastical body. Women, therefore, have no place in this ordinance, nor have self-appointed independent and unconnected men.

James does not say that the use of means is wrong and that the physician and medicine are to be excluded, and his silence, in view of other scriptures which endorse the use of means, is presumptive evidence that he recognized the place and service of each. Moreover, it may be assumed that the cases of sickness which were in his mind were those, in general, which physicians and medicines could not cure, for otherwise he would not have turned from them to the church elders, whose power of healing lay alone in spiritual processes. This conclusion is confirmed by the fact that Christ and the apostles chiefly healed, not minor and otherwise curable diseases, such as toothache, headache, etc., but major and otherwise incurable ones, such as palsy, blindness, deafness, dumbness, lameness, insanity and leprosy.

James, I judge, commanded the use of poured-out oil as a sign and symbol of the poured-out Holy Spirit. If this is the case, he thus signified that the Christian patient, openly and loyally, was to accept the fact that the Holy Spirit was present, and the additional fact that He was Lord over the whole being, spirit, soul and body. It was thus an anticipation and declaration of the truth which Paul expressed, the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body (I Cor. 6:13). It was under this sovereign overlordship of the Spirit that healing, when granted, was procured and produced.

James affirms that it is the “prayer of faith” which heals the sick (5:15), and he gives an illustration of such a prayer by citing the case of Elijah, who prayed that it might not rain and it rained not, and again prayed that it might rain and it rained (5:17, 18). The apostle thus defines the “prayer of faith” as one which originates in heaven, for Elijah’s prayer, before it was offered, was given to him by the Holy Spirit, which fact revealed to him the will of God and thus made him bold to ask for the thing desired. It is manifestly this kind of praying for healing, that is, God-given praying, which produces the recovery of the sick from disease.

James makes it clear that not all sickness is consequent upon and in punishment of particular sin. He says that “the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall raise him up” (5:15), which is an unconditional statement. He then adds, “If he has committed sins, they shall be forgiven him” (5:15), which is a conditional statement. That is, a man may be sick and need healing apart from particular sin; or he may be sick and need healing in consequence of particular sin. In the first case, the prayer of faith will obtain healing. In the second case, it will obtain both forgiveness and healing. So we must discriminate between one sickness and another, and we must not assume, because a man is sick, that he has committed some particular sin. Paul confirms this thought in his reference to Epaphroditus, who, he declares, was nigh unto death because of his work for Christ (Phil. 2:30), and who, with all such, was to be held in honour (Phil. 2:29).