The UK Bible Students Website
Question Box
|
All Scripture citations are to the King James (Authorised) Version, unless noted otherwise.
Acts 5:
12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought
among the people . . . . 15 Insomuch that they brought forth the sick
into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the
shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them. 16 There came
also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick
folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed
every one.
Acts 19:
11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul: 12 So
that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the
diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of
them.
Answer: We
couple these texts together because they share similarities which at first
glance may seem mysterious and at odds with other New Testament
accounts.
Acts 5
This
chapter narrates events in the early history of the Christian church in
Jerusalem, when the faith was growing in popularity. It must have been a
remarkable thing to witness the healing that the apostles performed, including
the casting out of evil spirits.
People
came from all around (v. 16). So many, in fact, that it was impossible for the
apostles to lay their hands on everyone. Peter being the acknowledged leader,
some of the people reasoned that the power to heal lay principally in
his person and that, perhaps, if they could not get to him, the mere
shadow of his passing would be sufficient to effect a cure. The biblical text
says only that they hoped (‘at the least’) that they would be healed by
this method, not that this is necessarily what occurred. Verse 16 seems to
summarise the overall effect of the work of the apostles (the people ‘were
healed every one’).
Acts 19
The
Apostle Paul preached and taught at Ephesus for at least two years, and became
well known in the city and its environs (v. 10). He performed ‘special’ or
extraordinary miracles, ‘so that from his body were brought unto the sick
handkerchiefs [towels] or aprons, and the diseases departed from them,
and the evil spirits went out of them’ (v. 11).
Assuming
that these miracles were performed over the two-year period of Paul’s sojourn
in Ephesus, we can probably rule out a single healing session, with people
thronging him. But if no mass healing was under way, with the consequent
difficulty of getting to the head of the queue, it is difficult to explain why
handkerchiefs and aprons were even seen to be necessary. In other cases, where
the crowds were large and the wait long, some took emergency measures.
See, for example, Mark 2: 1-12, where the friends of the man on the
stretcher broke through the roof of the house and lowered him into the presence
of Jesus. There was no provision made in this instance for ‘remote’
healing.
Note
that on only four occasions did Jesus heal remotely: the daughter of the Greek
woman (Mark 7: 25-30); the centurion’s servant (Matthew 8: 5-13; Luke 7: 1-10);
the nobleman’s son (John 4: 46-53); and the opportunistic healing of the woman
who touched the hem of His garment (Mark 5: 24-34; note that when this
miracle occurred, Jesus was on His way to heal the daughter of Jairus). Nowhere
is it said that Jesus healed through the distribution of ‘handkerchiefs and
aprons’ or called on the crowds to simply touch Him. In short, it was rare for
the healing to be conferred other than in the presence of the
healer.
The
formulation of Acts 19: 12 is similar to that of Acts 5: 12, 16: (a)
There are ‘signs and wonders’ and Paul’s ‘special miracles’; (b) the
sick are cured of their ailments and the evil spirits are cast out. Acts 19: 11
says that Paul’s ‘special miracles’ were brought about at his ‘hands’.
Compare Acts 8: 14-19; 14: 3. According to Acts 19: 13, 14, imitators
followed. But notice that no handkerchiefs or aprons were employed by the
impostors, from which we may infer that they copied Paul’s method the laying
on of hands. This seems to be borne out by v. 16, which says that the would-be
healers were attacked by their client, suggesting that they were standing
before him.
The
biblical narrative being spare, it leaves a number of unsettling questions,
answers to which can only be guessed at.
For
instance:
Were they wiped against Paul’s hand, arm or face in order to be impregnated with healing power?
How long did the towels, etc., retain their power? Were they used once and
discarded, or several times? And how would this latter assumption square with
the biblical teaching that the gifts of the spirit including healing passed
away after the last apostle died?
If the method was successful, why wasn’t it used before and after the phenomenon recorded only in Acts 19?
Since a confession of faith or repentance was customarily exacted from those who sought healing, are we to believe that these handkerchiefs and aprons were effective only for believers, or did they work on all who handled them, without discrimination?
Since
the accounts in both Acts 5 and 19 are rendered as valid by most translations,
they must stand, though we might prefer that they did not. The notion of remote
healing through the agency of a talisman or holy relic seems to be at odds with
the general tenor of the New Testament.
___________
Copyright July 2012 ukbiblestudents.co.uk
You may reproduce this article without permission, but please let us know if you do so.