Big Healing Book - Healing and Miracle-Related Words Are Mostly in the Gospels and

Objection: Healing and Miracle-Related Words Are Mostly in the Gospels and Acts, Not After Them

The objector is sure that we can gauge the relative importance of Bible topics in the Church Age by comparing the number of times words occur in the four gospels and Acts vs. later. Supposedly, a word that is not used very much by comparison after Acts has shrunk in importance after the book of Acts. Using this logic, the objector proceeds to demonstrate that signs, wonders and healings must not be nearly as important to the Church in our current day.

By HIS logic, heal/healed (iaomai) must not be important in the Church Age, as it appears 25 times in the gospels and Acts and only 3 times later. (I am including the objector’s counts without bothering to verify them.) Also, “signs” are not important today (61 mentions in the gospels and Acts, 16 mentions later). Then the word therapeuo, also translated heal, appears 45 times vs. 3 times, 2 of which refer to the Antichrist, so that really must not be important today. Then teras (wonder) appears 16 times vs. 1 time, and that 1 time refers to the Antichrist. So wonders are COMPLETELY OUT during the Church Age. The objector concludes that FAITH (50 times vs. 204 times) is what is important now, not signs, wonders and healings.

I’m going to fight fire with fire by giving you some shocking new revelations about the Church Age, all based on the same logic used by the objector.

First, the cross isn’t quite as important for us today, as the word “cross” gets 17 mentions in the gospels and Acts, but only 11 afterward.

Second, being SAVED is not as important in the Church Age, as proved by the fact that “saved” is found 81 times in the gospels and Acts but only 23 times after that.

Third, discipleship is COMPLETLEY OUT during the Church Age. The words “disciple” and “disciples” get a whopping 273 mentions in the gospels and Acts, and NOT A SINGLE MENTION after the book of Acts.

Finally, JESUS isn’t nearly as important as He used to be, seeing as He got 704 mentions in the four gospels and Acts and only 278 mentions later! (I admit that I did throw out the “later” verse about “Jesus who is called Justus,” as that referred to someone else.)

We used the same logic, so if you agree with the objector’s conclusions, you have to agree with my conclusions as well.

Does this objection still have any takers?

In case it does, let me point out another major flaw with this objection. The Book of Acts shows what we can have today, not just what the people in that book had, because we are part of the same Church Age that everyone in the book of Acts was in. Scripture never divides an “Early Church Age” from a “Late Church Age.” So all the references cited that were included in Acts should count for the Church Age also!