Objection: Matthew 13:15, John 12:39-41 and Acts 28:27 Prove That HEALED in 1 Peter 2:24 Doesn't Have to Mean Physically Healed
These three passages actually refer to the same prophecy in Isaiah. They are all substantially the same, so this is really one argument, not three:
Matthew 13:15:
For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
John 12:39-41:
Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias [Isaiah] said again,
He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.
Acts 28:27:
For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
By what authority does the objector conclude that these are the ONLY THREE VERSES IN THE BIBLE where the word iaomai (used for healed in 1 Peter 2:24) cannot refer to physical healing? See “Healed” Defined for proof that iaomai refers to physical healing in the Bible. I see no reason to explain away the use of it in these 3 verses. If people return to God, they can be physically healed. That has been the case under the Law of Moses as well as the New Covenant.
But there is an even better way to show that these 3 verses refer to physical healing. They all quote or paraphrase the very same prophecy in Isaiah 6:10. Wouldn’t it be logical to check out the word for healed in the original Hebrew to see what it means in Isaiah 6:10, seeing as this is the verse that the other verses refer to?
The word Isaiah used is rapha, which usually refers to physical healing, and is sometimes translated physician, as proved in the section “Healed” Defined. It can be used figuratively of healing a breach, for example, just as we might use the word in English. But this is talking about fixing something physical. If you have any doubt as to what the word means, read through all the places in the Bible where it is used, which are all listed for you in “Healed” Defined, and draw your own conclusion.
On the strength of these points, I maintain that the 3 verses in question DO refer to physical healing and not just some kind of spiritual thing, as the objector likes to think. There is no such thing as spiritual healing in the Bible anyway, though emotional healing is available. So these verses simply CANNOT refer to “spiritual healing.”
An objector could claim that being “healed” only means being saved in a non-physical sense. In other words, it would be reduced to merely being converted. All 3 New Testament passages above as well as Isaiah 6:10 above disprove this theory! In all 4 cases, conversion happens BEFORE the healing! That is why healed CANNOT mean converted! The people who are healed in these verses have ALREADY been converted! (Read the end of all those verses carefully.) The healing has to be another benefit that they receive AFTER they are converted! So I maintain that in the only 3 places in the New Testament where iaomai supposedly doesn’t mean physical healing, it actually does. And there aren’t any other exceptions to be found in the New Testament. Jesus brought you the same “healing” that a physician would bring you! It is available to EVERYONE and it is a New Testament benefit of conversion that comes with the package.
An even emptier argument would be that having your eyes see and ears hear is something spiritual, so the healing must also be spiritual. In the context of Isaiah’s prophecy, you get HEALED after you have your figurative eyes and ears fixed, so the healing can’t be referring to something figurative that was already fixed!
I am aware that Thayer’s Greek Lexicon claims that iaomai only refers to “salvation” in these passages. Please read the objection reply about his similar mistake in 1 Peter 2:24 for more thoughts on Mr. Thayer and his book.