In my last article I said, "It is not recorded that Jesus...

Lexington (Ky.) Leader

In my last article I said, "It is not recorded that Jesus ever authorized anybody to preach that he did not immediately couple with the commission an injunction to heal the sick." The doctor quotes this statement of mine and immediately adds: "Again I have my critic where quibbling and explaining will not avail. The 'great commission' is given three times, and in only one of these is the question of healing referred to." Then he quotes Matthew and Luke and continues: "The commission as given by Mark does assert the healing power, but at best this would be a ratio of two to one. It will not do to say that Christ implied it in the two other instances."

Now what does the doctor mean? He seems to imply that the "great commission" was given at three different times, and yet he certainly knows that it was given but once, and that his quotations from Matthew, Mark, and Luke are but three different accounts of a single occurrence. Does he mean to discredit Mark's account of what occurred, and to insinuate that because Matthew and Luke omit the injunction to heal from their accounts that Mark has added something which did not occur? Alas, to what straits a good man may be driven! He evidently suggests a possible contradiction between the three accounts and implies a rejection of Mark's version "at a ratio of two to one." Having thus arrayed two of the Gospels against the other, he quotes from Paul's letter to Timothy, as if to array Paul against Jesus. "Here, then," exclaims the doctor in exultant glee, "is a command to preach, and yet not one word about healing."

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit