What is the prayer of faith?

Further, it might, or might not, be that the patient would himself have faith to be healed. The faith-healers imperatively require such faith; Scripture does not. The prayer spoken of in James is the prayer of the elders, and in reference to this it is said, "The prayer of faith shall save the sick." It may be easily supposed that the sick one would himself join in the prayer, and that, with more or less assurance of faith but it was the "prayer of faith" that carried efficacy.

Finally, nothing could be more outside the scope of the passage in James than the popular notion of faith-healing. The case contemplated in James is clearly one of a very serious nature, where death is imminent; and so also in 1 John 5. The idea of the scripture being used as a substitute for medicines which God has provided in nature is not only unwarranted, but is contrary to the scriptural and apostolic principle of using remedies for ailments (see both 2 Kings 20:7, and 1 Tim. 5:23). It is theological quackery.

As to sickness the Apostle's instructions are equally plain. It is viewed as being God's chastening hand upon the saint, very possibly in the form of direct retribution for his sins. In this the church would be interested, and the elders of the church should be called in. They, at their discretion, pray over him, anointing him with oil in the Lord's name and he is healed, his sins being governmentally forgiven. It is evident from such a scripture as 1 John 5:16 that the elders were to exercise their spiritual discernment as to whether it was, or was not, the will of God that healing should be granted. If they discerned it to be His will then they could pray the prayer full of faith and confidence, which would be without fail answered in his recovery.

Is this all valid for today? We believe so. Why then is it so little practised? For at least two reasons. First, it is not an easy matter to find the elders of THE church though the elders of certain religious bodies may be found easily enough. The church of God has been ruined as to its outward manifestation and unity, and we have to pay the penalty of it. Second assuming the elders of the church are found and that they come in response to the call, the discernment and faith on their part, which are called for if they are to offer such a prayer of faith as is contemplated, are but very rarely found.

The faith, be it observed, is to be on the part of those who pray, that is of the elders. Nothing is said as to the faith of the one who is sick, though we may infer that he has some faith in the matter, sufficient at least to send for the elders in accordance with this scripture. We may infer too from the words that immediately follow in verse 16 that he would confess his sins, if indeed he have committed them. We point this out because this passage has been pressed into service on behalf of practices not warranted by this or any other scripture.

The confession of which verse 16 speaks is however not exactly confession to elders. It is rather "one to another." This verse has nothing official about it as verses 14 and 15 have. There is no reason why any of us should not practice prayer for healing after this sort.

If in sickness, one here is told to call for the elders of the assembly, that they may pray over him, and anoint him with oil in the Name of the Lord. We must remember of course that this epistle was written to Israelites at the introduction of the present dispensation of grace, when elders had been appointed in each assembly by the apostles. (Cf.Acts 14:23) After the church was established, there was no provision for the continuance of this appointing of elders, so that there are none definitely marked out as such today. Of course there is no doubt that there are still men who have the characteristics that make them elders in reality, though not as appointed to such office. As to the anointing with oil, Israelites would attach special significance to this, as in the case of the cleansed leper. Lev.14:16-18.

It seems very clear therefore that these instructions in the book of James were intended specifically for Jewish believers in the early church, for they could not possibly be a pattern for saints to follow down through the history of the church until now. On the other hand, John is the last of all the writers of Scripture, and he also gives Instruction as regards prayer for the sick, with assurance of the Lord hearing, so long as we ask according to His will. And in this case, he says nothing at all of calling for the elders, or of anointing one with oil. And of course he writes to all believers, the entire family of Gods so that we may fully take this for the day in which we lives and count much upon God in dependent, believing prayer.

Though these early Jewish believers were, in the case of sickness, instructed to call for the elders of the assembly, who would both pray over them and anoint them with oil in the Name of the Lord, yet let us observe that it is the prayer of faith, not the anointing, that saves the sick. This salvation of course is the delivering of one from his sickness. If his sickness was the result of having committed sins, this would be forgiven. John however (1 John 5:l2-15) stipulates that if one had "sinned unto death," no recovery could be therefore it would not be faith to pray for his recovery. No doubt in every case some spiritual discernment would be required as to whether we could pray in faith; for this would no doubt involve not only the sin committed, but the circumstances and the motives connected with this.

If they asked for it, not else. Oil was a sign, that is all. It is the prayer of faith that saves, not the oil; the faith of the elders.

There may also be the general or special need created by sickness. "Is any sick among you? let him call to him the elders of the assembly, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of [the] Lord." It is good where any dealing of the Lord leads us to turn to Him, expecting not evil but good. In those days too, elders of the assembly were there, men of moral weight and spiritual judgment, whose place it was to intervene in difficulties of a personal as well as public nature. They might not be evangelists or teachers; but apt to teach they were required to be, men able to take up in love and truth and faithfulness the burdens of their brethren. The sick man is exhorted to summon such as they are to pray for him with that application of oil which Romanism has distorted so wholly from God's mind. Extreme unction is a mere invention of superstition, to smooth the way when hope of recovery is gone.

It is remarkable that the inspired writer, though encouraging honour to the elders, attaches healing virtue, not to their official place or special art, but to prayer, and this of an efficacious sort through faith. He says "And the prayer of faith shall save [or, heal] the sick, and the Lord will raise him up." What a contrast this is with the gloomy superstition which sends "a priest" to absolve him and give extreme unction, because his death is regarded as inevitable! For if he recover, he will need the same hateful parody over again. Yes, unclean and drunken harlot, dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return, with no resurrection as being without life, nothing but a system of darkness and death.

Then comes the special character of the sickness, carefully discriminated from the common, "and if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him." It is a nice and notable point in the true rendering of the clause that the sins are in the plural, the forgiveness is in the singular. It is right that each and all should be judged in order; but grace gives the forgiveness in full.

But the emphasis in the passage is on "the prayer of faith." The prayer of faith, not the anointing with oil, shall save the sick. No believer denies the efficacy of believing prayer, yet always guarded by the condition of "if it be His will." In case of sickness the child of God will not send for a physician in the first place, but the believer turns to the Lord and puts himself in His gracious and merciful hands. The passage here seems to be the matter of sickness as a chastening from the Lord on account of specific sins committed. In such a case when self-judgment has brought the matter into His light, the promise can be claimed "the prayer of faith shall save the sick."

"Was it intended to be a direction universally applicable to all cases, and to be carried out at all times, in all places, and under all conditions? Surely--most surely not. For note that there is no question at all as to the result: 'the prayer of faith shall save (it is certain) the sick and the Lord will raise him up.'

"Now, we know perfectly well that this is not and cannot be the invariable outcome of all sickness. The vast majority of mankind--yes, of Christians--has died as the result of some sickness: has this been because 'elders' have not been called? Have they come to the end of that life here because they were not anointed with oil, and the prayer that always goes up from loving hearts was not the prayer of faith, and since not of faith, was sin? Who would not reject such conclusions with abhorrence? Yet are they inevitable, if this Scripture be pressed as being the one divinely given direction in the case of all sickness.

Compare verse 35. This is ever the Lord's word to faith. I suppose faith ever runs parallel with the Lord's will, for faith has its operation in the power of that kingdom which is the fulfilment of the Lord's will; when the request flows from our own will therefore, it cannot be the prayer of faith, and is a mere subjection of God and His counsels to our fallen wills. Accordingly, "We know that whatsoever we ask according to His will, He heareth us." And I am persuaded this knowledge of the divine will and faith run proportionally. It is (not knowledge properly but) in fact the knowledge of faith, and where there is the enquiry of faith, short of the apprehension of the will of God, we pray in truth in implicit subjection to His will, looking for that increase of the Spirit which shall enlighten us in power of conversation. Our personal necessities, however, may, even in this subjection to the divine will, be brought before God; when there is genuine trust in Him, we propose ourselves for mercy. The "What wilt thou" is God's part; the "We will" comes quite wrong from us, and marks want of trust or acknowledgment of the need first of mercy, and we generally, in such case, "know not what" we ask. And hereto the word of man, besides the willingness, applies "Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst," and the Lord said: "I will, be thou." The point we should practically enquire into is, Is our will concerned, or is there simple-hearted reliance upon the wisdom, and acknowledgment of the righteousness of the divine counsels and will? If it be our will, we may judge it (and this includes our judgment) to be at variance with the divine counsels, and injurious to our own peace, though it may, as the two disciples had, have a reference generally to, and seeking strong acknowledgment of the object of faith. However, there is a distinction between doing this in ignorance and misled perhaps by others, as here, and wilfully as in the Jews in the wilderness. In the latter case, I conceive the object will be found ever present and personal, and to be real distrust, and love of present gratification.

p236 * I do not think that the promises refer to prayers offered up one for another only, though this is a large part of the cases put forward in scripture: "pray one for another," "for me also," "labouring earnestly for you in prayers," and many others; but the prayer of faith is not confined to this. There are prayers for opening the door for the gospel and for all men. If it be not the prayer of positive faith, we are told in all things to present our requests to God, but then the answer is, or may be only, that God's peace which passes all understanding shall keep our hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. For the prayer of faith, or rather the promise to it, there are certain limits as to the certainty of answer, such as "in my name," "according to his will," "if ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will," "if two of you shall agree"; besides what stops prayer, as a sin unto death. But then I see no limits put to the expectation of faith if God gives it. If it be my will asking amiss to consume it on my lusts, I cannot expect an answer. But the Lord contemplates the giving of faith and certainty of answer for drying up of the fig tree or removing a mountain, and whatever I can ask believing, I receive it. This is a very important principle.

But this led to the further word as to prayer, in which emphasis is again laid upon faith. "Whosoever shall say … and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe … he shall have whatsoever he saith." The whosoever and the whatsoever make this a very sweeping statement; so sweeping as almost to take our breath away. But this is connected with the prayer contemplated in the next verse, where we have, " What things soever ye desire … believe … and ye shall have them." In both these verses everything evidently hinges on the believing.

Now belief is faith, and faith is not just a human product, a kind of make-believe or imagination. Verse 24. for instance is not that if only I can work myself up to imagine I receive my request, I do receive it. My prayers according to verse 24, and my words, according to verse 23, must be the product of genuine faith; and faith is the spiritual faculty in me which receives the divine Word. Faith is the eye of the soul, which receives and appreciates Divine light. If my prayer is based on intelligent faith, I shall believe that I receive, and I shall actually receive the desired thing. And so also with what I may say, as in verse 23.

Moreover, God at no time intended that things should be left, as it were, absolutely in man's hands, even though it were the hand of faith, as the doctrines taught suppose. The prayer of faith may be that which saves the sick, and yet, after all, that be far from meaning that we can find in every case a faith which should do so. God has His own will and His own way; and while we can always reckon upon Him to answer the soul that looks to Him, yet the way of His answer we do not always know. The apostle prays that the thorn in the flesh might depart from him, but it did not depart. God turned it to greater blessing. That was an answer to the prayer, but it was not such an answer as men usually count as that. Could any one suppose that among Christians, if everything were absolutely right, the sick would always be raised up, that death would hardly obtain at all, except in the extremest old age? We may imagine any such fancies, but fancies they are, and nothing else. Yet it is plain there is an appeal to God advocated here which we are always right in making, and from which we may always expect an answer in the goodness of Him whom we address. More than this, the Lord may give distinct light as to His mind that will enable one, as to anything, to ask with assurance, without the possibility of denial. If we are near enough to God for this we have cause indeed to be thankful; but we had better be humble about it, and be very sure that we have it before we claim it.