LDS Freedom Forum

drjme wrote:I just wanted to share this to give praise and Glory to God that I can say before Him, It is all HIM, we think we've got good intentions, but man, HIS intentions are so much better! and whoever reads this can say "God, If you done this miracle for one person, can you do a miracle for me too?"

Thank you for your post. It is, indeed, a faith booster.

Nephi294 wrote:
Oh boy here we go with the "we've all been anonited bit." It's true that if we have been through the temple, we have all been anointed. However evil speaking of the "Lord's anointed" refers specifically to The Leadership of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints.

Elder Oaks taught:

“Criticism is particularly objectionable when it is directed toward Church authorities, general or local. Jude condemns those who ‘speak evil of dignities.’ (Jude 1:8.) Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed is in a class by itself. It is one thing to depreciate a person who exercises corporate power or even government power. It is quite another thing to criticize or depreciate a person for the performance of an office to which he or she has been called of God. It does not matter that the criticism is true. As Elder George F. Richards, President of the Council of the Twelve, said in a conference address in April 1947,

“‘When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.’ (In Conference Report, Apr. 1947, p. 24.)” (Address to Church Educational System teachers, Aug. 16, 1985.)

For more read https://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/02/criticism?lang=eng :ymparty:

We probably shouldn't speak evil of anyone who is anointed anyways regardless, and as such I apologize for saying you didn't use your brain , I don't think there is any evil speaking going on here. Again he asked a question to help him reconcile a misunderstanding he has, I don't see any malice in his questioning. The purpose of the Bible and BOM is so that we CAN measure the words of a prophet against the word of another one, A lot of times we won't get an immediate answer from the spirit, and God will require us to go and search it out in His word, talk with fellow saints, work it out and ask him again and then get a witness of truth.

Nephi 924 wrote:Oh boy here we go with the "we've all been anonited bit." It's true that if we have been through the temple, we have all been anointed. However evil speaking of the "Lord's anointed" refers specifically to The Leadership of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints.

And here we go again with the acusations of criticism that just aren't there.

When have I crictized a leader? I think the leaders are great. There are doing a job, which they have been asgined to do, which is to lead people in the prepatory gospel. I just don't believe in deifying leaders as so many in the church do.

2 Nephi 9:30

30 But wo unto the rich, who are rich as to the things of the world. For because they are rich they despise the poor, and they persecute the meek, and their hearts are upon their treasures; wherefore, their treasure is their god. And behold, their treasure shall perish with them also.

Where you put your trust is your God. That is why so many of us are guilty of Idolatry. Wheter it be trust in money, leaders or knowledge. Anything but trust in Christ is in vain.

Original_Intent wrote:

Daryl wrote:Just a follow-up thought...

Would Jesus say to someone, "Do you have the faith not to be healed"? Maybe there is a scripture where Christ did exactly that. I just don't recall any canonized stories of the Lord's anointed propositioning an ill requester in such a way. I'm sure someone with more knowledge in the scriptures would have a reference for us.

I do remember a story where Joseph Smith couldn't physically attend to an ill partitioner so he blessed a hanky and handed it to a priesthood brother and said to deliver it to the ill person and they would be made whole. Many people have ridiculed Joseph for dabbling in metaphysical/witchcraf arts. Until Joseph opened the scriptures and showed where Christ had done the same.

My guess is Christ answers requests for healing with yea, yea or neah, neah. Again I am no scriptorian. Just trying to get my head around Elder Bednar's doctrine.

Again, your tone doesn;t convey a desire for reconciliation to me, but rather pointing out a perceived flaw in an accusatory manner, while trying to maintain an innocent posture that you are just trying to understand.

I would say an example of one of the Lord's anointed propositioning an ill person in this manner is the story Elder Bednar tells about himself. True, if this were a debate of logic, this would be considered "circular reasoning" and would be invalid. I guess the fundamental question is "Do you accept Elder Bednar as the Lord's anointed?" If the answer is yes, then the example that he gave at the fireside is an instance. If you do not, or if the point of your post is to question that or to maintain such a position is non-scriptural (which is progress from your OP where you implied that it was anti-scriptural) then I suppose that the only satisfactory answer for you will come from a higher authority than any you will find posting here.

It sounds like my intent is coming into question. I have been forthright and honest about my intent: I would
Like input on these questions I have about doctrines the Elder Bednar has spoken. If my proclaimed intent
Is not accepted, then that is a burden for someone else, not me.
Whether or not Elder Bednar has a position in the church makes zero difference to me when it comes to
analyzing his sermons. In fact I believe that he would be delighted his words were being studied.

Thomas wrote:

Nephi 924 wrote:Oh boy here we go with the "we've all been anonited bit." It's true that if we have been through the temple, we have all been anointed. However evil speaking of the "Lord's anointed" refers specifically to The Leadership of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints.

And here we go again with the acusations of criticism that just aren't there.

When have I crictized a leader? I think the leaders are great. There are doing a job, which they have been asgined to do, which is to lead people in the prepatory gospel. I just don't believe in deifying leaders as so many in the church do.

2 Nephi 9:30

30 But wo unto the rich, who are rich as to the things of the world. For because they are rich they despise the poor, and they persecute the meek, and their hearts are upon their treasures; wherefore, their treasure is their god. And behold, their treasure shall perish with them also.

Where you put your trust is your God. That is why so many of us are guilty of Idolatry. Wheter it be trust in money, leaders or knowledge. Anything but trust in Christ is in vain.

Thomas, I'm not saying you were evil speaking. I just mentioned talking about The Lord's anointed refers specifically to the leadership of The LDS Church. That's all. And no one is saying The General Authorities are Gods to be worshipped. And drjme, it's all good!

Daryl wrote:Just a follow-up thought...

Would Jesus say to someone, "Do you have the faith not to be healed"? Maybe there is a scripture where Christ did exactly that. I just don't recall any canonized stories of the Lord's anointed propositioning an ill requester in such a way. I'm sure someone with more knowledge in the scriptures would have a reference for us.

I do remember a story where Joseph Smith couldn't physically attend to an ill partitioner so he blessed a hanky and handed it to a priesthood brother and said to deliver it to the ill person and they would be made whole. Many people have ridiculed Joseph for dabbling in metaphysical/witchcraf arts. Until Joseph opened the scriptures and showed where Christ had done the same.

My guess is Christ answers requests for healing with yea, yea or neah, neah. Again I am no scriptorian. Just trying to get my head around Elder Bednar's doctrine.

It's certainly a worthwhile question. It might be worth adding some additional context to the words the Elder Bednar shared. He didn't just simply state "Do you have the faith not to be healed?". There was more than that. He said an inspired question came to him and it was "If it is the will of our Heavenly Father, do you have the faith to not be healed?" He made sure that they understood that the blessing of healing could only be received if they had the faith not to be healed and were "willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon [them]” (Mosiah 3:19). In other words, do you trust in God sufficiently that your belief in His goodness isn't dependent on this miracle. If your trust is truly that deep, then perhaps you have what it takes to truly seek this miracle. They came to understand that "not shrinking is more important than surviving. Thus, their experience was not primarily about living and dying; rather, it was about learning, living, and becoming." Sounds remarkably reminiscent of the words God shared with Joseph, "thine adversity and afflictions shall be but a small moment, and then if thou endure it well, God shall exalt thee on high." Or "know thou my son that all these things shall give thee experience, and shall be for thy good. The Son of Man have descended below them all. Art thou greater than he?"

This wasn't about Elder Bednar downplaying the gift of healing, it was about teaching them of the kind of faith necessary to obtain healing. It has to be a faith so deep that total submission to His will is first and foremost.

Scipturally speaking, I could ask you - was it just that Christ didn't have enough faith to be delivered of his burdens when he said "Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee, take this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt." He made a declaration of faith that all things were possible to God, but that he'd submit to God's will. Maybe he should have just asked more faithfully and that part could have been skipped.

Or what about Joseph in Liberty Jail. Did he just not have enough faith to shatter the prison walls like Alma and Amulek did? They were only in there for 3 days, but Joseph was in Liberty for 5 months, and got quite sick while there.

Or what about that same Alma and Amulek...the ones with faith sufficient to have the walls of a prison crumble around them...did they not have faith sufficient just a few verses before to save those being cast into a burning fire? No, it was that the will of God took precedence.

Perhaps it was that the people on the front lines who fell among the Anti-Nehpi-Lehi's are the ones who didn't have faith, but the ones in the back did, and that's why they were spared and others weren't. Or, was it that the faith of ALL OF THEM transcended the need to have a specific result. They were more committed to doing rightly and submitting fully to God. I find it fascinating that they had the faith to both kneel down in front of their attackers....and those who survived then the faith to continue on trusting God after losing senselessly so many friends and family. They could have said to themselves in anger "He saved half of us, why not just save everybody? Does he just not care?" But no...their trust in God was complete, no murmuring followed the great loss that would accompany them the rest of their lives. Their faith put their own lives in God's hands, and then they faithfully endured deep loss forever after.

I see no absence of scriptural evidence for the principles being taught in this talk. Perhaps the very words "Do you have the faith not to be healed" are not scriptural. But those words don't make up the whole of his message to that couple. His message was much deeper than that, and it would be unfair to only analyze that single statement outside of the full context. The question he asked was a teaching moment to suggest that real faith in God always involves humbly submitting to His will.

I don't want to make this about Denver, because it isn't. I happen to enjoy Denver's teaching style and message, and I know Daryl does as well. So I'll end with one more analogy that I think will put Elder Bednar's comment into proper context. Taking only the question "Do you have the faith not to be healed" outside of the context of his entire discussion with the couple and outside of the context of the entire talk (which dealt not just with healing, but adversity of all kinds), would be like only looking at one of the 20 questions Denver lists on a single post and questioning the doctrinal nature of that question in isolation while ignoring that the question was designed to be a teaching moment in the context of the entire post and all 20 questions. In fact, the question may be anything but doctrinal, but he's specifically asking you the question to get you to dig deeper and discover truth.

Asking questions, even uncomfortable ones, is often a great way to teach. In this case, Elder Bednar used the question we are discussing to help them discover how deep their faith really went. I think it was quite effective. We need not assume that means they were then passive about that faith and let death approach. Instead it may have helped them more fully submit and more faithfully petition.

Alma 24:27 "Thus we see that the Lord worketh in many ways to the salvation of his people." He works in both death and life, he works in both prosperity and adversity. He is not just the God of the healed, he is the God of those sick and dying as well; and their suffering, if they endure it well, works to their salvation just as much as the one who had faith to be healed.

It truly is "less about living and dying; more about learning and becoming" one who can faithfully "submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon them".

Respectfully,
Danny

Thomas wrote: Anyone who has been through the temple is one of the Lord's annointed.

Thomas, just for clarity sake, no ordinance is of eternal effect until it is sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise. So no anointing is complete until it is sealed by that spirit.

Daryl, sorry your thread was hijacked. While I do not claim to know your intentions, I do see where some questions come in. Also I think you asked them appropriately, regardless of intent.

I think the majority lack faith and misunderstand what it is to begin with. Now I am not claiming I know or have sufficient faith but I have been a part of miraculous healings. When this has happened I have felt a "charge" go through the chambers of my soul. I felt it both physically and spiritually. Afterwords I was physically weak but spiritually aware. This is something very real and something I KNOW. I would love to understand what the power of faith is, what priesthood power is, etc. I would love to be able to exercise that power with confidence. One day I will.
Justification, sanctification, purification...still working on sanctification.

Since I started this thread yesterday, I have been asking around to friends and family asking them about the talk. The ones that remember the talk all said the same thing: "That's the one about having enough faith not to be healed." So like it or not, that is the sound byte people caught from the talk.

Out of context, I'm uncomfortable with that phrase. It sounds like lacking faith. Now it seems to me that this soundbite will creep it's way into Mormon tradition. I'm not at all comfortable with that. But that's just me.

For the record, I openly admit that I am the one with the problem. Elder Bednar is the one who received "tactical revelation" about such doctrine. Not me.

Daryl wrote:Since I started this thread yesterday, I have been asking around to friends and family asking them about the talk. The ones that remember the talk all said the same thing: "That's the one about having enough faith not to be healed." So like it or not, that is the sound byte people caught from the talk.

Out of context, I'm uncomfortable with that phrase. It sounds like lacking faith. Now it seems to me that this soundbite will creep it's way into Mormon tradition. I'm not at all comfortable with that. But that's just me.

For the record, I openly admit that I am the one with the problem. Elder Bednar is the one who received "tactical revelation" about such doctrine. Not me.

I won't disagree with you there. I listen to that message, and I am most certainly uplifted and it confirms within me the desire to deepen my trust in God. It does not discourage me from seeking the gift of healing, it encourages me.

However, you are correct, there will be some, if not many, who may use such a phrase as an excuse to dismiss and ignore healing and miracles that are most definitely promised in scripture. If that is the case, and if that is all that people decide to remember, it will be sad indeed.

Learning the kind of faith I believe he was describing has been a great blessing to me. I learned it while facing obstacles that refused to be moved, it became clear to me that my duty before God was to submit and learn patience, charity, faith, and mercy in the face of adversity and betrayal. I wouldn't trade anything for the lessons I learned and the way I came to trust God. I'm glad he didn't deliver me in the way I initially wanted Him to. Too many lessons learned, and a proximity to God I'd not previously known.

If anything, developing that faith is the exact reason I continue to seek even greater closeness with God. It has become the fuel for my pursuit of more. It has not inspired in me passivity, but greater passion.

Learning the kind of faith I believe he was describing has been a great blessing to me. I learned it while facing obstacles that refused to be moved, it became clear to me that my duty before God was to submit and learn patience, charity, faith, and mercy in the face of adversity and betrayal. I wouldn't trade anything for the lessons I learned and the way I came to trust God. I'm glad he didn't deliver me in the way I initially wanted Him to. Too many lessons learned, and a proximity to God I'd not previously known.

Definitely true. We've had a rough path to be where we are with god, but we wouldn't have it any other way. It would seem he asked us to endure by giving us a promise of an outcome, but requiring us to endure the journey, maybe this is what he means by having the faith not to be healed.

I do like the saying, 'god isn't the light at the end of the tunnel, he is your light IN the tunnel" and seems relevant in waiting for his promise or miracle.

drjme wrote: We probably shouldn't speak evil of anyone who is anointed anyways regardless, and as such I apologize for saying you didn't use your brain , I don't think there is any evil speaking going on here. Again he asked a question to help him reconcile a misunderstanding he has, I don't see any malice in his questioning. The purpose of the Bible and BOM is so that we CAN measure the words of a prophet against the word of another one, A lot of times we won't get an immediate answer from the spirit, and God will require us to go and search it out in His word, talk with fellow saints, work it out and ask him again and then get a witness of truth.

I always thought the purpose of the Bible and the Book of Mormon was to convince the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's kingdom once again established on the earth, not to pit the words of one prophet against the words of another ... perhaps I need to reevaluate my understanding of these works ...

sonofliberty wrote:

drjme wrote: We probably shouldn't speak evil of anyone who is anointed anyways regardless, and as such I apologize for saying you didn't use your brain , I don't think there is any evil speaking going on here. Again he asked a question to help him reconcile a misunderstanding he has, I don't see any malice in his questioning. The purpose of the Bible and BOM is so that we CAN measure the words of a prophet against the word of another one, A lot of times we won't get an immediate answer from the spirit, and God will require us to go and search it out in His word, talk with fellow saints, work it out and ask him again and then get a witness of truth.

I always thought the purpose of the Bible and the Book of Mormon was to convince the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's kingdom once again established on the earth, not to pit the words of one prophet against the words of another ... perhaps I need to reevaluate my understanding of these works ...

Yeah you probably should son, the good books serve many purposes, I don't think I need to list all of them do I? Just one that is pertinent to what we are talking about yes?
I'm not sure about pitting one prophet against another.... This whole thread is what the scriptures are for, to clarify and provide better understanding of what bednar was saying. If you don't understand what a modern prophet says you can go back to the books and search for more meaning from gods word. I'm not sure why you wouldn't understand this. We do it everytime we read the bible and BOM. And if what one says is inconsistent with his word it's like a double check as well as discerning with the spirit.

I always thought the purpose of the Bible and the Book of Mormon was to convince the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's kingdom once again established on the earth

you are Correct.

Its also as djrme said, to correct false doctrine, to speak plainly, and to guide one to truth. I say most the time we hear something a prophet says and we don't agree with it, its normally because we don't understand it not because what they are teaching is false (98% of the time). Thus we read the books (scriptures) to understand what they were saying and reconcile it with our views and correct our views to whats true.

TZONE wrote:

I always thought the purpose of the Bible and the Book of Mormon was to convince the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's kingdom once again established on the earth

you are Correct.

Its also as djrme said, to correct false doctrine, to speak plainly, and to guide one to truth. I say most the time we hear something a prophet says and we don't agree with it, its normally because we don't understand it not because what they are teaching is false (98% of the time). Thus we read the books (scriptures) to understand what they were saying and reconcile it with our views and correct our views to whats true.

TZONE, I think you are right. However, that 98% is slipping quickly.

Here is what someone sent me via PM:

I understand where you're coming from, Daryl. What I would like to know is - why, in the scriptures, including the BOM - does the Lord heal EVERY person he comes in contact with. EVERY person who needs to be healed, he heals, period. There isn't a single example in all of scripture where someone has an ailment of some sort, and he doesn't heal them - not a single one. So, what has changed?

I told this person that I wish I was bold enough to come up with that myself and that I would post this anonymously. I think this person has a very good point.

I listened to Elder Bednar's talk again yesterday. Here is how I would rate the sermon on a sliding scale with 1 being horrible and 10 being pure enlightenment.

Humility - 9
Sincerity of belief - 10
Correctness of doctrine - 7
Correctness of the point in question - 7
Quality of sound byte for point in question - 2.5
Entertainment value - 10
Motivation for listeners to share one with another - 12+ (people are big-time talking about this)
Originality - 12+

Yes he came and healed those he came in contact with physically but not always spiritually. We can be healed spiritually 100% of the time from the Lord through the atonement. Sometimes being healed spiritually requires us not to be healed physically and so we have to have to exercise the faith necessary to let the atonement work in our life regardless to physical healing. This talk was a great example of teaching by the spirit, just an amazing talk.

I understand where you're coming from, Daryl. What I would like to know is - why, in the scriptures, including the BOM - does the Lord heal EVERY person he comes in contact with. EVERY person who needs to be healed, he heals, period. There isn't a single example in all of scripture where someone has an ailment of some sort, and he doesn't heal them - not a single one. So, what has changed?

I have not listened to what bednar said But what others have said so far I do not disagree with it. This quote above i believe is NOT correct in what we are talking about. There are plenty of people who are not healed. There are plenty of people who god does not save. Why would God give us an illness than just heal it? That would defeat the purpose. How many people died in Jesus's time? Did he heal all of htem? No. He only healed a VERY FEW! He had a 3.5 year ministry yet we have an account of healing a VERY FEW. Its like going on a mission. You have tons of healing and spiritual experiences but often you just go on preaching and few listen. Than you get home and share the SAME stories over and over.

How do we know he did not heal someone? Why would the apostles even write about that in the first place? However, in every part of history the mission of the saints is DIFFERENT than the mission of the savior. The savior taught by example. He taught through action. He was perfect. Missionaries teach by preaching being imperfect. The apostles taught but how often did they heal? Not quite as often. There are definitely examples of people not being healed in the Book of Mormon. I will take Alma and Amulek story as one. Not saving someone and not healing them are the same thing.

Am I not understanding the issue here? If you don't believe one can have perfect faith and still not be healed than one does not understand the fullness of the plan of salvation. I get what is being asked and the issue, however, that has nothing to do with healing everyone? Or am I mistaken?

TZONE wrote:Am I not understanding the issue here?

I think part of the issue here is Bro. Bednar's phrase, "do you have the faith not to be healed". This could easily turn into the go to catch-phrase for healing failures, or morph into other things like "do you have faith not to see an angel".

ajax wrote:

TZONE wrote:Am I not understanding the issue here?

I think part of the issue here is Bro. Bednar's phrase, "do you have the faith not to be healed". This could easily turn into the go to catch-phrase for healing failures, or morph into other things like "do you have faith not to see an angel".

Ok I get that. But still whats the issue? lol... I have always believed about needing to have "faith to not be healed"... It does not mean the Lord won't tell you that is the answer. He will still tell you or clear up your understanding of the "why". I can see why it could be a problem if we applied it to everything but really you could say that about EVERYTHING.

Oh I couldn't visit this hometeacher, guess the Lord didn't want me to visit them. I tired to visit them once guess the Lord didn't want me to visit them. I broke my ankle guess I shouldn't do any of the duties of sacrament. I am sick, guess the Lord is telling me to stay home from church. Sounds to me everyone is nit picking here? (my examples could be better but I am brain dead at the moment)

Oh T-ZONE, I love your HT example.

When I don't visit my families, I will tell them, "Do you have faith not to be visited by me this month?"

The problem is, most of them will probably say, "Hell yeah!"

ajax wrote:Oh T-ZONE, I love your HT example.

When I don't visit my families, I will tell them, "Do you have faith not to be visited by me this month?"

The problem is, most of them will probably say, "Hell yeah!"

=))

Well, that is kind of funny putting it in that context. I would be one to say yes as well.

Gone...Full circle

But were all telestial people, God is a Celestial person so these notions are in a way pointless. :ymsmug:

ajax wrote:

TZONE wrote:Am I not understanding the issue here?

I think part of the issue here is Bro. Bednar's phrase, "do you have the faith not to be healed". This could easily turn into the go to catch-phrase for healing failures, or morph into other things like "do you have faith not to see an angel".

It definitely has the potential for great abuse - and for leading people away from God. Not saying that was his intention. I think he meant well, and would be shocked that anyone would grab that phrase and run with it as an excuse to not be healed, to not have miracles in their lives.

TZONE wrote:Oh I couldn't visit this hometeacher, guess the Lord didn't want me to visit them. I tired to visit them once guess the Lord didn't want me to visit them. I broke my ankle guess I shouldn't do any of the duties of sacrament. I am sick, guess the Lord is telling me to stay home from church. Sounds to me everyone is nit picking here? (my examples could be better but I am brain dead at the moment)

I have known people with exactly this attitude. As an example, "My check has been spent. No money left for tithing. I guess God did not want me to pay tithing this month." There are people like this.

TZONE wrote:

I understand where you're coming from, Daryl. What I would like to know is - why, in the scriptures, including the BOM - does the Lord heal EVERY person he comes in contact with. EVERY person who needs to be healed, he heals, period. There isn't a single example in all of scripture where someone has an ailment of some sort, and he doesn't heal them - not a single one. So, what has changed?

I have not listened to what bednar said But what others have said so far I do not disagree with it. This quote above i believe is NOT correct in what we are talking about. There are plenty of people who are not healed. There are plenty of people who god does not save. Why would God give us an illness than just heal it? That would defeat the purpose. How many people died in Jesus's time? Did he heal all of htem? No. He only healed a VERY FEW! He had a 3.5 year ministry yet we have an account of healing a VERY FEW. Its like going on a mission. You have tons of healing and spiritual experiences but often you just go on preaching and few listen. Than you get home and share the SAME stories over and over.

How do we know he did not heal someone? Why would the apostles even write about that in the first place? However, in every part of history the mission of the saints is DIFFERENT than the mission of the savior. The savior taught by example. He taught through action. He was perfect. Missionaries teach by preaching being imperfect. The apostles taught but how often did they heal? Not quite as often. There are definitely examples of people not being healed in the Book of Mormon. I will take Alma and Amulek story as one. Not saving someone and not healing them are the same thing.

Am I not understanding the issue here? If you don't believe one can have perfect faith and still not be healed than one does not understand the fullness of the plan of salvation. I get what is being asked and the issue, however, that has nothing to do with healing everyone? Or am I mistaken?

I think the problem comes from believing that God doesn't really want us to suffer, knowing that we ourselves don't want to suffer, and yet having to accept that for some reason, we are still not being healed. So is it because of our faith or because of God's will? Is it me or Him? Can I do something more to obtain this blessing, or do I need to wait until the Lord is ready?

To complicate things. we have scriptures telling us that the Lord does want to heal us and that if we have enough faith we can be healed. However, in our mortal perspective, we forget that we sometimes need to wait on the Lord.

The people in Jesus' time who were healed instantly by Him all seem to have been healed right away to us. But we are only seeing one moment of their story. We are not seeing years of pain, of pleading in prayer with God above, of second guessing and doubt, and of dashed hopes. How many of those people were afflicted only a moment before they were healed? None. Many suffered for years.

Remember the blind man? Jesus was asked why he was born blind and He replied that it was so Jesus could show for His works in him. That man waited his entire life to be healed, years and years, just for that moment when Jesus could heal him. How many times did he pray for healing before that? How many blessings did he receive asking for that blessing? Did perhaps that man have to exercise faith first, that he would not be healed? I would think he did.

Very good points, CtS. The scriptures don't tell us that we will be healed instantly, though it seems to be like that when we read the NT - but, as you pointed out, those people had been infirm for possibly years, some of them their whole lives.