HEALING IN ZION

by
Carol Balizet
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
My Qualifications......3
WHAT THE SYSTEM IS......6
A Counterfeit......6
A Profession......8
Egyptian in Origin and Nature......18
Dangerous......21
A Tradition......29
WHAT THE SYSTEM USES......36
The Counsel of the Ungodly......36
Drugs......40
Surgery......53
Hospitals......60
Blood......64
Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation......69
Psychic Power......71
Psychology and Psychiatry......72
"Stings"......76
Manipulation......80

WHAT THE SYSTEM DOES......82

Effects both God and Man......82
Curses......85
Puts Diseases On People......91
Fosters Double-mindedness......107
Supports Antichristian Activities & Philosophies....110
Controls Childbirth......115
Defiles......135

A WORD OF EXPLANATION........140

FINDING THE SPIRITUAL ROOT OF PHYSICAL ILLNESS......145

The Point of View......145
Possible Causes of Disease......153
Significance of Location Within the Body......167
Scriptural References to Specific Diseases......179

SUMMARY......185
 JEHOVAH-RAPHA OR THE MEDICAL SYSTEM?
I.
MY QUALIFICATIONS
Let's start with this question: why should you listen to me about the
medical system? What are my qualification that I presume to instruct you?
Well, I'm qualified to present my viewpoint partly because of my
thirty-three years in service to this system, (beginning in 1950 as a
nurses' aide and progressing through various levels of training and
employment as LPN, RN, charge nurse, surgical first assistant, ICU/CCU
specialist, and house supervisor) and partly because of God's revelation to
me about it.
In addition to exposure to the medical system from within, and to
input from God about it, I have had years of experience in trusting God
alone for healing - and according to an old saying, the man with an
EXPERIENCE is never at the mercy of the man who has merely a DOCTRINE. For
the past twenty years, my family and I have walked this out in experience,
in faith and obedience assigning the role of healer to God ALONE. Our
experience includes everything from chronic headaches and car wrecks
through broken bones and childbirth, and we can stand at the end of these
twenty years with the testimony that God has never, never failed. He hasn't
always been real quick, but He's never failed.
Not only does He heal the physical manifestations, He also reaches
into the spirit realm and destroys the root problem which allowed the
sickness in the first place. This is, of course, far more important than
mere physical healing.
I believe this subject matters to God. I think He would like for His
people to believe Him, to mature and walk in the works He did, to fulfill
His prophecy about "those who believe" in Mark 16 - and to become DIFFERENT
FROM THE WORLD. I don't believe we'll raise the dead and show other signs
and wonders until we are single-minded and fully committed to Him with no
assistance from the arm of flesh. James says, "A double-minded man receives
nothing from God", and surely one of the things not received must be
miracles.
Of course, I would greatly prefer a debate on the subject, instead of
being in the position of bearing the whole burden of proof against an
established and accepted point of view. I am totally convinced that if the
opposing stand (that it is scriptural and logical for Christians to turn to
the medical system for healing) had to PROVE its validity instead of
operating from the enviable position of being assumed and accepted as
correct, it would find such proof difficult - no, IMPOSSIBLE! - to obtain.
I heard a very good teaching on the New Age in modern society by Dr.
David Jeremiah, on his radio program "The Turning Point". He talked about
the holistic health movement, and had counsel for people in doubt about
whether or not a particular practice was godly. He had five questions he
recommended we ask before submitting to anything doubtful:
1. Is the practice Biblically acceptable?
2. Will it lead into sin?
3. Does it work?
4. Does the practitioner hold a wrong world view?
5. Will it affect you spiritually?
They're very good questions, and the answers will certainly reveal the
 4
nature of the practice we're contemplating, but I wonder why Dr. Jeremiah
doesn't suggest we ask these same questions about normal, standard,
approved and accepted medical care? The answers might reveal something
about ITS true nature too.
Why do Christians so honor, and cling to, this system? Of all the
things this world has to offer, I think medical care is the last one most
Christians would be willing to surrender. Medical care in America covers so
much more than physical illness! Americans look to medicine to handle such
diverse problems as delinquency, crime, divorce, child abuse, court
decisions, violence, poor grades, sexual deviation, alcoholism, teenage
rebellion and stress.
Joann Ellison Rodgers, writing for the University of California,
states, "A whole constellation of rights and decisions with respect to
lifestyle has been taken from the family and individuals and placed in the
hands of medical or quasi-medical institutions... Responsibilities once
considered the exclusive province of parents, clergy, teachers, judges and
lawmakers are now declared targets for the health care system. Indeed, it
is hard to think of any condition which people believe cannot be cured, or
at least eased, by the medical system.
"(But) contrary to widespread belief, science does not have much
information about why people get sick or get better. Most human problems
lie outside the province of medical science... and there is no evidence
that physicians or psychotherapists are any more competent to deal with
these problems than families..."
There is NO scriptural incidence of healing through man's system. The
woman with an issue of blood had been to physicians and according to the
Bible, she had spent all her living, suffered much, and was not healed. In
II Chronicles 16, Asa looked to the physicians and died, and although Luke
was "the beloved physician", there is no record of any believer turning to
him for medical care, or of his healing anyone. Certainly he wasn't there
as a back up in case Jesus failed!
 5

II.
WHAT THE SYSTEM IS
1. IT IS A COUNTERFEIT
The medical system is NOT God's provision for the outworking of His
promise to heal. It is, in fact, a counterfeit of divine healing.
"Counterfeit" is a perfect word to describe it; it is "Made in imitation,
with intent to be passed off as genuine".
It did not originate with God. It doesn't reflect His nature; it
doesn't share His goals; it doesn't operate by His power. There may be a
superficial resemblance to God's healing, but it is spurious. A
counterfeit. It does not operated in the name of our God, and it gives Him
no glory.
(If medicine is a counterfeit of divine healing, then we can
understand the failure of a world-renown ministry ordained of God to "Send
healing teams throughout the world", which instead sent MEDICAL teams. The
two are NOT synonymous.)
An Illustration from Mythology
This little story will help illustrate the counterfeit nature of the
medical system.
Once upon a time there was a god, a god of light, truth and beauty,
whose son was a healer. In fact, the son healed so many that few people
were dying and going to hell. This made the god of hell angry and he killed
the son; but the father by his power raised the son from death and he still
lives in heaven and still sends down healing to those on earth.
If this sounds familiar, like some Father-Son combination we know, it
is because in order to be effective, a counterfeit must resemble the real.
But this story is not about our God and His son, Jesus; it is about Apollo,
the Greek god of health, and about his son Asclepias, the god of healing
and medicine. Asclepias is symbolized by a snake, and he is the snake which
winds around the staff of the Caduceus, the emblem of the medical system.
Many Christians believe that false gods, especially those which appear
over and over in every mythology - under various names and guises - which
are endued with supernatural powers and are worshipped, are truly
supernatural beings, the "Principalities and powers, thrones and dominions"
of Ephesians 6. If this is true, then it is obvious that Asclepias is the
Satanic strongman over the worldly system of healing. This Asclepias is the
same being who was worshipped as healer at the temple in Pergamos, where
the ill lay overnight on the temple floor with the "sacred" (sic) snakes
crawling over them.
The Hippocratic Oath
There is an oath which doctors may take upon beginning their
professional life, called the Hippocratic Oath. It begins, "I swear by
Apollo the physician, by Asclepias, by Hygeia and Panacea and all the gods
and goddesses, that according to my ability and judgment I will keep this
oath and stipulation." We shall pass over the scriptural injunctions
against oath-taking itself, and address the content of this particular
oath.
Even if we acknowledge that some doctors refuse to take the oath - and
 6
almost certainly no modern physician really means the words of this vow -
there is still an indication here of the background and the loyalty of this
system. Whether the young doctors believe it or not, some spiritual force
is empowered by this oath-taking - just as playing with a Ouija board
releases spiritual power whether or not the player "really believes."
Perhaps Christians should consider avoiding the ministrations of men and
women who take oaths to four false gods. At least they should be aware of
the danger of surrendering their bodies and their health to a SYSTEM which
does so.
 7

2. IT IS A PROFESSION
A profession is a HUMAN institution. It operates in human wisdom to
meet human needs by human efforts, and during my thirty-three years in the
medical profession, I repeatedly saw that it is a system where man takes
care of man. There is, in fact, no place you can go where there is less
faith in GOD as healer. This system, like the Tower of Babel which it
resembles, builds a complex, cooperative, humanistic way of meeting life's
needs without relying on God.
Its premise is: "MAN heals". The whole thing can, and almost always
does, operate in an independent spirit; there are no requirements built
into the system to operate according to God's will or ways, or to give Him
glory. As David said, "God is not in all their thoughts". It is perfectly
possible for a person to see a doctor, be hospitalized, operated on, nursed
to recuperation and discharged, without anyone involved being Christian or
submitting any part of the procedure to God. In fact, that's the way it
usually works.
A Religion?
Dr. Robert Mendlesohn, author of CONFESSIONS OF A MEDICAL HERETIC,
himself an M.D. and a practicing Jew, said the medical system is a
religion, that it operates by faith in a higher power and contains all the
trappings of religion: a priestly caste, confession, blood sacrifices,
lofty temples, even the taking of a collection. He also claims there is a
blood-thirsty pagan god behind all the trappings. Now I don't think the
good doctor really believes this; he uses the idea merely as an
illustration, but we can certainly see that Jehovah-Rapha is not the source
of this system's power, nor the recipient of its glory.
Their Conflicting Truths about AIDS
One definition of "profession" is: a career or position wherein one is
paid primarily for what he KNOWS, not for what he DOES. And under that
definition, we seek help from this system primarily for the knowledge
available there. If this is so, then the facts should be just that: facts.
The knowledge should be trustworthy, consistent, true, lasting, good. But
this is precisely what it is NOT. It is a constantly changing body of
information, slowly disseminated.
Here are a few examples of this so-called "truth" which people expect
from the medical system. Let's begin with the subject of AIDS. Billions of
dollars from tax-payers (you and me) are spent to educate the public (again
you and me) about AIDS. Education is their number one weapon against this
killer disease. But what is being taught? What are we getting for our
billions?
When I read Randy Shilts' history of the AIDS epidemic, AND THE BAND
PLAYED ON, I made a star beside each official pronouncement made by the
"experts", those at the Centers for Disease Control, the National
Institutes of Health, others of the various health departments. Then I made
a note when these official pronouncements were retracted or proved to be
untrue. The results are astonishing! They were constantly having to reverse
what they'd spoken officially, ex cathedra, earlier.
The same fellows who are saying now "You can't contract AIDS by casual
contact" were saying at one time (June, 1982) "No evidence exists that
 8
[this] is an infectious disease". In June, 1983, New York City Health
Commissioner Dr. David Sencer reported that AIDS was possibly "... not as
infectious as we may have thought". And the chairman of the city's Human
Rights Commission, Isaiah Robinson, told the DAILY NEWS unequivocally,
"There is NO epidemic".
In August of 1982 they maintained, "There is no evidence that AIDS can
be spread through blood transfusions", and there was an official
confirmation of this position in December of 1982. As late as July of 1983,
Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler, along with Assistant
Secretary for Health Dr. Edward Brandt, stated, "...want to assure the
American people that the blood supply is 100% safe." Dr. Herbert Perkins,
medical director of San Francisco's Irwin Memorial Blood Bank, announced
"The risk of getting AIDS from a transfusion is about one in a million".
(This was a month AFTER France had banned the importing of American blood,
considering it too risky for use.) Other "experts" rated the odds of
contracting AIDS from blood were about 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 5,000.
In February, 1984, the president of the Council of Community Blood
Centers told the JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION that his group
believed there might be a blood-borne AIDS virus, but that it probably was
not highly infectious. By March 12, 1984 - only one month later - the
Centers for Disease Control had counted seventy-three transfusion AIDS
cases, twenty-two of whom had already died.
It's abundantly clear that they were wrong about its being infectious;
they were wrong about its being transmitted through blood. And it's highly
likely they're wrong about casual contact. An AMA release way back in May
6, 1983, begins: "Evidence suggesting that AIDS can be transmitted by
routine household contact is presented in this week's JOURNAL OF THE
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION", but we hear nothing of this now.
And this despite facts like these: on August 25, 1986, Professor Jean-
Claude Cermann of Paris' Pasteur Institute reported that the AIDS virus had
been found in African insects. It had been isolated in mosquitoes,
cockroaches, ants, body lice, tsetse flies, bedbugs and black beetles.
It would take far too long to enumerate all the reversals-of-position
I found; suffice it to say I found a LOT! And it's still happening. To
support my statement that what we're told isn't consistent with reliable
truth, I offer this. In May, 1987, a memorandum to the House of Commons by
Dr. John Seale of England's Royal Society of Medicine, made the following
statements:
"The most important and urgent task for politicians... is to force
scientists to speak clearly, precisely and honestly about the AIDS
epidemic. Half-truths, wishful thinking, flawed scientific hypotheses and
deceptions have been perpetrated by scientists, and allowed to flourish as
conventional wisdom, aided and abetted by editors of scientific and medical
journals. These deceptions must be exposed with maximum publicity... The
longer the truth is obscured from the public...the greater the multitude of
innocent people who... die most horribly as a result... Disinformation
weakens the political will to implement the tough control measures required
to halt the spread of the virus."
In short, if you're trusting in the medical community to know, and to
tell, the whole truth, you're in for either deception or disappointment.
Their Conflicting Truths about Other Things
 9
Here are a few more examples of their less-than-perfect truth.
Dr. Eugene Vayda, associate dean for community health at the
University of Toronto, asked 73 physicians to make treatment
recommendations based on three case histories. About 40% said they would
operate, while just over 60% said they would not. Who was right?
Jon Van of the Chicago Tribune writes, quoting Dr. Gerald Chodak, of
the University of Chicago, and Dr. Martin Resnick of Case Western Reserve
University, "If doctors could diagnose and treat every case of prostate
cancer in its earliest stage, more men would die from complications from
the surgery than would die of the disease itself."
Mr. Van goes on, "Despite this, many physicians continue to urge
healthy patients to have prostate cancer screening tests... this ignores
the studies which suggest that early detection and treatment of prostate
cancer does not prolong life and hold only the potential of harm for the
patient... The idea of screening men without symptoms for prostate cancer
is highly controversial among urologists."
Gina Kolata in the New York Times writes of the somewhat shame-faced
announcement by medical researches that they now believe cholesterol levels
are harmful. I quote, "Although... low concentrations of cholesterol in the
blood protect people from heart disease, there also seems to be newly
found, but sometimes grudging, agreement that very low levels of
cholesterol levels make death from other causes more likely."
Then there's the question of mammography. A good thing? Dangerous? Do
they even KNOW? The American Cancer Society says women aged 40 to 49 should
have mammograms every year or two. The American College of Surgeons was
asked to endorse the Cancer Society's position and refused. The American
College of Physicians and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, advisors
to the Department of Health and Human Services, openly oppose this
recommendation. The American College of Radiologists say that 40% to 50% of
the mammograms involved in the study which led to the Cancer Society's
position, were substandard. Nobody agrees with anybody else!
Mammography itself is fallible. A biostatistician at the National
Cancer Institute, Lou Fintor, says it misses about 10% of breast cancers,
and has a false positive rate of 60 to 70%
Whoever is right, many studies, including the one discussed above,
show that more women who received mammograms died of breast cancer than
women who had not been Xrayed.
The New York Times News Service published an article in December,
1987, concerning the long-held belief within the medical community that
newborn babies are unable to feel pain. (Any mother who has accidently
stuck her baby with a pin can affirm that infants are fully able to feel
and respond to pain!)
But for decades, surgery was performed on newborn babies without
benefit of anesthesia. "Typically, an anesthesiologist would administer a
drug to paralyze the muscles, so that the infant would not thrash
around..." the article states. "The practice of withholding drugs was
widespread in the United States and other countries from the 1940's..."
Now the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Society of
Anesthesiologists admit than "an increasing body of evidence" indicates
that newborns do show physiologic responses to pain. This "new" evidence
shows that "infants utter unusual cries, and secrete high levels of stress
hormones in response to pain". Dr. John W. Scanlon, director of neonatology
 10
at Columbia Hospital for Women, calls this failure to relieve pain
"barbarous".
I quote from Dr. Frederic Berry of the Children's Medical Center of
the University of Virginia: "The long failure to provide anesthesia for
newborns provides a salutary reminder that medical practices are sometimes
based on flimsy science and erroneous beliefs... With the benefit of
hindsight, the anesthesiologists who withheld painkillers all those years
would probably admit they made a mistake..."
Time magazine, October 27, 1958, writes: "One thing that medicine's
learned men once knew, or thought they knew, was that cancer is not
infectious. Therefore no infectious agent could be involved in its
origin... Today no line of investigation into the origins of human cancer
is being pressed more vigorously than that implicating viruses..."
Daniel Q. Haney, a science writer for the Associated Press, has this
to say about medicine's store of "trustworthy" information. "Two papers
examining the effects of estrogen pills on older women reached the New
England Journal of Medicine at almost the same time. One suggested that the
hormone prevents heart disease, the other says that it causes it."
"This illuminates that one should never take as gospel what is
published in the New England Journal of Medicine, but should take it as the
current state of the art," says Dr. Jay Winsten, assistant dean of the
Harvard School of Public Health.
Dr. Marcia Angell, deputy editor of the journal, says, "No study we
publish comes down to us on a tablet. There's always a possibility that
something is wrong. I think it's a nice reminder that science is fallible."
Yes, Dr. Angell. So it is.
(And isn't it interesting to note that the truth they use to contrast
with their own, the one they acknowledge is higher than theirs is first
called "gospel" and then is called what "comes down on a tablet".)
From THE NEW PHYSICIAN, March 1988: "Having fallen into disrepute
since about a century ago, when they were prescribed so universally that
they nearly became extinct in Europe, medicinal leeches are staging a
comeback. At many hospitals they have been rediscovered as an ideal agent
to drain accumulated blood. In order to prevent the transmission of
diseases such as AIDS, each leech is assigned to one patient only. Each
costs only about $6.00." Talk about changing your mind, changing what you
believe is true! LEECHES again? How's that for state-of-the-art medicine?
Through the media, we are barraged with details of research into the
tobacco - lung cancer question. The effects of smoking or chewing tobacco
is studied, the consequence of second-hand smoke, the effects on the babies
of smoking mothers: we get so much information we may assume that we have
the TRUTH. But do we? One point that is never published here is the fact
that primitive tribes have been smoking for thousands of years, with no
disagreeable after effects. Dr. Richard Passey, a researcher at London's
Chester Beattie Research Institute, conducted twenty years study on this
subject, and found no significant link between traditionally air-dried
tobacco and lung cancer. He found no resulting lung cancer in smokers in
the (former) Soviet Union, China or Taiwan, all of which produce air-dried
tobacco.
However, the American and English tobacco industries use sugar in
their tobacco. England, which uses 17% sugar, has the highest lung cancer
rate in the world. (The Unites States uses 10%). The results of Dr.Passey's
 11
studies indicate that the addition of sugar to tobacco creates a
carcinogenic substance in tobacco tar which is not present in plain, air-
dried tobacco. Had you heard this? Which is true: tobacco causes cancer,
or tobacco with sugar added causes cancer?
Even something as "carved in stone" as the so-called normal
temperature of the human body is now being discredited. It's 98.6
Fahrenheit, right? Wrong! That "truth" has reigned since 1868, but is now
being revised. A recent study by the Veterans' Affairs Medical Center and
the University of Maryland show that the 98.6 reading accounted for only 8%
of those tested. (700 individuals were checked, from one to four times
daily, for two and a half days.) So now they're saying our "normal"
temperature is a range - from 96 to 99.9.
Impermanent, Often Conflicting "Truth"
The point I'm making is, their truth is NOT permanent.
immutable, trustworthy.
We are foolhardy to trust that what this system says is TRUE. If they
operate in ontological, immutable TRUTH, why the urging to seek a second
opinion? If these men are tapped into incorruptible reality, how can they
disagree? Won't they both say the same thing? But the fact is, they often
don't; so often in fact that the Medical Society of Delaware is
implementing a testimony review committee to handle the many court cases in
which "expert testimony" is contradictory.
What was believed as truth in times past has been replaced with newer
truth, and there is every reason to believe the facts upon which they base
their opinions and decisions today will continue to change. What is the
public supposed to believe NOW about oat bran? Is milk good for growing
children or not? How much sunlight is safe? How much exercise?
A few years ago, a number of health care products containing
hexachlorophene, a highly touted antiseptic, were withdrawn from the
market. It was only after many years of use that it was discovered that a
high concentration of this substance (manufactured from the same chemical
as Dow Chemical's deadly weedkillers) could cause death when rubbed on the
skin of babies. The horror is, it took a ten-year struggle to get all the
highly profitable hexachlorophene products off the market. And what are
they using NOW which they'll find in the future to be toxic?
Is it safe to adopt a passive acceptance of all the hospital practices
currently established as routine? Many are now being revealed as
destructive. Like this: The Institute of Child Health studied 670 children
born between 1965 and 1987. When they compared the records of the healthy
children among the test group, with the records of one hundred and eleven
children who had developed cancer, there was a SIGNIFICANT connection
linking leukemia with injections of vitamin K at birth. Do we believe those
who established the hospital routines and accept the injection, or do we
believe the newer research and try to refuse it?
Their Truth is Not Dependable
What passes for truth within this system is, in short, not
trustworthy. Certainly it is not true the way the Word of God is true (and
remember, they only need to know 70% of it to pass their courses!) and yet
it is often considered to be the final authority on health, even to
Christians. And Christians are instructed in Psalm 1 not to walk in the
 12
counsel of the ungodly.
The Profit Motive
Another aspect of a profession is: it's done for payment. Princeton
University's health economist Uwe Reinhardt says, "America's doctors and
hospitals never have practiced medicine for anything but money." The
medical system has never operated under God's policy of, "Freely ye have
received, freely give". Physicians charge for their services. Medical costs
are out of control in America, while physicians average over a quarter of a
million dollars a year in income - the highest paid profession in our
country.
They have no external controls: they aren't regulated by either
competition or by governmental regulation. Eustace Mullins says in his
book, MURDER BY INJECTION, "The AMA focuses on protecting physicians'
incomes against government intrusion in the practice of medicine."
The New York Times reported that "...in 1985 the cost of health care
per person in the United States was $1800 per year; in England $800 per
year; in Japan $600 per year... What is the $1300 difference? It is the
$300 billion per year overcharging." Despite the respect which the
medical community commands from the public at large, there is a good deal
of price-fixing and other unethical behavior going on. For example, in
1982, Medicare paid out some $48.3 billion dollars, while Medicaid paid
$38.2 billion dollars. Conservative estimates believe that some 11 billion
dollars were skimmed off in illegal profits.
Consider this in light of the Scripture which calls healing a GIFT!
 13

3. IT IS EGYPTIAN IN ORIGIN AND NATURE

Is It a Gift From God?
Another thing about the system is: it's not native to God's people. It
was not founded by God for man's benefit. Many people consider the medical
system God's provision for dispensing divine healing, in the same way the
church is God's provision for dispensing the teachings and ministry of
Jesus. And with this point of view, these people feel they must remain
loyal to the medical system no matter what inefficiencies, evils and flaws
they see. We can all see flaws in the church, they say, yet we can not
simply "come out from her".
But the medical system is not entitled to any such loyalty and we are
not bound to submit to it, for unlike the church, it is NOT ordained of
God. He didn't establish it and He left us no promises of His continuing
blessing and protection upon it.
The medical system was never a part of Israel's heritage.
Scriptural Symbology of Nations
First. a brief review of the symbology of different nations in the
Bible: on one level, they refer to actual lands and nations, but they also
have a second, spiritual or symbolic interpretation. For example, when the
Bible refers to Egypt, it means of course the nation of Egypt; but it also
means a land or position which represents the world or the world system. A
reference to Babylon would mean Babylon, but would also refer to a position
or land which the enemy owns, where the people of God are in captivity.
Babylon often refers to the realm of the occult or false religion.
Scriptures concerning Zion, the promised land, also represent the
kingdom of God, while the wilderness represents the life of those of God's
people who have come out of the world but who have not yet entered the land
of promise.
With this in mind, we see significance in the fact that the medical
system - indeed many of man's institutions - originated in Egypt and was
developed by the Babylonians, Greeks and Romans. And God has always used
the Jews, the Hebrew nation, as His chosen route into the world. We
received the law, the Bible, the Messiah, the very idea of monotheism, all
through the Hebrews. God doesn't send His gifts, or His revelation through
pagan nations. He chooses His "Chosen People".
Did God's Instate "Nice Jewish Doctors"?
I quote from UNGER'S BIBLE DICTIONARY, Moody Press, page 267-268
(Emphasis mine). The author writes from the point of view that the medical
system is a good thing; he is looking for evidence that the Hebrews had a
part in the formation and appreciation of this system, and he is distressed
that he cannot find such evidence. This point of view comes through his
writing clearly, and there is something to be said for proof which is
offered DESPITE the writer's perspective.
"The Hebrews were greatly inferior to their powerful neighbors of
Egypt, Assyria and Greece in scientific culture... Only by the most
laborious search can we find in Scripture hints as to the scientific belief
and practice which the Hebrews may have derived from their residences in
Egypt and intercourse with their more enlightened and progressive rivals.
 14
"...It is exceedingly difficult to establish from the Bible the
existence of science or of a proper order of medical practitioners... in
Hebrew history. There is nowhere in Scripture an intimation that a
physician assisted at a confinement (Gen. 35:17, 38:27-30, Ex. 1:15)...
circumcision was probably performed by heads of families on their
dependents (Gen. 17:10-14, 34:24).
"The law stated that one who injured another should 'cause him to be
healed', (Ex. 21:19) but this does not state nor necessarily imply a
physician. Physicians embalmed Jacob (Gen. 50:2) BUT THEY WERE EGYPTIAN,
NOT HEBREW.
"Of the diseases and infirmities mentioned in the Pentateuch... we
have no hint of treatment except ceremonial and sacerdotal... Thus to the
end of the Old Testament the Scripture reveals hardly a trace of medical
science. This seems remarkable, CONSIDERING THE LONG RESIDENCE OF ISRAEL IN
EGYPT, WHERE MEDICINE WAS WELL ESTABLISHED AND CULTIVATED TO A HIGH DEGREE.
"Although a considerable number of hygienic precepts exist in Mosaic
law... it is a strained interpretation to refer to them as medical
knowledge. There was a tendency in all serious sickness to fall back on
religious ritual and ultimately on the divine providence (Exodus 15:26,
Psalm 103:3, 147:3, Isaiah 30:26, Jeremiah 17:14, 30:17). When Asa 'sought
not to the Lord but to the physicians'(II Chron. 16:12) the record speaks
reproachfully."
Egypt is where we labor in bondage to a harsh taskmaster, under a king
who "knows not Joseph". In the very first promise for healing, the Lord
says, "I will put none of these diseases upon thee, WHICH I HAVE BROUGHT
UPON THE EGYPTIANS, for I am the Lord that healeth thee" (Exodus 15:26). In
Isaiah 19, the Lord tells us what His attitude is toward Egypt, and verse
14 says "The Lord has mingled a perverse spirit in the midst thereof [in
Egypt] and they have caused Egypt to err in every work thereof..." It just
doesn't work very well.
It seems unlikely, at least, that God would keep His people out of
man's healing system all through the old covenant, and then, after Jesus
made a better covenant and made full provision for our healing, THEN send
His people back into Egypt. If He didn't send His children to that Egyptian
system BEFORE we were healed "by His stripes", would He do so now? No, He
calls His son - and His Church - OUT of Egypt (Hosea 11:1, Matt. 2:15).
 15

4. IT IS DANGEROUS
In addition to being a counterfeit, a profession instead of a ministry
and Egyptian in origin and nature, the medical system is also dangerous.
As we stated above, the Lord mingled a perverse spirit in Egypt (Isaiah
19:14), and it just doesn't work well. Actually, the Bible says He causes
it to err in EVERY way, and statistics, those published by the medical
system itself, actually support the view that the system is dangerous.

Facts About Physicians

Let's begin by talking about doctors, as a group. They're the ones who
actually control the system. And they have enormous authority over people's
lives. Eustace Mullins states in MURDER BY INJECTION, "One group has the
power to issue life or death sentences to any American - our nation's
physicians". Are they, again as a GROUP, worthy of our trust or is this a
dangerous stance?
In 1978, (and things have no doubt exacerbated since) the following
statistics were compiled about licensed physicians in the U.S.:
1 in 20 is an alcoholic
35,000 are known drug addicts
40% admit to abusing barbiturates, narcotics
amphetamines (A study in the American Journal of
Psychiatry says the incidence of narcotics addition among
physicians is from 30 to 100 times greater than that of the general
population.)
One half are divorced
1 in 2 is under psychiatric care
Suicide rate is twice the national average for age group
For psychiatrists, the suicide rate is 4 times the
national average for age group
An AP dispatch of February 11, 1988, headlined "Doctors Lie About
Credentials", revealed disquieting facts discovered by a large health care
corporation, Humana, Inc. They found that 39 of 727 doctors - that is 5% -
 16

who applied for employment in Humana clinics over a six month period
presented false credentials. (It is possible for doctors who have been
convicted in one state of professional incompetence, or of drug or sex
crimes, simply to move to another state and set up practice.)
The Public Citizen Health Research Group reports figures from state
licensing agencies: the number of physicians investigated and punished for
"such offenses as performing surgery while drunk, sexually assaulting
patients or acts of gross negligence in making medical decisions" increased
in 1986 by 17% over the previous year, 1985, which in turn had seen a 46%
rise over 1984.
Dr. Richard Bagby, president of the Orange County (Florida) Medical
Society, states "Every neurosurgeon in Florida has had a lawsuit against
them (sic) and obstetricians are leaving the profession in droves, almost
50% now." Why? Malpractice suits. Why malpractice suits? Because
something went wrong.
I quote from U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, May 6, 1991, the Science and
Society column: "In a survey of 254 interns and residents at three
inner-city hospitals, UCSF researchers found than an astonishing 45 percent
reported anonymously that they had made mistakes, most of them serious,
when treating patients. Of the errors, 31 percent allegedly resulted in, or
hastened, the patient's death."
On four different occasions when doctors went on strike, statistics
documented that the death rate went DOWN, by a rate of 15% to 18%! Then,
after the strike had been resolved and the doctors went back to work, the
death rate rose again.
These are the men and women whom most Christians trust as healer.
There is serious risk in this attitude.

Inefficiency in Accounting
The system is dangerous also because its worldly nature produces
ineptitude. Even the billing is affected by inefficiency! Equafax Services,
Inc. of Atlanta, which audits hospital bills for virtually every major
health insurance company in the country, conducted a survey from November
1983, to March 1984, and were shocked to discover "sizable errors" in 98.1%
 17

of the bills! In 1981, 90% of the audited bills were wrong and in 1982, 93%
It's getting worse!

Inefficiency in Laboratory Testing

Published statistics indicate over one quarter of the laboratory tests
done on hospital patients are inaccurate. Senator William S. Cohen (R.,
Maine) is the ranking minority member of a Senate subcommittee
investigating medical testing. He states: "Inaccurate testing has become a
serious health hazard." No one knows precisely how serious; there are no
national statistics on non-hospital laboratory safety or efficiency. Only
thirteen states regulate the 80,000 to 100,000 labs in physicians' offices.
But the 1450 labs which are involved in interstate testing are under
the supervision of the Federal Health Care Financing Administration. Its
report to the Senate sub-committee was grim. Over the two-year period
ending in June, 1986, 78 labs lost their licenses because of incompetence,
and 108 others voluntarily relinquished their privileges rather than face
administrative hearings. That means 13% of these labs were at least
inadequate, possibly life-threatening. The statistics indicate there are
somewhere around 240 million false, useless or potentially dangerous tests
done annually.
The requirements for labs are not stringent; generally a lab must fail
three out of four quarterly tests before it loses the right to do any
specific procedure. And the labs which fail are likely to be really in
disorder, because they know they're being tested and so naturally they tend
to do their best work. The tests don't really measure the lab's routine
performance.
The Centers for Disease Control occasionally do "blind" testing,
sending test specimens which are not labelled as such. In one such test,
six out of six labs failed the blind test, even though all of them had
previously passed the proficiency tests. And when 5000 hospital
laboratories were asked to perform a test which measured blood cholesterol,
a test in which accurate readings are imperative, 800 of them gave results
which were 10% off the true value; 400 were off by 15% The American
College of Obstetrics and Gynecology conducted studies which indicate that
 18

20% to 40% of Pap smears involve false negatives. (The federal government
requires no proficiency testing for labs doing Pap smears, and New York is
the only state which does.)
I detail all these dry and dreary statistics simply because this
source of information is considered superior to the word of God by many
Christians, and I wanted to point out its many imperfections. I am trying
to make the point that it is DANGEROUS to trust this system; it is
dangerous to take what they say as TRUTH.

Dangers in Xray Therapy

Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, author of MAL(E) PRACTICE, estimates 30% of
Xrays taken in the United States, some 300 million a year, are ordered when
there is no valid medical reason. Xrays are carcinogenic, you know. The
genetic effect of Xrays on the population in a single year has been
estimated to cause as many as 30,000 deaths per year.

Dangers in Drug Therapy

In 1978, doctors ordered one billion doses for sleeping pills, some
twenty-seven million prescriptions, which resulted in 25,000 trips to the
Emergency Room for adverse drug reactions, and some 1500 emergency room
DEATHS from tranquilizers. (90% of these victims were women.)

Danger in Cancer Therapy

The medical system's treatment of cancer is far from safe, also. Dean
Burk, head of the cyclochemical section of the government's National Cancer
Institute, has stated, "...virtually all of the chemotherapeutic agents now
approved by the FDA for use or testing in human cancer patients range from
highly toxic to markedly immuno-suppressive, and highly carcinogenic in
rats and mice, themselves producing cancers in a wide variety of body
organs".
"The medical community has been thrown into confusion by recent
studies which show that metastases (spread) may be more frequent in cancer
patients who have received radiation," states Dr. Lucien Israel, a
prominent French oncologist. In short, the radiation used to treat cancer
 19

has been shown to increase its spread.

California physician Bruce Halstead, M.D., states that modern medicine
has no cure for AIDS or cancer; meanwhile AIDS patients who are being
treated by oncologist (cancer specialists) are reported to be dying at a
much faster rate than AIDS patients who are treated by holistic methods.
Dr. Hardin James, professor of medical physics at the University of
California at Berkeley, addressing the American Cancer Society Science
Writers' Conference, stated, "The life expectancy of untreated [cancer]
cases is actually greater than the life expectancy of those who were
treated". He summarizes by saying that his studies have proven conclusively
that untreated cancer victims actually live up to four times longer than
treated individuals. "For a typical type of cancer, people who refuse
treatment live an average of twelve and a half years. Those who accept
surgery and other kinds of treatment live an average of only three years. I
attribute this to the traumatic effect of surgery on the body's natural
defense mechanisms."

Danger of Abuse
Another frightening, and pitiful, danger is the increase of patient
abuse. It doesn't receive as much publicity as child abuse or spouse abuse,
but it's happening, it's increasing, and it stems from the same source:
unregenerate humanity, under pressure from a hostile world and enemy
activity, loses control and demonstrates its ungodly character.

Newspaper Headlines Citing Medical Dangers

I will share just a few of the hundreds of newspaper and magazine
clippings I have which illustrate this system's various dangers.
Prized by Hospitals, Accreditation Hides Perils Patients Face:
Slip-shod institutions keep group's seal of approval
even after forced closings
Health Hazards: Medical Advances Often Worsen Illnesses and Even
Result in Some Patients' Deaths
Wrongly Injected Woman Dies: Given cancer-fighting drug in error

Pap Test Misses Much Cervical Cancer Through Labs' Errors

 20

Nurse Charged With Attempted Murder

Improper Hospital Care Caused Deaths in up to 27% of Cases, Rand
Study Finds
Patients Face Increasing Risk of Hospital Infection: The threat
is growing and is largely unreported
Panel Told of Vaccine-Related Tragedies
Hospital Cited for Mistake: 21 year old pregnant cancer patient
left paralyzed by mistaken injection
Deadline Nears for Filing Dalkon Shield Claim: Company will seek
Chapter 11 because of an estimated 300,000
claims
The Disease Doctors Don't Talk About: Doctor-induced illness is
more prevalent that you may realize.
Two Indicted in Infant's Death: Grand jury charges murder
Minnesota Hospital Performs Ear Operation on Wrong Boy: Admitted
for tonsillectomy. boy has tubes put in ears
Clinic Malpractice Charged: Woman treated for miscarriage given
formaldehyde injection instead of painkiller
Baxter Inc. Faces Lawsuit After Disclosure of Heart Valve Failure
Man Who Got Morphine Overdose Dies Following 9 Days in a Coma:
Heart patient mistakenly injected with ten
times the prescribed amount

Couple Says Wrong Baby Circumcised

Officials: Poisoning Discovered Too Late: Elderly eye patient
given liquid air freshener instead of medicine
Drugs Denied During Abortions, Women Say: Patients claim they
were denied anesthesia, seemingly as a sort of
punishment
Woman Recalls Being Wrongly Declared Dead: 75-year-old couldn't
speak to say she was still alive
Self-Proclaimed Weight Doctor Faces Sexual Abuse Charges
Doctor Battles Washington in Patient-Dumping Case
Physician Defends Research of Fetuses: Accused in lawsuit of
 21
violating rights of poor, pregnant women
Two Small Boys Victims of Surgery Mix-up: 2-year-old Bryan and
4-year-old Ryan received surgery meant for each other
Houston Doctor Indicted in Scam to Bilk Insurers: Claims of
patient illnesses fabricated
Mother of 4 Stabbed to Death While Patient in New York's
LaGuardia Hospital
Routine Surgery Alters Healthy 27-Year-Old's Life: "Grim to zero"
chance of normal life following minor surgery
Girl Gets Transfusion by Government Order
10 Patients Fed Oven Cleaner
Family Sues Over Fatal Injection
Child Forced to be Tested: E.R. doctor gets court order for
spinal tap
Accident in Surgery Leaves Man Comatose: An injection of an
incorrect chemical apparently leaves patient brain
dead
 22

Bethesda was Hospital Where Too Many People Died: Dr.Donal Billig
faces general court-martial on four
manslaughter charges

"Don't Just Stand There! Do Something!"

Physicians are trained to intervene. The older maxim of their
profession, "First, see thou do no harm" has been replaced with a newer
one, "Don't just stand there! Do something!" It's a rare doctor who adopts
a wait-and-see attitude. This is despite the fact that God has made our
bodies with a wonderful ability to heal and restore themselves. And also
despite the fact that statistics prove that 85% of those problems which
bring people into physicians' offices would probably cure themselves in
time, if left alone. And half of the remainder are psychosomatic in origin!
But there is almost always SOMETHING done, if only for the doctor's
protection.
This is the most honored, most respected and highest paid profession
in the world; also the profession which has been the means of killing over
30,000,000 human babies since the Supreme Court legalized abortion in 1973,
yet almost all Christian women submit themselves to this system to bring
forth their young.
We will address some specific dangers - those involving drugs,
surgery, etc. - later on. For now, I am merely making the point that what
has been touted as the best, the safe, chosen, dependable, proper,
infallible, God-ordained (I have heard dozens of pastors say, "I thank God
for giving us doctors and hospitals!") route to healing is in actuality a
danger.
The system just doesn't work very well.
Yet with all its dangers, Christians continue to submit their bodies
as living sacrifices unto this system. Why? Why do so many people trust the
system, and even feel God is WANTING them to do so? Well, possibly it's at
least in part because, in addition to being a dangerous, Egyptian
profession which counterfeits divine healing, this system is a strong
tradition.

5. IT IS A TRADITION
The Random House dictionary defines tradition as, "Any long-continuing
practice or custom; the handing down of beliefs, legends and customs from
generation to generation, especially by word of mouth or practice." In
short, things which are done or believed simply because they have been, and
are being, done and believed. We follow the examples of our parents and
the custom of our experience and continue to submit to the medical system
simply because it's done; it's habit; it's custom.
Historical Background of the AMA
It was not always thus. In 1847, when the American Medical Association
was founded, there were basically two types of healing disciplines:
 23
allopathy (whose practitioners received training in recognized academic
schools, who relied heavily on surgical procedures and on the use of
medications) and homeopathy (which means "like cures like" and works
through the immune system, using nontoxic doses of substances which are
similar to those causing the illness). From its earliest inception, the AMA
has had one principle objective, attaining and defending a total monopoly
of the practice of medicine in the United States, and thereby destroying
freedom of choice in health care in America; allopathy was the basis of its
practice.
At the time, homeopaths outnumbered allopaths by more than two to one.
The few surviving records indicate homeopathy was effective; in a cholera
outbreak in 1854, deaths at homeopathic hospitals were only 16.4% while
deaths in "orthodox" medical hospitals was 50% But the AMA's goal was the
promotion of a myth, the myth that its type of medicine is the only one
which is effective.
Allopathy vs. Chiropractic
Its first target was the homeopath, next independent health
practitioners then chiropractic. They were ruthless, powerful and organized
and they won many victories, but there were set-backs, too.
In the battle against chiropractic, for example. In January, 1971, the
committee reported to the trustees of the AMA that "... prime mission is
first the containment of chiropractic and ultimately the elimination of
chiropractic".
The AMA pulled out a lot of big guns: they prevented the government
from guaranteeing student loans for those studying chiropractic, they
blocked grants for research, they lobbied in every state to prevent
accreditation. Then they forced the Veterans Administration to refuse
payments for chiropractic services. But several chiropractors sued,
charging conspiracy, and after years of litigation, in August of 1987, a
U.S. District Court found the AMA, the American College of Surgeons and the
American College of Radiologists guilty of conspiracy.
Traditional Medicine: A Threatened Monopoly?
After all these years of effort, the AMA has achieved its goal in one
way: traditional medical care in America in an incredibly potent force. It
is supported and strengthened by law, it is supported by every facet of our
society and it controls an enormous amount of the nation's money. Most
people willingly submit to it, believe and do and pay whatever they're
told, and consider it the absolute ultimate in health care. But the victory
isn't complete. On the other hand, some folks are looking at medical care
more closely and are discovering that the authoritative, honored, expensive
old emperor is naked!
A recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine showed that one
in three Americans use alternative treatments, spending $13.7 billion,
($10.3 billion out-of-pocket compared with $12.8 billion out-of-pocket for
all hospitalizations). More people use therapies (such as relaxation
techniques, massage, herbal medicine and spiritual healing) than see all
primary care doctors combined. (U.S. patients made 425 million visits to
alternative care-givers in 1990, compared with 388 million visits to family
doctors and internists.)
The National Institutes of Health has recently established a new
 24
Office of Alternative Medicine, to study therapies outside the realm of
traditional medicine. Its director is a Native American who was treated for
childhood illnesses with "herbs and things" by his mother, a full-blooded
Mohawk. Hardly your traditional doctor!
Lessening Freedom of Choice
Up to now, we in America still have the right to go to chiropractors;
or to acupuncturists, nutritionists, Christian Scientist practitioners,
herbalists, psychics, snake charmers or even to Jesus. Like I said, we have
this right SO FAR. The battle isn't over.
We lose ground daily; already the state's rights and the rights of the
medical systems to control the health care given - or NOT given - to our
children is far greater than most people realize.
The Accepted Christian Prespective
But most Christians don't realize this; or if they do, they don't
consider it a bad thing. Most Christians are told from their pulpits that
God gave us doctors (and therefore allopathic healing with its attendant
cutting, drugs and intervention) and their commitment and loyalty to this
TRADITION is strong.
But even stronger than tradition in shaping our beliefs and behavior
is an Archetype - the mind-set or view of reality which is so accepted and
so powerful that it is never questioned, never doubted, never even
considered. It is assumed to be true on the basis of its mere existence. It
is often a stronghold within the mind, built on a foundation of error and
deception.
I heard a university professor discussing his problems in teaching
creationism as opposed to evolution at his college. He said, "People just
believe in evolution without ever questioning it. It's only a theory; it
isn't true, it isn't logical, it isn't Scriptural, but people believe it.
And they get really angry if you say it isn't true."
I thought at once of the similarity here to the way people feel about
the medical system; people just believe it's good, believe it's from God,
trust it as the oracle of God about the condition of their bodies - and it
isn't true, it isn't logical, it isn't scriptural. And, WOW, do people get
angry when you say it isn't!
In Colossians 2:8 we are told, "Beware lest any man spoil you through
philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the
rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." When we believe a tradition
as TRUTH, accepting it without question, we can be "spoiled", carried into
captivity. To come out of it requires courage - we may have to leave the
comfort zone. It's not always easy, but it's better.
In Psalm 118:8-9, the Lord says, "It is better to trust in the Lord
than to put confidence in man. It is better to trust in the Lord than to
put confidence in princes." The "confidence in" here is defined: "Go for
refuge to." We may have to recondition our thinking and our responses. In
a crisis of illness or accident, where do we go for refuge? Do we say,
"Call 911! Get the Rescue Squad!" or do we say, "Let's pray!"? To discover
truth, do we ask, "What does the doctor say? What were the test results?"
or do we ask, "What does God say?"
Some people continue to believe in the medical system in the teeth of
evidence that it isn't safe, it isn't godly and it isn't working. They may
 25
have frightening experiences or bad results, but they assume their
situation is unique, the exception to the general rule. So great is their
faith in this system that they deny the evidence of their own experience.
And that's because most Christians don't believe - don't WANT to believe -
that God elects to heal outside the human institution.

The Minority Perspective

I recognize that few people believe as I do; but we know that the
majority opinion is often wrong. The majority of humans on this planet do
not believe Jesus is the son of God, and the majority is wrong. Only two of
the ten spies believed the Israelites could take the promised land as God
had said, and the two were right, the ten wrong. Remember, we're not
seeking the most popular view; we're seeking truth. Our beliefs must
reflect reality, even if we stand in a very tiny minority.
And there is that minority - people who walk in divine health, who
never even think of mixing human effort with divine healing because it is
that very mixture which can rob us of victory. Unfortunately, the only ones
folks ever seem to hear about are the ones who have apparently failed.
The subject of receiving healing becomes a totally different matter if
you consider the physical part of the human being as merely the tip of the
iceberg, a tiny part of his being which extends into the visible realm from
the spirit. And the things which happen to this tiny fleshly part of us are
always parallel to, and result from, things which are happening within the
spirit. That's where the action is; that's where we achieve victory. That's
where we must focus our attention: not on merely controlling the physical
symptoms but in addressing the spiritual roots. That produces not just
healing, but HEALTH.
The Minority Method
This subject is covered in detail in the last chapter of this book,
but to lay the groundwork, let's talk a little bit right now about how we -
our little tiny minority - do receive healing. First of all, we don't just
pray and forget it. We don't whip out a simple prayer - or have someone
else pray - and figure the ball is in God's court and it's up to Him. We
need to pray and keep on praying. We ask and seek and petition and call on
God. And we listen.
We battle the enemy. We battle him in the spirit, using all the
non-carnal weapons of our warfare. And we battle him within ourselves.
Like resentment: "I did my part, God. Why don't you do your part?" We
battle fear: "This child is going to die, and we won't be able to stand
it." We battle self pity: "You poor thing; your back has been hurting for a
week and nobody even cares".
We praise God. We establish Him as Lord over this circumstance by our
praise. We read the Scriptures about healing, and those about illness. We
ask God: am I in sin? Have I opened a door for this by my disobedience? Is
this a storm I rebuke, or one I ride out? Am I under some curse, some
judgment, reaping some harvest? And we LISTEN.
We may take some natural action; fluids, vitamins, herbs, exercise,
rest. Maybe we fast; Isaiah 58 says that causes our health to spring forth
speedily. But most of what we do is spiritual. We look for patterns - if
something keeps happening over and over it's not just a problem, it's a
 26
pattern. What does it mean? Did my mother have this same thing? Is it
common to my local church? Am I always attacked in the same part of the
body? The same time of year?
We ask God: are there people I haven't forgiven? Have I failed to
discern the body? Is somebody praying against me? Is this the result of
some sin of my forefathers? What do I need to do - to learn - to die to -
to believe - to give - which I haven't yet?
We remember that the relief of symptoms is not the primary goal: it's
not God's first goal and it shouldn't be ours. The primary thing must be
obedience to God, so that he can have HIS will. Don't forget, when our
prayer is hindered, it may be because God is wanting to go deeper.
So we LISTEN. In many different ways, at any time, God may speak. We
must enlarge the ear, for His is a still, small voice. It isn't simple
and it's seldom quick and easy. But if we look at it from God's point of
view - that the illness itself is a symptom, it's the fruit growing from
some root in the spirit realm behind the veil, if we keep the perspective
that God has a purpose in mind and that curing the physical illness is
probably not His primary goal - then we concentrate on the question, "Why
am I sick in the first place?"
And we listen for the answer. And when we hear, we obey INSTANTLY.
It's not comfortable. It's like "The buck stops here", and there's a
weight of responsibility we bear which is carried by the doctor when we're
in the system. We have to shore up our faith constantly, get hold of God
and not let go; as Jacob said when he wrestled all night with the Angel, we
proclaim "I will not let you go until you bless me". The enemy attacks;
other Christians attack. But we reach dimensions in Christ that aren't
attainable any other way.
And we get healed on BOTH sides of the veil.
 27

III.
WHAT THE SYSTEM USES
When we progress from what the system IS to what it USES, it's
interesting to note how many of the things it uses - things which are
inherent in it and inseparable from it - are things which God has
forbidden.
1. IT USES THE COUNSEL OF THE UNGODLY
In Psalm 1, God says the man who "walketh not in the counsel of the
ungodly" is blessed. So, what is is "the counsel of the ungodly"?
"Counsel" is "Advice, plan, purpose" in Strong's Concordance and
"Advice given to direct the judgment of another" in the dictionary.
"Ungodly" is "Morally wrong, condemned, guilty" in Strong's and "Not
godly or pious" in the dictionary. It is clarified by the distinction
between two kinds of wisdom in James 3:15-17. There is "...the wisdom that
is from above, first pure, then peaceable, gentle and easy to be entreated,
full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy."
This is describing God's wisdom and counsel, and our thoughts when we are
operating in the mind of Christ.
The other wisdom, which equates to the counsel of the ungodly, is
described thus: "This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly,
sensual, devilish." The carnal mind is enmity with God, and the thinking,
advice, plans, purposes and counsel of the natural, unregenerate man are
both evil and dangerous. And while we may find Christians within the
medical system, they are not running things and their thinking (while in
the system and operating from its point of view) is not godly.

The Counsel of Elizabeth Kuhbler-Ross

Here is an example of how the counsel of the ungodly permeates the
system, how people trained for any of the health care fields have their
minds flooded with ungodly ideas and principles. For one thing, they are
required to read and study the works of Elizabeth Kuhbler-Ross, the first
and still most prominent of the thanotologists (those who study death). She
presents her views of death, which are accepted as true, and they are
almost diametrically opposed to what God says on the subject. God says
death is an enemy, that He has conquered this enemy and that He holds the
keys. Kuhbler-Ross says death is only "a beautiful life experience", and
she is deeply involved in the psychic and occultic realms. She has
chronicled encounters with spirit guides and other demonic manifestations.
Surely she is a prime example of Psalm One's "the ungodly," but in order to
be trained as a professional nurse, a lab technician, physical therapist,
respiratory therapist, etc., one must study and learn her views on death.
Of course, nothing is taught about God's views on the subject.
The Source of The System's Counsel
Another example of this kind of evil counsel constitutes the very
 28
basis of truth in the medical system. As the seed of Abraham, we must
believe as seeing Him who is invisible; not like Thomas, requiring
confirmation within the realm of the senses - sight, touch, hearing, etc.
The medical system relies on facts as discovered, defined and ordained by
the sight realm. Their truth is based on such things as laboratory tests,
diagnostics, observations, and the measuring and recording of indices such
as vital signs. These are a poor basis for determining reality even if they
are accurate, and in many cases they are not. The American Hospital
Association estimates that probably 25% of laboratory tests are inaccurate
- one in four is WRONG!
Let's consider that. What if one of the four tires on your car was
flat; what if one of every four paychecks you received bounced? What if
your phone or your electricity only worked a fourth of the time?
What if 25% of God's Word wasn't true? Would you still trust HIM?
Yet most people consider this the final word about their health. What an
example of building a house on sand!
Counsel Without God
But even when they are accurate, these kinds of things are a poor
basis for determining reality. They do not take into account the reality of
God, or of the spirit realm, where faith is higher than sight. And they
don't acknowledge that the natural universe is inferior to, and subject to,
the spirit. In short, when what they say contradicts what GOD says, then
what they say is false, and if we believe what they say, then we are
deceived.
One Possible Result of Being Deceived
And our belief in the lie may bring it about!
A friend of mine had a vision which illustrates this situation. In
the vision, she saw her house on fire. Great flames enveloped it and it was
being consumed. She started crying out, "Oh, my house is on fire!" As she
spoke, the Lord appeared and calmed her. "No," He said. "Your house is NOT
on fire. Let me show you." He took her by the hand and drew her back, away
from the house. As she withdrew, she was able to see, over at the side, the
devil standing with a movie projector, projecting an illusion of flames
onto her house.
It was all a lie! It looked true from the original point of view, but
a different perspective showed the truth: the house was safe and she had
been deceived by a lie.
How does this apply? Well, when we are told we have a certain
condition, and the diagnosis is spoken over us, it may or may not be
accurate. And our response can be incredibly potent in determining the end
result. EVEN IF THE WORDS SPOKEN OVER US ARE NOT TRUE, if we believe them,
proclaim them, walk in them, they may BECOME true. We believed, faith was
released, we spoke as the confirming witness (II CVorinthians 13:1) and it
becomes true. We bought it.
Proverbs 18:21 says, "Life and death are in the power of the tongue".
On the other hand, if we either deny the negative words spoken over us
- or better still never seek their counsel and allow the negative words in
the first place - and proclaim what GOD says about our health, we find we
receive THAT reality. As the Bible says, "Be it done unto you according to
your faith."
 29
Of course, that's very simplistic; we certainly don't believe as the
New Agers that we create our own reality. And there are other factors
involved besides the spoken words of diagnosis - which can have the effect
of a curse - but this is a very important and valid point. We can not
safely believe their counsel in the same way we believe the counsel of
God's word. What God says is always perfectly true; what they say may or
may not be. And there is no virtue or safety in believing their words.
 30

2. IT USES DRUGS
Another thing used routinely by the medical system, also forbidden by
God, is drugs.

Drugs and Medications: Are They Different?

In our society, we have manufactured an artificial division in drugs;
we call some "medications" and call them good, while others are considered
bad. (Just like witchcraft, which some people divide into either good or
white witches, and bad or black witches. God says all witchcraft is evil
and He says "suffer not a witch to live.")
He also says all drugs are evil.
Jesus "Just Said No" to Drugs
There is a significant teaching about the use of drugs to be found in
the Bible, and five clear warnings against drug taking in the New
Testament. Four drugs, in addition to alcohol, are named in scripture:
hemlock, gall, wormwood and myrrh. (The last two are very potent narcotics,
both more powerful than opium). Every Biblical mention of drugs is in a
context of despair, mourning, grief and danger, and they are NEVER
connected with healing.
I want to repeat that. In the Bible, drugs are never connected with
healing; they are connected with misery and gloom.
The book of Hebrews tells us that Jesus was tempted in all points as
we are, yet without sin. And He was tempted to use a narcotic. Let me
explain.
Crucifixion might possibly be the most agonizing method of execution
ever devised by man. It originated with the Persians and was refined by the
Romans. In Jesus' day, its use was confined to the slave class, or to
perpetrators of the most heinous crimes. It was basically a death of
exhaustion and suffocation, and it sometimes took days for the victim to
die.
It was carried out under the charge of Roman soldiers, who had
available at the crucifixion site two different liquids. One was simply
wine, (called vinegar in the KJV, and wine vinegar in the NIV). It was to
quench thirst. The other was sour wine, fermented and strongly alcoholic,
to which was added gall and/or myrrh. This mixture was a strong narcotic,
available for use when the soldiers were feeling particularly humane.
Jesus was offered both these drinks. He did accept the one which
merely quenched His thirst:
Matthew 27:48: And straightway one of them ran, and took a sponge, and
filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave Him to drink.
Mark 15:36: And one ran and filled a sponge full of vinegar, and put it on
a reed, and gave Him to drink...
John 19:29-30: Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar; and they filled
a sponge with vinegar and put it upon hyssop, and put it to His mouth. When
 31
Jesus therefore had received it, He said, It is finished.
He refused to drink the other liquid, the one which contained drugs:
Matthew 27:34: They gave Him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when
He had tasted thereof, he would not drink.
Mark 15:23: And they gave Him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but He
received it not.
If there were ever a justification for the use of a pain-killer,
surely this was it. The torment was intense: the scourging, the crown of
thorns, the crucifixion itself, protracted bleeding and sweating leading to
the "somatic thirst" of electrolyte imbalance. Surely any one in this
position would eagerly grasp whatever pitiful bits of comfort he was
offered. But not Jesus. He refused to alter His perception of reality with
a drug; He refused to leave us an example of accepting that option.
"Pharmakia"
The scriptural teaching about drugs isn't always clear at first
reading, because the word used is not translated "drug taking". For some
reason, the primary definition of this word - which is some form of the
word "medicine" - is never used in our modern English Bibles. The usual
translation is "sorcery".
The word we're dealing with is PHARMAKIA in Greek, and the English
words pharmacy, pharmacist and pharmacology are derived from it. In Vine's
Dictionary of New Testament Words, pharmakia is defined: "PRIMARILY
signifying the use of MEDICINE, drugs, spells; then poisoning; then
sorcery, witchcraft."
In Strong's Concordance it is #5331: "MEDICATION, by extension magic,
literally or figuratively, sorcery, witchcraft". Strong's #5332 is "A drug,
spell-giving potion, druggist, poisoner, by extension a magician or
sorcerer." This word is translated "sorcery" in the KJV and "User or magic
arts" in the NIV.
In Revelation 21:8, sorcerers have their part in the lake of fire,
and Revelation 22:15 describes sorcerers as one group of people who are
kept outside the City (the New Jerusalem) along with dogs, whoremongers,
murderers, idolaters and liars. Sorcery is defined as one of four end-time
sins (the others being murder, fornication and theft) in Revelation 9:21.
And what is really being discussed, the thing which is banning people
from the City, consigning them to the Lake of Fire and being named a major
sin of the end times, is primarily the taking of drugs.
Drug Trafficking
Let's look at the drug industry. It's VERY big business. The United
States maintains an overwhelming lead in the production and sale of drugs;
eleven of the world's eighteen leading drug firms are located here. Each
year, doctors in the U.S. write 1.6 BILLION prescriptions.
While other countries have negotiated prices with pharmaceutical
companies, we Americans have let the drug industry decide for itself what
to charge. Therefore drug prices went up at three times the inflation rate
during the 1980's, an enormous 152%, and the average cost of the twenty
drugs prescribed most often for the elderly has quadrupled in the past
seven years.
Hearings by the Senate Anti-Monopoly Subcommittee into abuses by
 32
pharmaceutical companies revealed that drug manufacturers routinely showed
profits of from 10,000% to 20,000% for their drugs. We pay the world's
highest prices for our medicine. Europeans pay 54% less for 25 common
drugs.
Costly, Tested, But Still Unsafe
For all their cost, it simply isn't wise to assume that all drugs are
safe and effective, tested and found beneficial. (It's interesting to note
that the most dangerous drugs are also the most profitable because they
produce dramatic, easily seen results.) In fact, the Office of
Technological Assessment of the U.S. Government states that 95% of the
drugs on the market have not been proven to work. Almost all testing in
done to determine toxicity, not effectiveness.
We can question the "research", too. The National Bureau of Standards
reports that half or more of the numerical data published by scientists is
unusable because there is no evidence that the researchers accurately
measure what they claimed to be measuring. Just one illustration of this
point: 31 authors of scientific reports were sent questionnaires asking for
their raw data; Only twenty one replied and they ALL said that their data
had been "lost" or "accidently destroyed"!
"Sixty Minutes" on January 17, 1988 presented an expose of the abuses
within the community of scientific researchers. They estimated that up to
30% of all research projects carried out in the United States is totally
faked. One scientific scholar advised, "I would think twice before I
believe what I read in the medical journals... it is dishonest, fraudulent
material." We must remember that this kind of possibly faked data is
usually the basis for the acceptance or denial of new drugs.
After the laboratory work, then there is the stage of clinical
testing. First the new drug is given to a small number of healthy people.
Next the drug is given to a larger group; frequently it's given secretly to
school children, hospital patients or inmates of mental institutions, but
by far the most common group for testing is the population of our prisons.
(Upjohn and Parke-Davis have acquired "exclusive rights" to the inmates at
Jackson State prison in Mississippi).
An article in BUSINESS WEEK explains: "Tests at the prisons are
designed primarily to measure the toxicity of the drug rather than its
efficiency... doses are built up gradually to the point where adverse
reactions occur." Prisoners are paid thirty cents a day for submitting to
the experiments.
Examples of Past Problems
Within the departments concerned with the safety and effectiveness of
drugs, things are pretty disorganized. For example, in September of 1980,
the Food and Drug Administration announced that it would remove from the
market more than three thousand drugs whose effectiveness had not been
proven. During the previous year, Americans had spent more than one billion
dollars on these same "unproven" drugs, many of which had been accepted by
the AMA.
Many times dangerous drugs are sold in America, complete with all
sanctions, seals and imprimaturs. A case in point: diethylstilbestrol was
widely used from the 1940's to the 1970's as a synthetic female hormone,
routinely prescribed to prevent miscarriage. It was not tested for possible
 33
side effects. Despite evidence that it might be precipitating negative
sequelae, it continued in use until after the long term effects began to
appear: cancer of the breast, liver damage, and genital malformations and
vaginal cancer in the daughters of those treated with it.
In 1949, Park-Davis' chloromycetin was hailed as a new wonder drug.
Several doctors were persuaded to give it to their children, some of whom
then died of leukemia. Aplastic anemia was sometime a result from the
administration of chloromycetin; it was fatal in 75% of the cases.
Hoffman LaRoche marketed an intravenous drug, Versed, which was linked
to forty deaths in two years by FDA studies. Ritalin, now the drug-of-
choice of educators for treating so-called hyperactive children, has had a
97% increase in use since 1985. Students are sometimes forced to take this
drug or face being expelled from school. The WALL STREET JOURNAL of January
15, 1988, reported that a number of lawsuits have been filed against
schools by parents who are resisting the forced use of Ritalin.
Another drug, tryparsamide, manufactured by Merck, was a dangerous
arsenical drug. It was abandoned by its discoverer, Paul Ehrlich, when he
found that it caused blindness by atrophying the optic nerve. Erlich's
warnings did not prevent Merck from continuing to distribute the drug.
One of the most destructive errors was the approval of sulfathiazole
in the 1940's. The first 400,000 tablets sold by the Winthrop Drug Company
contained as much as 5 grains each of Luminal. The safe dosage of Luminal
is 1 grain. There were a number of fatalities.

Actions by the AMA

Dr. Emmanuel Josephson, writing for SCIENCE MAGAZINE, states that the
AMA "...deliberately concealed the benefits of Vitamin E therapy for more
than twenty five years. This is only one of instance of hundreds where the
AMA withheld life-saving information from the public".
Dr. Josephson continues, "The history of the AMA... is replete with
betrayals of professional and public trust. Drug products of the highest
value have been rejected or their acceptance unwarrantedly delayed.
Worthless, dangerous or deadly foods and drugs have been hastily accepted,"

America's Drug Culture

We can not blindly follow the current vogue of "better living through
chemistry", expecting God to bless us - and IT - when He has forbidden the
use of drugs. Again, to emphasize, there is no scriptural distinction
between a drug and a medication; actually there's none with modern society
either, except a medication is a drug some other person has told us to
take.
In America we hear much about the drug culture. And truly here is an
incredible use of drugs in this country, but the drugging of the population
is not limited to sleazy pushers and rebellious teenagers. Most of
America's drugging is done with pharmaceuticals. (Incidentally, here's an
interesting fact. Only 26% of drug overdoses are caused by street drugs;
the rest are done with legal drugs, pharmaceuticals.)
And why do Americans take so many drugs? Even the system admits many
of them aren't necessary. As long ago as 1972, Dr. Henry E. Simmons, then
director of the Bureau of Drugs at the FDA, testified before a Senate
hearing, "At least 60% of hospital patients who receive antibiotics don't
 34
need them." Another witness, Dr. Harry F. Dowling said production of
antibiotics had jumped more than 300% in the previous decade. "This would
amount to about fifty doses of an antibiotic for every man, woman and child
in this country per year," he said.
Who is taking all those drugs, and what does it do for them?
Here's a possible hint: in 1978, 363,800,000 prescriptions were
written in the United States. 60,000,000 were prescriptions for Valium, for
a total of 16,000,000,000 capsules. This resulted in a gross profit of
$300,000,000 for the manufacturer. Part of the reason is PROFIT.
These statistics on Valium are more interesting when you consider
this fact: to a great extent, the indications FOR taking this particular
drug and the side effects FROM taking it are the same - tremors,
nervousness, anorexia, depression, etc. Millions of people spend great
amounts of money to take a highly addictive drug, which the facts say may
only INCREASE the symptoms they're trying to control.
God Speaks to Me about Valium
I see a clear correlation between Valium and depression. In the
hospital one night, as I walked down a dark hall making rounds as House
Supervisor, I heard a whiny little voice complaining, "I ain't had my
Valium yet."
The medicine nurse proceeded to administer the drug, but I thought,
"You should be glad!" As I walked on, I received a vision from the Lord
about the nature of drugs.
I saw a zoo with large, barred cages holding huge, violent beasts.
There were signs over the cages identifying the beasts: DEPRESSION,
EPILEPSY, DIABETES. The beasts were really pitching a fit, shaking the bars
and rattling their cages. As I watched, a keeper in a white coat came out
to feed them, and as he tossed them their food, they calmed down and quit
acting violent. Then I saw what they were eating: drugs! The Beast of
Depression was feeding on Valium, and while it had a temporary effect of
quieting him, he was growing stronger and larger from his feeding. The
Beast of Epilepsy was feeding on Dilantin and Phenobarbital - I know these
drugs are dated, but that's what I saw! - and of course Diabetes was eating
Insulin.
I saw the whole concept of drug therapy from a different standpoint.
Even with a temporary relief from symptoms, it is unwise to use drugs -
something God has forbidden - to fight an enemy God says is already
defeated - illness - when the end result might be that the enemy grows
stronger.
Another word I had from God concerning drugs also occurred in a
hospital and also concerned Valium. I became a nurse in the old days; I was
"capped" in 1951, and in those days, nurses took "The Florence Nightingale
Pledge". Today they have something a little more modern, but in my day it
was quite a ceremony, done by candlelight, all very moving. I didn't know
then not to swear, and I took the pledge in good faith. It begins "I swear
before Almighty God and in the presence of this assembly to pass my life in
purity and to practice my profession faithfully." One passage is, "I will
abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous, and I will not take
or knowingly administer any harmful drug."
One night over thirty years later in the Emergency Room of a local
hospital, I prepared a syringe of intravenous Valium for a patient, and as
 35
I started to inject it I heard the Lord saying, "You promised me you
wouldn't do that."
It all came back: the ceremony, the pledge and its restrictions on
giving drugs. After all the years, all the drugs I'd given - and taken -
God was holding me to my word. I had another nurse give the drug -
admittedly a compromise solution - and this particular Rhema was one of the
many reasons I finally quit the profession of nursing and gave up my
registration.
Now I fully understand nobody but me heard that word, (I wonder so
often why God says so much to me about this system and apparently so little
to other people) but I DID hear it, and I had to obey.
It seems incredible to me that Christians can believe God uses drugs;
with all the scriptural prohibitions and its close companionship with other
forbidden things like witchcraft, I see no defense for the position that
this is something God chooses to use.
Children on Drugs
Our society's bondage to drugs is enormous.
My daughter Cynthia attended the University of South Florida and her
under-graduate degree is in Elementary Education. She was told in one class
that as many as 40% of elementary school children are on drugs; on legal,
prescribed, "medication" drugs.
Add to this the fact that an overwhelming majority of children born in
the United States are born under the influence of drugs, is there any
wonder so many Americans take and use drugs? And I don't mean just "Crack"
babies and those born to addicted mothers. Almost ALL mothers are drugged
during labor. The drug culture begins in utero, as the mother - under
sedation - labors to bring forth the baby.
If the parents see drugs as a legitimate option, an acceptable answer
to their problems - physical or psychological - then it is only logical
that their teenage children should also consider drugs a suitable choice,
and experiment with marijuana and other drugs. As Bill Gothard says, what
the parents accept in moderation, their children will excuse in excess.
It's a matter of sowing the wind and reaping the whirlwind.

Drugs: a Doorway into the Spirit

One effect of drugs which many people don't know is its influence in
the spirit realm. The taking of drugs is a SPIRITUAL activity; drugs touch
and control our spirits. I know one clear example of how this works through
the experience of a friend of mine.
This girl is the daughter of TWO pentecostal preachers; she has been
saved since early childhood. The habit of prayer is deeply ingrained in
her; she prays constantly, without ceasing, instinctively. She had her
first child in a hospital and she was given a routine injection of Demerol
while in labor. She told me that from the time she received that drug, she
ceased to pray. It simply didn't occur to her to pray. It was as though the
customs and habit patterns of twenty years had been wiped out by the drug.
This experience really upset her, so although she'd had a fairly good
birthing experience, she chose to have her second baby at home. She wanted
her prayer life unaffected.
You have to search a very long time in America to find anyone who is
truly drug free. I am continually astonished at people who are into the
 36
healthy body scene, careful of diet and exercise, who avoid caffeine and
fried foods and wouldn't dream of eating white sugar - but they fill this
same body, this temple of the Holy Spirit, with any drug the doctor orders.
And feel it's perfectly all right!
Have you read Stormy O'Martian's autobiography? Her recovery from a
number of destructive habits was a strong testimony to God's love and
power. There's also a message in her description of the effects of
anesthesia given her for a Caesarean section. She recounts that it took
months to recover from this drugging.
Raising [Totally] Drug-Free Children
It's increasingly important to raise at least a few drug-free
Christian kids. The vast majority of them are carted off to doctors at the
first sign of ill health and they are treated for every disease (and every
threat of disease) with drugs.
Since we can seldom defeat any enemy which we serve, if the Spirit of
Sorcery is to be cast down in the end times there will have to be SOME
virgins, some remnant of the Church which is untouched and undefiled by the
influence of drugs. We'll need some who won't look on this enemy, this
force which has been revealed in Scripture as GOD'S enemy, as an
acceptable, even a GOOD thing.

The Future Our Children Will Face

Maybe it doesn't seem horribly dangerous now. Maybe it's easy for
people to consider drug therapy an appropriate solution for physical and
social problems NOW. But it's not a static situation. It's growing worse.
More people, and more different kinds of people, are taking more drugs;
that's part of it. But the really scary part is, the drugs themselves are
changing. They're getting worse.
The drugs being developed now aren't soft, comforting, dreamy mood
elevators, or zippy, enthusiastic, "let's party!" intoxicants. The drugs
of the future will include performance enhancers; drugs which are designed
not to help us escape from reality - like today's drugs - but instead are
designed to change our abilities. Today's anabolic steroids, crack cocaine,
amphetamines and such (which aren't used primarily to increase pleasure,
but to expand the limits of human potential) will be improved and
strengthened and others will be added.
In addition, these new drugs won't be simple vegetable extracts which
can imitate human biochemistry; they may well be pure bio-chemicals which
can be produced cheaply in a laboratory, thousands of times stronger and
more specific than today's version.
So our children may face a generation which has the wherewithal to
boost IQ, to enhance physical strength and endurance, to augment memory and
the physical senses, to control physiology, and to expand emotion. And
these chemically-enhanced supermen won't be either won to the kingdom of
God, or overcome in their own kingdom, by Christians who are tainted and
double-minded about the spirit of sorcery. As my sister put it, very
neatly, "I don't think you can be used to raise the dead if you've just
taken aspirin for a headache."
We have to be pure, untouched, not partaking of their sins. We have to
be undefiled virgins, like the 144,000 in Revelation 14.
 37

Satan's Weapons: Rebellion and Witchcraft

I heard a great teaching lately about "The Devil's Plan for Your
Children", and it spoke of the two-pronged lie Satan is promulgating
through a dozen different channels which touch our children, including
schools, TV shows, movies, books, modern toys, cartoons, music and even
Sunday School Programs.
These two lies are: first that there IS supernatural power, but it has
nothing to do with Jesus Christ. It's magical, occultic, and has no
relationship with the traditions of the Church, no requirements for
holiness. And it's available to all, even children, to use for their own
purposes if they only learn how.
And secondly the Devil lies to children by saying that they are
smarter than their parents, that they have greater wisdom and knowledge,
and certainly the child's rights - his demands and desires - are far more
valid than those of the adults in his life. The idea of submission to
authority is disparaged and what is paramount is "the rights of the people"
(which is what the word LAODACIA - one of the churches in Revelation 3 -
means.)
At the root of those two lies are two of Satan's most frequently used
tools - witchcraft and rebellion. He subtly encourages our children to USE
unlawful power and control through the supernatural (which is witchcraft),
and at the same time he urges them to REFUSE the lawful control which God
has put over them (which is rebellion).
And that's what's being molded and prepared to fill the world in the
next twenty or thirty years: a generation of rebellious, undisciplined,
lawless psychics, who will operate in drug-enhanced occultic power. We who
are responsible for bringing up the next generation of Christians had
better be aware of what they'll be facing, and we'd better be preparing
them for the warfare with something a little more scriptural than puppet
shows and trips to the skating rink! An hour of fun in Sunday School,
after a week of humanistic schooling, television fare and worldly music,
can hardly swing the balance against a supernatural enemy. That requires
knowing and serving a supernatural God.
 38

3. IT USES SURGERY
Statistics on Surgery
Before we discuss the spiritual side of surgery, let's consider the
subject from a purely natural standpoint. The statistics are not very
favorable. In 1978, the American College of Surgeons released the following
statistics:
2,400,000 unnecessary surgeries were performed in the
United States. (This means normal tissue was removed.)
These unnecessary surgeries resulted in 12,000 deaths.
Where second opinions are mandated, the number of
surgeries is reduced by as much as 45%.
Approximately 90% of all surgery performed in this
country is totally without value. (And that's what the
surgeons themselves say!)
Location can play a tremendous role in whether
particular surgeries are performed. For instance,
hysterectomy is performed 80% more often in the South than
in the Northeast. According to Dr, John Wennburg of
Dartmouth Medical School your child's chance of having his
tonsils removed can vary from 8% to 60%, depending on where
he lives. In some regions, only 15% of males underwent a
prostatectomy by age 85; in other places the rate was
60% In one Maine city, 70% of women had a hysterectomy by age
75; just 80 miles away, the rate was only 25%
Since Medicare was enacted, there has been a 130%
increase in elective surgery for patients over 65.
787,000 women had hysterectomies in 1975 and 1700 of
them died as a result of the surgery. Estimates are that
at least half of these surgeries were not necessary.
Medical patients over the age of 65 are subjected to
80% more surgery than those under 65
Unnecessary surgery is widespread. According to findings by the
Senate Special Committee on Aging in 1985, unnecessary surgery on the aging
include:
23% to 36% of all cataract surgery
27% to 32% of all knee surgery
17% to 43% of all hemorrhoid surgery
15% to 31% of all gall bladder surgery
14% to 29% of all prostate surgery
5% to 28% of all hernia repair surgery
Nearly half of all Medicare costs are now for surgery or surgery-
related expenses. Reducing just UNNECESSARY cardiac pacemaker implants
alone could save Medicare up to $358 million per year.
Dr. Paul R. Hawley, Director of the American College of Surgeons, has
stated for publication: "It is reliably estimated that one half of the
surgical operations performed in the United States are performed by doctors
who are untrained or inadequately trained to undertake surgery".
"If patients brought malpractice suits against all guilty doctors -
and against guilty doctors only - the courts would probably be flooded with
THREE TIMES the suits now in litigation." (Emphasis his).
 39
Senator John Heinz, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Special Committee on
Aging, states, "Whether the result of inexperience, ignorance or greed on
the part of some doctors, millions of older Americans each year face the
double jeopardy of unnecessary surgery. Proof of this national disgrace is
all too evident."
One particular surgery, circumcision, is a good example of what
conditioning, tradition, compliance and an unquestioning acceptance of the
status quo is producing. In the first place, circumcision is done routinely
only in this country and in Israel. In the United States, about 1,200,000
circumcisions are performed annually, and the average cost is between $150
and $200. Now for the bad news: 55% of these surgeries have some kind of
post-operative complication, and 1 in 500 has a life-threatening problem.
The operative site is tiny, the patient is awake - and feeling a great deal
of pain - and frequently those performing the surgery are resident doctors.
All of the traditional indications for this particular surgery have
now been proved invalid. (Remember? Their truth isn't permanent; it
changes.) The idea that circumcision is necessary for cleanliness, to
prevent cancer, etc. aren't now in vogue. Since the middle 1970s, both the
American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians
and Gynecologists have stated that there is no valid evidence that
circumcision is a medical necessity.
In the old covenant, circumcision was a sign of Israel's relationship
with God; but in our covenant it is no longer applicable. In Acts 15:1, the
Judaizers falsely taught the necessity of circumcision, but in Romans
2:25-28, Galatians 6 and many other scripture, Paul said it no longer
"profiteth". So our reason for performing this surgery shouldn't be
spiritual. If the natural reasons aren't valid, and the spiritual reasons
don't apply, why do it? But millions of babies still undergo this procedure
every year in this country.
Thomas Preston, M.D., chief of cardiology at the Pacific Medical
Center, writes for THE ATLANTIC an article entitled: "Coronary-Bypass
Surgery: Remedy or Racket?" In it he states, "In 1978 researchers for the
National Institutes of Health completed a study, randomly assigning
patients with unstable angina to either surgery or nonsurgery. No
difference could be determined in survival rates between the two groups. In
other words, surgery was not saving them." He also said, "...it is not so
much the public's health as the medical profession's wealth that dictates
the use of this expensive, risky and often unjustified operation."
Has the number of these heart procedures diminished? Well, in 1983
doctors performed 180,000 bypass operations. 1992 saw nearly twice as many.
In 1983, 30,000 patients had angioplasty to open heart blockages, in 1992
there were nearly ten times as many.
The Trussell report dealt with treatment given to patients in 101
hospitals in New York. Its conclusion: one third of the hysterectomies
performed were "unnecessary" and that "some question could be raised about
another ten percent".
A similar study done by the Rand Corporation, reported in the Journal
of the American Medical Association, "Nearly half the patients... either
should not have had the procedures or could have done without them."
 40

Spiritual Dangers of Surgery

Surgery has many subtle and hidden dangers. There are scars on the
body following surgery, and we are finding more and more that there are
scars on the soul as well. When we violate God's principles, ignore His
laws and deny His power, the enemy will take the opportunity to claim
ground within our very beings. We have surrendered our authority; the
system has violated the borders of the body, the secrecy in which God
works, the Scriptural injunctions regarding sexual purity and we have been
contaminated.
Dealing with the aftermath of surgical procedures is important. There
is ALWAYS a spirit of sacrifice, for the shedding of blood and the
relinquishing of tissue is a rite of sacrifice, no matter how righteous and
beneficial we may consider it. There's a spirit of mutilation. If you've
been anesthetized, that needs to be dealt with. In addition, there are
specific spirits which are left within the body - sort of in exchange for
the tissue which is taken out - and the spirits align with the specific
organ which was removed or mutilated. For example, a hysterectomy will
leave a spirit of barrenness and infertility; a vasectomy will leave a
spirit of sterility.
And the alarming consequence is, the spirits aren't content to remain
just in the physical body. They spread out through the whole being; into
the soul, the thought-life, relationships with God and with others, into
ministry, finances. If you have a hysterectomy maybe you don't want any
more natural children, but do you want a spirit of barrenness in your
finances? Your career? Does anyone want to be poor? Unsuccessful? Unable
to make or keep friends? All these and more are potential sequelae from
surgery.
Reasons for Surgery
Surgery is done for a number of reasons, in addition to the obvious
one that some people believe it may be of some physical benefit. Sometimes
patients need attention, love, a time of being cared for and nourished.
They think (mistakenly, I believe) that a hospital stay will provide an
answer to these needs. They plan to rest in bed, be waited on, with back
rubs and meals on trays - in general to be the center of concern and
attention. They tend to forget the pain of injections and blood tests, the
mornings without breakfast before diagnostic tests, the intrusion,
embarrassment and discomfort of physical examinations, the danger of the
drugs and Xrays, and the all-too-frequent lack of concern and compassion in
the people who give the care. And since you can, on a daily cost basis,
travel to Europe for less that you can enter a hospital, that seems a
better option to me.
But surgery is NOT always done for rational reasons, or even for
reasons such as I have described above. It's not even done simply for the
traditional reasons which imply that a child MUST be relieved of his
tonsils at an early age and that a woman has no further need for a uterus
after the age of forty and, therefore, it should be cut out. No, there's a
 41
far more potent and wide-spread reason, and it is a spiritual reason.
If we stand back from the practice of surgery and get a broad and
unobstructed point of view, it's really a remarkable thing. Some totally
neutral being who was completely untouched by the tradition of medical care
in this country might find it hard to believe that we would allow someone
to strip us, drug us into unconsciousness, cut us open and remove living
tissue (which will later be burned), and not only allow it but pay
handsomely for the privilege! Only if our lives hung precariously in the
balance and the record of surgery were excellent would this be rational
behavior. We don't allow anybody else to strip us, handle and manipulate or
even deface our bodies - if anyone but a doctor cut us with a knife, it
would be assault with a deadly weapon and we would have recourse to the
courts to redress the wrong! But literally millions of people allow this
kind of thing even when the surgeons themselves admit that 90% of the time,
it's useless! There must be some compelling force behind it all.
Again, I borrow from Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, who wrote CONESSIONS OF A
MEDICAL HERETIC and MAL(E) PRACTICE. He is of the opinion that surgery is a
spiritual activity, a religious ceremony. The doctors are the priests in
this religion; they wear special priestly garments (their scrub gowns) and
go through a ceremonial cleansing (scrubbing up). The patient is a
sacrificial offering; he is stripped and drugged and spread out on an altar
(the operating table) and his blood is shed and his tissue burned to
satisfy the blood-lust of a pagan god.
I can feel I'm losing some of my audience now; this is just going too
far! But please strip the subject of its aura of respectability and the
years of compliance and trust, and even more than that, ask God to confirm
or discredit the idea. If it IS true, isn't it better that you know?
Scriptural Prohibitions
The Lord has forbidden it, of course. Deuteronomy 14:1 says, "Ye are
the children of the Lord your God: ye shall not cut yourself." In Leviticus
19:28, the Lord says, "Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the
dead, nor print any marks upon you." And Leviticus 21:5 says concerning the
priests "They shall not... make any cuttings in their flesh." This word is
#8296 in Strong's Concordance. The verb is "To gash, cut in pieces, make
cuttings" and the noun is "An incision." In Jeremiah 48:37, part of the
judgment on Moab is, "Upon his hands shall be cuttings." This is Strong's
#1417, from #1413, and it also means, "Gash (as if by pressing into)".
When we fall prey to the scientific view point, we sometimes tend to
think God didn't really mean what He said; or that something so wonderful
as modern surgery certainly should supersede an old covenant injunction by
God! And I agree we're not under the law nor bound to obey the Mosaic
covenant. But God changes not, and the law is a clear indication of how He
feels about things. The law is our school-master, to bring us to Christ
(Galatians 3:24) and one way of interpreting that is: the law shows us
God's opinion about things so that we can freely choose to avoid what
displeases Him, and in that way come to Christ.
When Elijah encountered the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (I Kings
18), he gave them the first turn at bat. They had literally hours to pray
down (or UP?) the power of Baal but of course they failed. It's interesting
to read the methods they used to attract Baal's attention. In verse 28 it
says, "And they cried aloud, and they cut themselves AFTER THEIR MANNER
 42
with knives and lancets... " Sounds like Baal was attracted to the sight of
human blood being shed. And since the Bible is clear that our God hates,
and considers an abomination, those who shed innocent blood (Proverbs
6:16-17), it isn't surprising that Baal would enjoy it. If cutting with a
lancet, a surgical instrument, was the custom with the prophets of Baal
(and they did it to invoke his presence!) then certainly it's something
Christians should avoid.
 43

4. IT USES HOSPITALS
Since World War II, when doctors were in short supply and patients
were brought together to facilitate their care, there has been a steady
decline of the "house call" and an increase in hospitalization. Just
recently there has been a movement back to decentralized care, out-patient
treatment and one day surgery, but even so most people face hospitalization
several times in their lives. And hospitals aren't very pleasant places.
The Danger of Infection
For one thing, they're dirty. They have more germs and worse germs
than any place else in town. If you're looking for the biggest and best
collection of disease-causing organisms, where else to go but to your local
hospital? And these germs are frequently the most resistant to
antibiotics. For that reason, the incidence of "nosocomial infections",
those contracted WHILE IN THE HOSPITAL, BECAUSE you're in the hospital, is
on the increase.
More statistics:
Approximately 40,000,000 Americans are hospitalized
annually, and 2,000,000 acquire nosocomial infections.
That's one out of every twenty patients - infected IN the
hospital, by pathogens contacted there.
80,000 to 100,000 patients die each year as a result of
hospital-incurred infections.
The average hospital stay is lengthened by four days,
and the average hospital bill is increased by $800
because of these infections.
Tests done in hospitals on things like frequency of hand washing also
show hospitals aren't very clean. This means they're not especially safe,
either.
I quote from MEDICAL MAYHEM, by Dr. David T. Nash, published by Walker
and Company in 1985: "A study was done of 815 hospital patients; 290
contracted hospital-caused ailments at least once, some an many as seven
times. Sixty one had life-threatening illnesses and 15 died." Yet we're
conditioned to think of hospitals as temples of healing, places of succor
and security for the sick.
The Danger of Abuse
In addition to hospital-caused infections and doctor-caused
(iatrogenic) complications, there is a very real danger of physical abuse -
like children, spouses, and the elderly, patients are targets of battering.
Anywhere people are subjected to and dependant on others, and those others
are under the sway of demonic activity, there is an opportunity for abuse.

The Danger of AIDS

And then there's AIDS. As I write this, the controversy rages about
who has the right to know what about whom in regard to this disease. Should
patients be told of a health-care worker's infection? Should the
health-care worker be told if his patient is infected? The fear of
infection batters against entrenched, legally bolstered rights to privacy,
and what might once have been a medical - a public health - question has
 44
become a series of political battles. People with AIDS aren't patients;
they're "victims", and the questions surrounding their care seem to center
more on their civil rights than on their physical condition.
This is an incurable, virulent, adaptive, one hundred percent fatal
epidemic. And as a source of infection, hospitalization is becoming almost
as dangerous as IV drug use and casual sex.

The Danger of Demonic Assault

But I think the main danger in hospitals, even more hazardous than
other risks I've mentioned, is the presence of demons. Hospitals are FULL
of demons! When you consider the things that attract demons: nudity, fear,
pain, greed, lust, unbelief, drugs, death - these things are all abundantly
present in hospitals and it's no wonder demons are there as well. And the
danger is, they are often looking for a "swept and garnished" abode.
A young friend of mine had a vision once; actually it was of Women's
Hospital here in Tampa, Florida. He saw a large, dark cloud hovering over
the building, and he knew he was seeing the seat of the spirit of child
death in our area. (They do a lot of abortions there.) Then the whole
subject of demons, their activities and their dwelling places was opened up
to him. He saw people anesthetized on the operating table, and demons
entering their souls without hinderance. As he put it, if we saw a bum
passed out from alcohol, or a drug addict in the gutter stoned on heroin,
we would know that these people were open to demonic attack; the voluntary
surrender of the soul realm - intellect, will, memory, control - to a drug,
opens a door for the entrance of demons. My friend saw the effect of
general anesthesia as exactly the same thing, the "driver's seat" of the
patient's being had been voluntarily vacated and given over to a drug. He
saw demonic invasion as a very real danger in hospitals.
There is No Faith in God
Another thing you'll find in hospitals in unbelief.
In order to be healed by God, faith must be released. It is one
ESSENTIAL. In Luke 8, Jesus went to Jarius' home to bring healing to his
daughter. When He spoke faith to the crowd, they "laughed him to scorn,
knowing she was dead". So in order to work His miracle, Jesus put out the
unbelievers, and the child was raised from the dead. In Matthew 13:58,
Jesus was unable to do mighty works because of unbelief; the children of
Israel could not enter the land of promise because of unbelief (Hebrews
3:19). A heart of unbelief is called "evil" in Hebrews 3:12 and we are
instructed not to be yoked with unbelievers in II Corinthians 6:14.
Now bear all that in mind as I state: there is no place on earth where
there is greater unbelief than a modern hospital. (It's like going to a
bank to receive a miraculous provision of money, or reading a book by Carl
Sagan to learn about God's creation of the universe.)
There are times when Christians who believe in divine healing go into
 45
a hospital, but in these cases, they are bringing something foreign - faith
in God - in with them. The belief in God as healer is not an integral part
of the system. The medical system has belief in MAN as healer, not God. The
weapons the system uses to fight illness are not faith in God, the Word,
the Blood of Jesus, the power of prayer, dominion over the forces of
darkness and the like. The system brings its own weapons, which are carnal,
and require no faith in God.
There is no Blood from our Lamb on the doors of these buildings.
 46

5. IT USES BLOOD
The Nature of Blood
Bumper stickers and posters proclaim, "Blood is Life; Pass It On".
That's a very subtle perversion of what God says about blood.

Of course it IS life. It is the essence of the Atonement and in almost

every culture it has been a symbol of sacrifice.
But even more than that, it's ALIVE. After it's been drawn, it's kept
refrigerated in blood banks, and it must be used within a certain time
limit - while it's still alive. This time limit is called the shelf life.
The blood of Abel cried to God from the ground (Genesis 4:10) and
Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant, sprinkled His blood "that speaketh
better things than Abel" (Hebrews 12:24). Blood is different from other
parts of the body; it has LIFE. It is the blood which carries life to all
the rest of the body.
God Forbids the Consuming of Blood
Leviticus 17:11 says, "The life of the flesh is in the blood..." and
verse 14 of that chapter says, "For it is the life of all flesh, the blood
of it is for the life thereof..." but the prohibition there follows:
"Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, ye shall eat the blood of no
manner of flesh, for the life of all flesh is in the blood thereof:
whosoever eateth it shall be cut off." The prohibition in these scriptures
is against eating blood; at other places they were forbidden to drink it.
Today, through the marvels of man's technology, we can receive it
directly into our blood streams. Isn't it logical He wouldn't want that
either?
We're discussing again an old testament law which I claim reflects a
clear view of God's opinion. But in this case we also have a New Testament
ratification; in Acts 15 we read of the apostles and elders of the church
in Jerusalem meeting to decide matters of policy concerning the conversion
of Gentiles. What portions of the law would be applied? Circumcision? Grace
only? The answer is in verses 19-21.
Only four requirements were made of the new converts. They were to
"Abstain from pollutions of idols, from fornication, from things strangled,
and from blood." Here the restriction isn't limited to eating or drinking
blood; they were to ABSTAIN from it. That's Strong's #567 and it means "To
keep away from, to hold oneself distant from, refrain, abstain, be
distant." The very OPPOSITE of receiving it into our own blood streams,
mingling it with our own "life".
Is the modern church subject to the decision of the apostles and
elders of the early church? How does the Lord expect us to relate to their
decision? It isn't wise to ignore their opinion simply because it doesn't
 47
coincide with modern thinking or line up with some worldly system, or
because it just never occurred to us to obey. Certainly we over-ride their
verdict only after prayer and seeking God. Those men were God's spokesmen,
what they said has never been rescinded by God, and they said don't do it.
So the question of taking blood is not a hazy, unclear matter; God has
made His position known. What the medical system
does is diametrically opposed to the REVEALED will of God.
Spiritual Results of Disobeying About Blood
Like every other mandate from God, the prohibitions regarding blood
were given for our welfare. God's point of view about anything will always
reflect His loving concern for us. God says the giving and receiving of
blood is wrong - dangerous, forbidden - and this is true no matter what the
world, the medical system, the hierarchy of the church, our own reasoning
or anyone else says. These practices have a destructive effect on us. And
because the soul life is in the blood, that's where the destruction is.
In the case of donating blood, we are giving up, pouring out,
surrendering, sacrificing a part of our souls. Maybe there is no lingering
loss in the physical realm, since our bodies are wonderfully made to
restore themselves, but there is a permanent forfeiture in the soul. A
diminution, a deprivation, a leanness, which lasts until that soul life is
called back. This is especially true of those who give frequently, giving a
large amount.
In the case of receiving blood, we have the "confusion of persons"
which God found so abhorrent in the time of Noah. There is enormous danger
in accepting the blood of other people into our bodies. We receive not
only the natural but also the spiritual factors of that other person's
heritage.
In accepting a blood transfusion, we allow into our bodies the soul
life of another person: that is, a portion of all the elements which
comprise his soul: his intellect, emotions, will, memory. Whether or not
we believe it, whether we're aware of it or not, it happens, and it lasts
until we deal with the situation.
Blood banks screen blood for compatibility and for such contaminants
as they recognize, but there is no screening for the spiritual factors. We
get all the donor's demons, blood-line curses, generational sins,
destructive behavior patterns, strongholds of deception and unbelief, soul
ties, emotional disturbances etc. His LIFE is in that blood, and when we
receive his blood, we get the whole package, natural and spiritual.
Natural Results of Disobeying About Blood
Of course, there are also natural dangers to the use of blood; they're
well publicized. An Associated Press release in May 1991 states that, "The
Red Cross [has] inadvertently released blood contaminated by hepatitis,
failed to follow safety procedures that guard against the use of
AIDS-contaminated blood, and repeatedly failed to report errors and
accidents to the [Food and Drug Administration] agency." This same release
states, "Health officials have reiterated recently that there is no way to
guarantee 100 percent safety of blood from the AIDS virus and other
contaminants because the available testing procedures are not 100 percent
accurate." The taking of blood is risky.
Steven Spenser, writing in March, 1992 for the Associated Press,
 48
states: "Fewer than 20 of the nations's 2400 blood banks and plasma centers
- representing five percent by volume of all the blood collected -
currently test for HIV-2..."
AIDS is probably the most prominent danger and it may be just the
front runner in a number of similar diseases. We ignore God's will at great
peril. He is not mocked.
Deception in the Church About Blood
Many churches, perhaps most churches, consider the donating of blood a
virtuous thing. They have blood drives, bringing the Bloodmobile (I have a
good friend who calls it the "Vampiremobile") right into the church parking
lot, honoring those who give.
But that's tradition, not Scripture. To call a thing "good", a thing
which God has forbidden or cursed, is to fail as King Saul did in I Samuel
15. He kept alive the "good" part of the Amalekites. And the kingdom was
rent from King Saul.
In the old covenant it was animals who died in sacrifice and their
blood was poured out. Then God so loved us that He gave His only begotten
Son who died as sacrifice, and GOD'S blood was poured out. There is no
place in Scripture where God advocated the shedding of human blood as
sacrifice - remember, Abraham did NOT offer up Isaac - and certainly NEVER
the co-mingling of human blood with human blood.
With increasing evil abroad today, high schools have become armed
camps, full of demonic music, violence, illicit yet sanctioned sex and,
increasingly, the influence of Satanic cults. Our children should be
learning what GOD says about blood, not what tradition says.
We should teach our young people that if they are ever in a situation
where others are suggesting that they cut themselves, shed their blood,
mingle their blood with that of another, shed and drink the blood of an
animal or the blood of another person, they should leave that place AT
ONCE, praying as they go. There is great danger and unspeakable evil being
loosed and no child of God should stay in the presence of such activities,
unless he has been sent there by God to do battle.
We don't want our children to be confused, helpless or double-minded
in situations like this. But in how many local churches are they being
given the message that the shedding of blood is a good, even a righteous
thing? Even though God says one of the things He abominates are hands
which shed innocent blood (Proverbs 6:17), our churches often call it
"good". As with the taking of drugs, in the matter of blood the confusion
about good versus evil is spreading like a contaminant from parents and
leaders - who might be expected to know and speak truth - down to the
youngsters, who are reaping a dreadful harvest of grief and death.
Blood is given medically to pass on the life force of one person to
another. And as I understand it, the reason satanists kill their sacrifices
and pour out - or drink - their blood is the same: in order to receive the
life force which was present in whatever it was they killed: the power of a
goat if they killed a goat, the power of a dog if the sacrifice were a dog,
and the power of a man if they've moved up to human sacrifices.
And blood sacrifice is only the beginning of this evil. Next comes
organ transplants, another great evil which is called "good" by the world.
Then will come the increase of genetic engineering, the manipulation and
alteration of the genes and chromosomes. Man playing God, saying that MAN
 49
can design - create - life.
Since the pollution of human blood was one reason God sent a flood in
Noah's day, isn't it time to re-think our position on the subject of the
taking of blood?
 50

6. IT USES CARDIO-PULMONARY RESUSCITATION

CPR, cardiopulmonary resuscitation. A good thing?
For several years, I was licensed as an instructor in CPR and I was
head of the hospital's CODE team for my shift. We were the ones who
responded to cardiac arrest. And even back then, it always bothered me.
For one thing, it so seldom restored life. In more than thirty years,
I never saw it bring a patient back to a long span of good health. But I
often saw the pitiful state of patients with pacemakers which artificially
induced a heart beat, with ventilators which artificially produced
respiration.
Zombies!
We really have contrived technological immortality! We can create an
electronic zombie which will never die, at least as long as the electricity
doesn't quit.
But it's only a counterfeit of life and from my first exposure to this
kind of thing, it was always incredibly grieving to me. I always wondered,
where is GOD in this? I saw it as a perversion of resurrection. The system
saying, in effect, "Thou shalt not surely die, we have conquered death."
MEN claiming to have the keys to death.
I always thought, the important thing isn't another few hours or days
of life, but where will you spend eternity? I once envisioned a CODE team
that responded to life threatening situations with the message of
salvation, not drugs and tubes and electric shocks in an attempt to restore
the clay husk.
The System's Increasing Evil
The medical system is fully committed to any practice - forbidden,
heroic, draconian, destructive, expensive - anything at all to maintain
control of the life or death subject. They implant baboon livers in human
bodies to preserve some kind of life; or they cunningly devise killing
machines to accomodate those who are determined to "shuffle off this mortal
coil". Men like Jack Kevorkian risk prison to empower that scorpion spirit
of suicide, while others extend the illusion of life by means of
technology. Nowhere do we see God's sovereignty acknowledged. Nowhere is
the knee bowed to the One who said, "There is a time to die... I hold the
keys to death..."
And Christians believe this is the repository to DIVINE healing!
 51

7. IT USES PSYCHIC POWER

The medical system uses the psychic or occultic realm, too, which the
Bible has called an abomination. It's far more wide spread than people
realize, and it's growing.
"We'll Show You How..."
My first experience with a real blatant case was an article about
psychic healing in R.N. MAGAZINE way back in 1980. It was a "How To"
article, with specific instructions for building up an aura between your
hands, bouncing psychic energy back and forth till you feel tingles, then
laying your hands on a patient with some kind of spoken words. They
suggested this technique for potentiating the use of drugs, such as a
sedative; stroking the patient with your tingling hands and murmuring,
"You're getting sleepy, sleeeeepy." Christians need to know this kind of
thing is going on and is being ADVOCATED in some quarters.
Ouija Boards
Another example: in the old days if a post-stroke patient couldn't
speak, he was given a little chalk board, and he wrote out his messages.
Today in some hospitals and treatment centers, the chalk board has been
replaced with a ouija board. It's so easy to push that little pointer
around to the letters, much easier than writing words out. How subtle is
our enemy!
Manifold Examples of the Trend
We know the system uses hypnotism, biofeedback, behavior modification,
acu-pressure if not acupuncture, meditation, visualization and many other
techniques which are questionable if not out-right evil, and the trend
toward this type of thing is growing. As the Holistic movement gains
ground, so will these questionable methods. And as the world in general
grows more and more evil and ungodly, so will everything humans do without
the power and anointing of God.
8. IT USES PSYCHIATRY AND PSYCHOLOGY
The medical system embraces both psychiatry and psychology.
Practitioners of the former, in fact, are themselves doctors of medicine.
And I can hear folks saying, "So? What's wrong with that?" My answer is:
quite a bit.
The Church is Deceived
As with so much in the world, we are expected to start from the basis
that this is a good thing, and to accept that opinion without challenge. We
are told, and an overwhelming majority of us believe, first that psychiatry
and psychology are effective, scientific disciplines, based on empirical
evidence gleaned from measurable and consistent data; second that there is
a consensus in the field regarding emotional and behavioral problems and
how to treat them; and finally that it has documented effectiveness with a
high record of success.
None of these assumptions is true, and even LESS true is the subtle
and growing belief that psychology enhances Christianity, that the Bible
needs additions and corrections from the likes of Freud, Jung, Adler,
 52
Maslow, Skinner, Rogers or Dobbins. That the best counseling is a blend of
Christianity and psychology - "the best of both worlds", so to speak. What
a tragic deception!
The Bible is the Word of God, immutable and unfailingly true.
Psychiatry and psychology are derived from the mind of man - man's
reasoning, man's conclusions, man's assessments. Does mixing them together
add anything beneficial to God's word?
Why These Disciplines Can't Help
The problem here is simple; the foundation of what they believe is not
true. Both psychology and psychiatry deny the need for God. They believe we
can achieve peace, power and wholeness with only our human effort. God says
we can't.
They start from the premise that man is inherently good (God says we
aren't) and that his help must come from within himself (God says our help
must come from Him) and that the highest goal is self-realization (God says
it isn't). As with everything else in the world system, the focus is on
MAN.
They preach a sort of Gospel of Self: self-esteem, self-realization,
self-love, self-acceptance, self-help. As Martin Bobgan says, "According to
the psychologizers of Christianity, the greatest detriment to a fulfilling
life is low self-esteem. In their quest to bring their followers to the
realization of their full potential, they substitute one form of self-
centeredness (high self-esteem) for another form of self-centeredness (low
self-esteem). In either case, self is the focal point of the cure as well
as the problem."
Scripture does not teach self-love as a virtue; it is listed as a work
of the flesh. II Timothy 3:1 says "... in the last days perilous times
shall come...men will be lovers of self..." John Piper says, "Today the
first and greatest commandment is 'Thou shalt love thyself'... the ultimate
sin is no longer failing to honor God but failing to esteem oneself".
Do we warrant admiration? Can we safely assume we're worthy of
esteem? God loves us; does that prove we're loveable? Hardly. God says
man is desperately wicked, that no good thing dwells in our flesh, and that
we are already damned, without a saving knowledge of Jesus. He says we need
Him, without Him we can do nothing, and it is His goal that we die to
ourselves. Of course these two different concepts of the nature of man are
antagonistic and mutually exclusive. They can't both be true, and it's
wicked and dangerous to believe the word of the world as opposed to the
word of God.
The premises and counsel of psychiatry and psychology reveal their
denial of absolutes; what was once a contrast between good and evil was
briefly modified into right or wrong, and now has become "positive or
negative" - or simply "what is right for YOU". The concept of righteousness
is passé, as is our desperate need for a Redeemer. Guilt has become a guilt
complex, sins are labelled "mistakes" or "illnesses", and "understanding
our weaknesses" replaces "humble yourself in the sight of God".
The world's answer to every problem is, "Get counselling". We're told
to "deal with, come to terms with" our problems; no mention of God. It is
MAN helping man, or man helping man help himself. And unless the power of
God is invoked, it is vanity.
And it can be confusing: there are over 250 separate systems of
 53
psychology, often conflicting and contradictory, each claiming superiority
over the rest. And even if it's labelled "Christian", that doesn't mean
much. The Christian Association for Psychological Studies has stated "...
at the present time there is no acceptable Christian psychology that is
markedly different from non-Christian psychology". Yet more and more we see
not just the world but the children of the kingdom turning to psychology
and psychiatry for help.
Leaven in the Church
I quote from Martin and Deidre Bobgan in Media Spotlight's "Special
Report on Psychology: Science or Religion?"
"Psychology is a subtle and widespread leaven in the Church. It has
permeated the entire loaf and is stealthily starving the sheep. It promises
far more than it can deliver, and what it does deliver is not the food that
nourishes. Psychotherapy is a most subtle specter haunting the Church
because it is... a pseudoscientific substitute system of religious belief.
Whenever psychology is intermingled with the Scripture, it dilutes the Word
and deludes the Church."
Psychiatrist Thomas Szasz, author of THE MYTH OF PSYCHOTHERAPY,
says,"[Psychotherapy] is not merely a religion that pretends to be a
science, it is actually a fake religion that seeks to destroy true
religion". And Psychologist Daniel Goleman quotes Chogyasm Trungpa as
saying, "Buddhism will come to the West as psychology".
The REAL Answer
When we have a problem in emotional or behavioral areas, we need GOD.
He is the present help in time of trouble, His is the name which is like a
strong tower, He is our refuge and hiding place. Not man. "Give us help
from trouble, for vain is the help of man. Through GOD we shall do
valiantly; for it is He that shall tread down our enemies". (Psalm
60:11-12)
 54

9. IT USES "STINGS"
There are a lot of deceptions going around concerning how Christians
should relate to the medical system, or maybe it would be better to call
them "stings". A sting is a con game, something that looks good, looks very
appealing and desirable, very logical and proper, but it isn't true and
there's a hook hidden in it somewhere. I'll give you an example.
"God helps those who help themselves." Right? Sounds good, doesn't
it? Some people even think it's scripture. But it isn't scripture and it
isn't true. God doesn't help "those who help themselves"; He helps "those
who ask". The criterion for getting help from God is not helping yourself.
In fact, that can be a real hinderance. And believing this lie will make
you susceptible to a sting. (Incidentally, this statement, this particular
sting, was quoted by Aesop in his fables; later, in the 1700's, it was
found in DISCOURSES ON GOVERNMENT by Algernon Sidney, and he was quoted by
Benjamin Franklin. Lots of sources, but not the Bible.)
Common Stings
Some stings which involve the medical system are: "God gave us
doctors." Well, certainly He created them; He created everybody, but if we
infer from this statement that God gave us doctors TO IMPLEMENT DIVINE
HEALING, then we're believing a sting. It looks good, sounds good, appeals
to the natural mind, but it isn't true. God gave us Jesus, and heals us "by
His stripes". To say the system is His divine provision is like saying,
"Our God shall supply all your needs according to His riches in glory by
the banking system."
Remember, the Bible calls healing a gift, so it should be free; and
the Bible assigns the role of Healer to God. It is therefore a DIVINE GIFT,
not a worldly trade. No one else should claim to function as healer.
"God gave doctors their wisdom." Oh? Did He? Is this wisdom, and the
effect it has, under the lordship of Jesus? Does it have the three New
Testament signs that it is godly - is it done in the name of Jesus, by the
power of the Holy Ghost and for the glory of God? Has God committed
Himself to empower and protect this system, or is it part of Babylon, which
is damned to fall? Does the wisdom of this system increase the reign and
glory of God? Or is the wisdom used by this system merely natural?
"I know I was supposed to go to the doctor (or hospital) because I was
able to witness to him (or to a room mate)." Well, maybe you were able to
witness; God never wastes anything and He is the master of Plan B, but if
we really want to witness to the power of our God, it shouldn't begin with
our saying, "I need the system." If we're going to witness to a bartender,
we don't walk into the bar needing liquor. No, we go forth to witness in
the mode of GIVING, giving freely of the Lord, not NEEDING or receiving
from the world.
Another sting you hear all the time is: it's tempting God not to use
whatever natural means are available. Of course, we're told not to tempt
God - and that He won't tempt us - and that the role of Tempter is assigned
to Satan. But trusting God to fulfill His clear, unvarnished, unequivocal
word is not tempting Him. It's trusting Him. And the Lord never rebuked
His disciples for trusting Him; He never said, "Oh, ye of too much faith!"
Neither is it presumption to trust God to do what He said, that is to heal
our physical bodies. It's not a lack of wisdom, not foolishness, not
 55
presumption or tempting God to believe His word. We simply act like He told
the truth.
Not My Child!
One more sting: "I could trust God for myself, and wait for a healing,
but I can't stand to see my children suffer." What a wealth of portent
hides behind these lofty words!
If we examine this statement, we can hear the speaker reveal his
opinion of God: "If we trust Him with our children, they'll be treated
harshly, they'll suffer. On the other hand, man will treat them with mercy
and goodness. They're safer with man." The speaker therefore puts the
blame for his lack of faith on God's faithlessness. "I love my children too
much to run that kind of risk, trusting them to God." He professes faith -
he would trust for himself, he says, so there's nothing wrong with his
faith - it's just the horrors of surrendering his child to God's control.
In contrast let me quote from a conversation I overheard between a
child who had just been to a doctor's office to be treated for a
respiratory infection, and a child who had never been to a doctor. Both
were about eight years old.
The first child described the episode: she waited, she was taken into
a little room, her clothes were removed, and a man came in and examined her
body. The second child could handle all that fairly well, but the story
moved on to a description of a blood test and an injection of penicillin -
in the bottom! - and the second child was obviously horrified.
"WHERE WAS YOUR MOTHER?" Again, a wealth of portent behind the words:
surely no loving parent would stand by and allow such assaults!
"Oh, she was there."
"Golly!"
So our first speaker, the parent who hesitates to entrust his children
to God, and our horrified child who can't comprehend how a loving parent
would surrender his child to a man, stand in diametrically opposed
positions. They have totally different answers to all the questions which
could be asked on the subject of how should a Christian relate to the
medical system: Where are you safer? Who can REALLY help in time of
trouble? Which way is more likely to bring true health? Where is our
faith fixed? Whose word is true?
The little child knows, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put
confidence in man." (Psalm 118-8)
 56

But it Doesn't Work

One final sting. People say, "I know a family - or I read about them,
saw them on television, heard a sermon about them - and they refused to get
medical care for a child, and he died. And that proves it's wrong not to
take your kids to the doctor." This sting employs the flaw in logic
called "Drawing a conclusion from insufficient data." First of all it
assumes facts not in evidence; that the parents were in a position to
receive from God, that their stand was based in faith in God and obedience
to His word, that there were no weaknesses in their hedge through which the
enemy might come.
It also assumes that the child would have lived if he had received
care from the system. This isn't a "given"; many children die within the
system. For example, a Christian Scientist couple here in Florida lost a
daughter to diabetes a few years ago. They were taken to court on charges
of manslaughter and it became a real media circus. The thing that was
never given any publicity AT ALL was the fact that 100 other children died
of diabetes that same year, but only this case involved legal charges. No
one charged the doctors and hospitals who were responsible for the other
ninety nine children who died.
I see one consistent pattern within all the different forces which are
empowering the "medical care by law" movement, and this pattern is: the
unspoken - and unchallenged - assumption that medical care is always
effective, always safe, always a benefit.
This is a dangerous assumption.
This is the ultimate sting.
 57

9. IT USES MANIPULATION
In the system, you see a strong pattern of control, compliance and
obedience. The authority rests in the system and the patient is usually
very glad to relinquish responsibility for either making decisions or
taking action. He surrenders his options to and trusts in the system.
Most patients cooperate with the system remarkably. They trust their
doctors with their lives, literally, and most patients have a really
touching faith. They are submissive, yielding, and allow the system a lot
of time and room to succeed. I would like to see the same kind of faith and
submission when we're coming to God for healing.
We need to give Him time, for one thing. Don't demand that He heal
NOW, STAT, Sunday morning, or we'll see the doctor Monday. He has a deeper
work than merely countering symptoms and He's NEVER in a hurry.
Also, we need to stand against and resist symptoms; healing is a
PROCESS. We grant doctors that favor. Take this example: you go to the
Emergency Room with right lower quadrant pain, nausea and a slight fever.
They do some tests and find you have a high white cell count and the
differential indicates a hot appendix. The doctor operates, takes out the
appendix and an hour or so later, he comes by to see you.
There you are, lying in bed in great pain from the surgery - much
greater pain, in fact, than that which brought you to the hospital in the
first place. You're feeling the effects of being drugged. You still have
some nausea, maybe a sore throat from intubation for anesthesia - in short
you feel lousy. The doctor smiles proudly and says, "It was really hot, but
we caught it before it ruptured. You're just fine!"
And hear this, friend: YOU BELIEVE HIM! In the very teeth of evidence
to the contrary, you believe that you have been healed, and it's now just a
matter of walking it out, waiting for the full manifestation.
Why can't we give God the same kind of faith? Why can't we cut Him
the same slack?
Faith is essential for healing; faith in God to receive healing from
God, faith in the system to receive natural healing. And faith as we know
comes by hearing. How often do we hear words to raise our faith in the
system? "I take Tylenol for pain. Hospitals do, and that makes me
confident." "My doctor said Mylanta." "Dristan takes care of all your
cold symptoms." On and on, we hear and hear and faith comes. So, we get a
headache, we take Aspirin, faith is released, and the headache goes away.
(Sometimes.) And the more we use it, the easier it becomes.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if several times an hour we heard a
commercial for God?
"He sent His word and healed them" (Psalm 30).
"Bless the Lord, oh my soul, who healeth all thy diseases" (Psalm
103).
"My son, attend to my words... they are life unto those who find them
and health to all their flesh" (Proverbs 4:20-22).
"A merry heart doeth good like a medicine" (Proverbs 17:22).
If we bathed our ears and minds and spirits with these commercials and
endorsements, there would be more faith in GOD for healing GOD'S WAY.
 58

III.
WHAT THE SYSTEM DOES
1. IT EFFECTS BOTH GOD AND MAN
So, we've talked about what the system IS and what it
USES... now, let's talk about what it DOES.
It robs God. It limits Him.
It puts Him in a tight box of unbelief and obliges Him to heal through
methods and procedures that He has clearly forbidden.
God's Chosen Vessel
He has specifically defined His chosen routes for authority, anointing
and blessing, and the system requires Him to work through alternative
channels.
For example, the father is the priest of the home and the route God
has chosen to use in healing and blessing the children, but when a child is
ill or a baby born in the system, the source of authority is the doctor,
not the father. Decisions are made and action taken completely apart from
God's divine order, using the doctor's scientific knowledge instead of the
parents' spiritual insight. And there are no scriptures to indicate that it
is God's CHOSEN CUSTOM to use a doctor of medicine as a channel of grace;
there are many to show that He DOES choose and desire to use the father.
The system takes the place of Jehovah Rapha. It substitutes as a
source of truth and an object of faith, and it receives to itself praise
and glory. It equates "medical care" with "healing", then lifts up man as
healer and takes to itself glory which should be given to God.
 59

We Pay a Lot for What God Calls a "Gift"

The system robs man as well.
To begin with, it costs a blue fortune; health care costs have almost
bankrupted this country. But that's only the beginning.
The system also robs man by putting him under a covenant that doesn't
believe in God as healer, and in that way it SEVERELY limits his chances of
receiving a miracle. The workings of miracles require the gift of faith,
and while it's not impossible, it is very difficult to believe God for
miraculous healing when you're in the world system and subject to its
methods and practices.
Outside the Realm of Blessing
Because man elects to hand over his God-given authority to the system,
he falls into the "WOE TO THEM" of Isaiah 31:1-3: "Woe to them that go down
to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots because they
are many, and in horsemen because they are very strong; but they look not
unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the Lord! ... Now the Egyptians
are men, and not God; and their horses flesh and not spirit. When the Lord
shall stretch out his hand, both he that helpeth shall fall and he that is
helped shall fall down, and they shall all fail together."
Isaiah 30:1-3 has the same message. "Woe to the rebellious children,
saith the Lord, that take counsel, but not of me: and that cover with a
covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin: that walk to
go down into Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth, to strengthen
themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt.
Therefore shall the strength of Pharaoh be your shame and the trust in the
shadow of Egypt your confusion."
In Isaiah 36:6, the Lord says, "Lo, thou trusteth in the staff of this
broken reed, on Egypt; whereon if a man lean, it will go through his hand
and pierce it; so is Pharaoh king of all Egypt to all that trust in him."
The word "staff" is Strong's #4938, and it means "Support, protector,
sustenance". It is derived from #8172, which means "support oneself, lean,
lie, rely, rest". If we allow the symbology that "Egypt" speaks of the
cosmos, the world system, and if we allow that the medical system is a part
of the world system, then it follows that its use isn't just second best,
it's actually dangerous.
 60

2. IT CURSES THOSE WHO COME TO IT

The man who goes into the system runs the risk of being cursed. For
one thing, the diagnosis spoken over him may have that effect. The doctor
has been handed the authority and his word is received as final truth and
if he speaks a negative thing, it has force and effect.
A Curse Around the Neck
There was a word of knowledge at a service I attended which shows this
sort of thing. The word was: somebody present had been praying for some
time for a healing from diabetes; apparently praying without effect. The
Lord told her, "You wear around your neck a strong, creative statement: I
AM A DIABETIC. You are held in bondage by that chain around your neck.
Remove it; proclaim what GOD says about your condition and I will be free
to heal you."
It was a Medic Alert (in her case a necklace although they're often
bracelets, too) on which the words had been engraved, made permanent: I AM
A DIABETIC. She wore it day and night, in preparation for a time when this
particular enemy would overwhelm her and she would be carried into a
hospital unconscious. It was a strong "it is written" kind of weapon
against her, and even God was limited by its power. (And of course He was
also limited by the fact that she believed what the Medic Alert said more
than she believed what God said about "By His stripes ye were healed.")
Curse from the Arm of Flesh
There is another way that submission to the system can bring a curse.
In Jeremiah 17:5, God says, "Thus saith the Lord, cursed is the man who
trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arm." What does this mean? Does God
get His feelings hurt and take revenge on those who offend? And aren't we
delivered from the curse?
I think God is simply stating - predicting - what will happen to those
who attack their problems from a fleshly, sight- realm point of view.
Whenever we have a need or problem that requires help from outside
ourselves, we have the choice of operating in the flesh, (the natural,
temporal, visable realm) or in the spirit, (the heavenly, eternal, faith,
kingdom-of-God realm). And God says that viewing the situation and
attacking the problem from a strictly natural standpoint will not bring a
spiritual blessing. It will bring a curse.
What this means in healing is, what is manifest in the flesh (the
body) is merely an outgrowth from, and a symptom of, a spiritual situation,
and it's putting the cart before the horse to deal with the flesh first.
(Or to deal with it ONLY, as some people do.)
Healing from the Inside Out: Sarah's Eyes
Here's an example of this. When my granddaughter Sarah was born there
was a problem with her right eye. It was swollen slightly and there was
some kind of discharge which sealed it shut. We kept cleaning it with warm
water and for a while she would be able to open it, but the oozing and
discharge continued and before long it would be stuck shut again. Because
she was born at home, without medical attendance, there was no input about
it from the system. We prayed for her and waited to hear from God.
It went on almost a month without any improvement. We were considering
 61
having the elders pray for her in church; we needed more than our own
efforts. Then God moved.
As Cynthia, the baby's mother, read the Bible one night, she read in
Psalm 6:7, "My eye is consumed because of grief." WOW! The Lord quickened
this to her as Sarah's problem, and He gave her the companion scriptures in
Psalm 31:9 and Job 17:7. It was certainly possible, considering the
circumstances surrounding their family at the time, for Sarah to be the
victim of an attack by grief. Cynthia prayed once more for Sarah, this time
in warfare against grief. There was an immediate healing; the swelling
left, the draining stopped, the redness went away. She was healed.
And, far more importantly, THERE WAS NO MORE GRIEF! We could possibly
have obtained relief from the physical symptoms by submitting her to the
system, and they might have brought about a healing for her eye, but she
would still have had the grief! By trusting God, by attacking the problem
in the spirit and winning the victory there, we conquered the real problem,
which wasn't a weepy eye but grief.
And now she's the happiest, most joyful person I know. She has
overcome grief and it "hath no more dominion over her"; certainly more
important than merely clearing out the discharge in the eye. If we had
trusted in the flesh, looked at the problem from that point of view and
chosen that route of healing, she would still be cursed by grief to this
day. Even if the eye was healed, she would still have the grief. The system
would never have considered the Bible as a source of diagnosis, nor
spiritual warfare a method of healing!
Healing from the Inside Out: Tanya's Heel
Here is another example. A friend of mine had a very bad problem with
her heel. There was pain, some swelling and she was having severe
difficulty walking. She was told it was a bone spur and it would require
surgery to correct. She chose not to do that and instead waited to hear
from God. When He spoke, it was to impress her to do a word study of the
scriptural passage II Corinthians 10:5, "Casting down imaginations and
every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God." Why?
What does that have to do with a spur in the heel?
But she did it, looking up every word in a concordance and then in a
lexicon, trusting that God would being it all together. "Imaginations"
(computations, reasoning);
"High" (sky, barrier);
"Thing" (that one is "Rhema" and every Spirit-filled Christian
knows what that Greek word means);
"Knowledge" (science); nothing here to relate to the physical
problem.
But what about "Exalt"? Aha! Following that one to its root, she
discovered one of the meanings is "Of the heel, as of one lifting up the
foot before kicking."
So there was something, but it took some more time listening to the
Lord to get full understanding. The problem was: This girl was absolutely
firm and unyielding about marriage, something God told her He might want
for her. Her attitude was, "I don't care what you say, Lord, I won't EVER
get married." Nevertheless not thy will but MINE! Talk about being
unblessable!
Her heel was stubbornly raised against God, and the result of that
 62
rebellion was a bone spur. The treatment she chose, which involved
repentance and aligning herself with God's will, brought an immediate
healing. A healing of the rebellious attitude, the real problem, and of the
bone spur, which was just an outworking of the problem, a symptom.
This demonstrates again that the flesh must obey the spirit and this
is the way to win a victory not only in the natural body, but also in the
spirit realm.
Healing from the Inside Out: Lyn's Infection
One last illustration. I have been involved with a home childbirth
ministry, and there have been lots of examples of divine healing. These
ladies are exposed to all the possible problems and symptoms of pregnancy,
and almost all of them elect to receive healing directly. One case I
remember is significant.
This girl had a bad yeast infection which was giving her a lot of torment.
She prayed for healing and held on until God spoke to her about the cause.
He said to her, "Yeast is a kind of leaven. You get the leaven out of YOUR
house and I will get the leaven out of you. You're MY house."
In Exodus 12:15, when the Lord instituted the passover, He instructed
the Israelites: "Ye shall put away leaven out of your house." They
searched for natural leaven to make their dwellings clean before God. In
our covenant the offense can be either attitudes or physical items whose
influence may start small but, like yeast, can grow and swell and permeate
the whole mass and cause it to change.
In 1 Corinthians 5:7-8, the Lord says: "Purge out therefore the old
leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ
our passover is crucified for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with
old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the
unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."
So she began to search her tent for leaven. God was faithful to show
this girl and her husband what He meant by "leaven in your house." He
revealed the specific items which offended Him. One was a collection of
owls, which the scripture calls unclean birds, one of the creatures which
inhabit land which has been cursed. Also, they are used to symbolize and
exalt a wisdom other than God's wisdom. The home was also full of frogs,
tiny little Zodiac signs and other kinds of "leaven." When they went
through their "tent" and purged it of everything the Lord quickened to them
as offensive, her body was healed of the yeast infection. Without drugs or
any other kind of therapy, she was healed because there had been obedience
and victory in the spirit realm.
A Different Method of Healing
I have a dream of Godly healers who are trained in this type of
thinking instead of the ways of Babylon. Instead of learning the skills of
the Egyptians, of drugs, cutting, and seeing diseases from the world's view
point, let them spend their time searching the word for what GOD says about
the cause and cure of physical problems.
I know some of them. I know grief causes eye problems. I know envy
brings bone disease; relationships which are out of order can produce
arthritis; rebellion and idolatry can result in cancer. And if a person has
gall stones and fails to deal with bitterness, he is still diseased no
matter how much medical or surgical treatment he may receive.
 63
Cholecystitis, cholelithiasis - these conditions are a symptom, a RESULT of
bitterness, and the bitterness is the REAL disease, not the inflamed
gallbladder.
There are scriptures for these and many, many others. But even more
than specifics, what the body of Christ needs is this way of looking at
things. If it is true that our physical manifestations are parallel to, and
result from, what is happening in the spirit, then it's IN THE SPIRIT that
warfare and victory should take place. We are spirit beings, we should be
fighting with spiritual weapons, not carnal ones.
And our source of information and truth, in this as in everything,
should be the Word of God, not the word of the world. We don't usually
believe them. Even in science, which represents their version of truth, we
don't accept the conclusions they draw from facts. Most Christians don't
believe in evolution; we don't align with the increasing use of psychics
and hypnosis by our public institutions; we don't consider "situational
ethics" an adequate substitute for the absolute moral code of God's word;
we don't agree that sexual freedom and lack of restraints will produce
peace, joy and character in our teenagers. In short, when what "they" say
differs from what God says, we usually agree with God. But not here. As a
whole, the Christian body believes that the word of the medical system, and
more importantly, its point of view, are absolutely true.
This system allows man to act independently of God, and when we do
that, we are reduced to natural resources. The natural, carnal mind cannot
receive the things of the spirit, for they are spiritually discerned.
 64

3. PUTS DISEASES ON PEOPLE

God said He will never cause us to be ill (Exodus 15:26), but the
medical system does. I don't just mean the nosocomial infections people get
from being hospitalized, or iatrogenic diseases that result from what's
done to them in the system: I mean a deliberate, purposeful CAUSING of
illness. I'm talking about inoculations.
Inducing Illness in our Children
Why would we allow a doctor to inject our children with pathogens,
deliberately producing illness? Well, we have the same situation here as
with the rest of the medical system; we accept without question their
assertion that it's the proper thing to do. We submit our healthy babies to
deliberately inflicted diseases because we've been told it's good for them.
It's all based on this theory: an injection of very weak pathogens
will cause the body to contract a very mild case of the specific disease
you're being inoculated against; the body will build up a defense against
the disease, and acquire a permanent immunity. Sounds good. Most people
believe this actually happens. The medical system claims that vaccines
are not only effective but also safe; that the benefits outweigh the risks,
and this also is almost unanimously accepted as true. But the "safety"
claim, like the "effectual" claim, doesn't quite live up to its reputation;
there is strong evidence against this tradition belief.
Let me quote Dr. Christopher Deatherage in the January, 1993 edition
of GENTLE SPIRIT MAGAZINE: "The practice of immunization is probably one of
the most fundamental doctrines in Western medical practice. While there
has always been a body of scientists and physicians that have opposed this
practice, within the last twenty years the percentage of those opposed to
immunizations, including parents, physicians,scientisits, etc., has and is
growing markedly... It is my personal opinion that the theory of
immunization is built upon a shaky foundation that is not supported by true
science, and that it is a dangerous practice."
I want to take this subject point by point. I'll start with the fact
that vaccines are toxic compounds, then discuss why vaccinations don't
deserve credit for the decrease in communicable diseases. Next we'll talk
about the evidence that vaccinations OFTEN don't work, don't give a
predictable, permanent acquired immunity. Then I'll explain why
vaccinations are dangerous; they do much more harm than good.
We'll conclude with what God says about preventing illness, and we'll
summarize the legality of refusing vaccinations. Incidently, much of the
following information and statistics are gleaned from the following books:
WHAT ABOUT IMMUNIZATIONS? by Cynthia Couroyer
DON'T GET STUCK by Hannah Allen
IMMUNIZATIONS: THE REALITY BEHIND THE MYTH by Walene James THE CASE
AGAINST IMMUNIZATIONS by Richard Moskowitz, M.D.
HOW TO HAVE A HEALTHY CHILD IN SPITE OF YOUR DOCTOR by
Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.
IMMUNIZATIONS: ARE THEY NECESSARY? by Randall Neustaedter
with Drs. Greg Manteuffel and Dennis Chernin
THE DANGERS OF IMMUNIZATIONS, Humanitarian Publishing VACCINES DO NOT
PROTECT by E. McBean
DPT: A SHOT IN THE DARK, by Harris L. Coulter
 65
CHILDREN AT RISK: THE DPT DILEMMA by Jennifer Hyman
THE IMMUNIZATION DECISION: A GUIDE FOR PARENTS by Randall
Neustaedter.
Vaccines are Toxic Compounds
So, what is a vaccine? Just what is it that's being injected into our
kids?
A vaccine is a culture of a disease-causing bacteria or virus which
has been killed or inactivated and chemically preserved. Another
definition, from Henry M. Shelton in EXPLOITATION OF HUMAN SUFFERING:
"Vaccine is pus, either septic or inert. If it's inert it won't 'take', if
septic it produces infection." (This explains why some children have to go
back for a second inoculation, because the first one didn't "take" - it
wasn't sufficiently poisonous and did not infect the body.)
Mothering Publications IMMUNIZATIONS, SPECIAL EDITION, states "...
manufacturers of vaccines admit they are highly toxic and BY THEIR VERY
NATURE cannot be made safe."
Here are just some of the ingredients found in vaccines. (If these
substances were found in food, they would either be banned or the
manufacturer would be required to use a warning label.)
Phenol - (carbolic acid) a deadly poison
Formaldehyde - a known carcinogen, also used in
embalming fluid
Thimerosal - (a mercury derivative) a toxic heavy
metal, not easily eliminated from the body
Alum - a preservative
Aluminum phosphate - a toxin, used in deodorants
Aluminum and oil adjuvants - known to cause cancer in
laboratory rats
Acetone - a solvent used in fingernail polish remover,
very volatile
Glycerine - a tri-atomic alcohol extracted from natural
fats which are putrefied and decomposed. Some
toxic effects are damage to kidney, liver and lung
tissue, diuresis, local tissue damage, gastrointestinal
damage and death
But we're not through. There is the culture medium to consider. The
infectious organisms are grown in animal tissue: pig or horse blood,
chicken or duck egg protein, dog or monkey kidney tissue, human fetal
tissue or other decomposing proteins.
According to THE DANGERS OF IMMUNIZATIONS, live attenuated viruses used for
vaccines implant foreign, alien material derived from the animal culture
tissue (in which they were grown) into the human genetic system. It is
impossible to separate the antibodies which have developed from the
proteins of the animal tissue which was used as the culture to manufacture
the vaccines. The injected germ proteins hybridize with the body's proteins
to form new tribes: half animal and half human, whose characteristics and
effects cannot be predicted.
Let's examine how smallpox vaccine, an old, reliable (sic),
tried-and-proven inoculation, is made. It's processed within the body of a
cow. A cow is put in stocks, so that she can't move or lick her stomach,
and a portion of her abdominal wall is shaved. Then it is sliced open and
 66
the smallpox virus is introduced into the open wound. The virus multiplies
in her tissue, and a week or so later they come back and put a stainless
steel basin under the cow. They shave off the scabs which have been formed;
they then collect the scabs, the pus and fluid which drip from the
re-opened wound, then they dry it out and it's from this GUNK that the
vaccine is processed. You get the small pox virus, true, but you might also
get anything else the cow is host to.
For example, between 1954 and 1963, an estimated 10 million to 30
million Americans were inadvertently infected with SV [Simian Virus] 40, an
apparently harmless monkey virus borne as a silent passenger by both Salk's
and Sabin's polio vaccines. There are greater safeguards now than were
present at that time, but also there are more deadly viruses now.
Great concern is expressed over whether or not the child is allergic
to the medium in which the pathogen is cultured; for example a child with
an allergy to eggs should not be given vaccines grown in chickhen or duck
egg protein. But they essentially ignore the larger question of the KNOWN
poisons, carcinogens, pathogens and alien proteins within the vaccine.
Why is ANYBODY willing to have this stuff injected into their
children? Well, it manages to masquerade as a safe and beneficial
procedure (like so much within the system, it manages to look mighty good
despite the facts) and it has been given unchallenged credit for decreases
in the incidence in disease.

Vaccines Didn't Conquer All Those Diseases

But Eustace Mullins points out that medical records prove that a 90%
decline in child mortality from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough
and measles had occurred BEFORE the the introduction of immunization or
antibiotics. In fact, there is evidence to demonstrate that vaccines had
little or nothing to do with a decline in disease.
I quote from MURDER BY INJECTION: "Edward Jenner 'discovered' that
cowpox vaccine would supposedly inoculate persons against the eighteenth
century scourge of smallpox. In fact, smallpox was already on the wane, and
some authorities believe it would have vanished by the end of the century
due to a number of contributing factors."
From 1850 to 1940, diseases had declined 90% and were at an all time
low, just when vaccines STARTED to be used. These huge reductions in
disease prior to vaccines are due mainly to improvements in public and
personal hygiene.
During the nineteenth century, epidemics of cholera and typhoid fever
devastated the inhabitants of large American cities, the outbreaks being
due to poor sanitation and pollution of the water supply. Typhoid fever was
largely due to the contamination of city streets by large quantities of
horse droppings, which festered and drew flies. With the chlorination of
water and the advent of the automobile, with the resulting disappearance of
the horse from city streets, typhoid fever vanished.
Polio was also on the decline before vaccines were invented or
widespread. Where vaccines were not so extensively used, as in Europe and
Australia, the disease also declined. For example, the incidence of death
from polio in Great Britain peaked in 1950 and had declined by 82% BEFORE
1956 when the vaccine was first introduced there. The death rate from polio
 67
had declined by 55% in the U.S. before immunizations were introduced here.
Pertussis had been falling steeply for more than seventy years prior
to the vaccine; in America, the death rate from this disease had falled by
82% by 1935 - years before the vaccine.. After the vaccine, mortality rates
continued to fall at about the same rate as before.
There is more current documentation for this. According to WORLD
HEALTH STATISTICS ANNUAL 1973-1976, the rate of decline in infectious
diseases in most developing countries is the same, regardless of the
percentages of vaccines administered.
In addition, diseases for which there was no vaccine also declined
dramatically. It seems there is a natural fluctuation in the incidence of
diseases, and recently there has been an alarming increase in our country
in diseases which we had "conquered" in the past.
And this in a population which is supposedly vaccinated!
Carl Kendall, a medical anthropologist at Johns Hopkins University
says, "We're entering a new era of infectious disease." A drug-resistant
strain of tuberculosis swept through New York State prisons and killed 13
men. Country-wide, doctors are reporting difficulty treating a range of
infections from pneumonia to gonorrhea. The primary weapons against
infectious diseases - inoculation and antibiotics - are failing to halt the
spread.
One growing concern is staphylococcus, a potent bacteria which tends
to breed in hospitals and infect surgical wounds, heart valves and blood.
In some hospitals, half of these bacteria respond to only one antibiotic,
vancomycin, and researchers warn that the infection could become completely
untreatable within the decade. "We've been living in a bubble of time when
our tools worked," Carl Kendall continues. "Unfortunately, the past fifty
years may simply have been a historical anomaly."
So it's possible that the so-called "conquest of disease" which is
usually attributed to vaccinations was really the result of other factors.
Maybe it's because of hygiene, nutrition, sanitation, that sort of thing,
and because of natural cycles. Remember, there was also a decrease in the
incidence of diseases for which there are no inoculations.
Vaccines Fail to Protect
And if it didn't conquer disease globally and historically, can
vaccination conquer disease currently, specifically? Will a vaccination
prevent YOUR child from contracting an infectious disease?
Probably not.
Half of all reported cases of measles and pertussis occur in
vaccinated people. Most whooping cough in America today occurs in
vaccinated children or those too young to be vaccinated. Only 37% of cases
over all occur in unvaccinated children. One in three diphtheria fatalities
occurred in fully vaccinated people; from 1965 to 1980, the same death rate
and the same severity of illness was found among the vaccinated and the
unvaccinated.
In an outbreak of rubella in Wyoming, 73% of those infected had been
fully vaccinated. In Chicago in 1969, a board of health report issued
following an outbreak of diphtheria showed that 37.5% of cases occurred in
fully vaccinated individuals.
Vaccination appears to have actually increased the number of cases of
disease in many countries. In the late 1930's, diphtheria vaccination was
 68
made compulsory in Germany, and the rate soared to 150,000 cases in 1939.
Nearby Norway, totally unvaccinated, had only 50 cases.
When Hungary made vaccination compulsory, the diphtheria rate rose 35%
in two years. When vaccination was enforced in Geneva, the number of cases
tripled in two years. France vaccinated most children in 1941: there were
13,795 cases by the end of that year. Shots were continued and by 1943 the
number of cases had tripled to nearly 47,000.
Military records show that vaccinated soldiers have a four times
higher disease and death rate from this disease than do unvaccinated
civilians.
Dr. William F.Koch, M.D., Ph.D., states, "The injection of any serum,
vaccine, or even penicillin has shown a very marked increase in the
incidence of polio - at least 400%. Statistics on this are so conclusive no
one can deny it."
An analysis of measles in school age children during 1985 and 1986
revealed that a median of 60% of cases occurred in vaccinated individuals.
In one sustained outbreak in Dane County, Wisconsin, it was determined that
over 96% of all cases occurred in children who had previously been
vaccinated against measles.
In 1988, 3,411 cases of measles in the U.S. were reported among
school-aged children; 68.9% of them had been vaccinated.
Polio increased 700% in countries which began compulsory vaccination.
From 1980 through 1985 there were 55 cases of paralytic polio in this
country. Of this number, 51 were caused by the polio vaccine and four
occurred in people returning from third world countries. (The polio virus
is excreted through both stool and urine for up to six weeks following
vaccination.)
Here are some more statistics: the state of Vermont reported 15 cases
of polio during the year ending August 30, 1954. Then there was a massive
immunization program against polio. The following year, ending August 30,
1955, recorded 55 cases - an INCREASE of 266%!
Rhode Island reported 22 cases before the immunization program, and
122 cases after, a 454% increase. In New Hampshire, the figures for polio
cases were 38 before immunization and 129 after, and in Massachusetts the
figures were 273 before and 2027 after, a whopping 642% increase!
When the use of smallpox vaccine was introduced in Europe, some
remarkable things happened. In England the highest number of deaths for any
two year period before its use was 2,000. Two years after compulsory
vaccination, 23,062 people had died of smallpox. In Germany, 124,948 people
died, all vaccinated. In Bavaria, there were 29,000 cases with 3,994 death;
all were vaccinated.
PLAIN TALK magazine tells us, "... during the Franco-Prussian War,
every German soldier was vaccinated. The result was that 53,288 otherwise
healthy men developed smallpox."
The same thing held true in the Pacific. Prior to compulsory
vaccinations in the Philippines, the death rate for patients with smallpox
was 10%; after vaccine laws were enforced, the death rate from smallpox was
75%. In Australia there were no vaccine laws. There were 3 cases of
smallpox in fifteen years. By contrast Japan with compulsory inoculations
had 29,979 deaths from smallpox.
The U.S. Public Health Service reported the statistics for four
states, for the year before and the year after compulsory inoculation for
 69
polio. The record shows 259 cases before inoculation, 874 cases after
inoculation.
Failing to Protect, They Often Damage
In addition to being less than totally effective, vaccines are
dangerous. A statistic from DPT: A SHOT IN THE DARK by Harris L. Coulter
and Barbara Fisher, is a perfect example: "In the case of the pertussis
vaccine, there are AT LEAST one thousand deaths per year from the vaccine
and only ten deaths per year from the naturally occurring disease. The
risks FAR outweigh the benefits."
In 1985, eighty one adults were accidently given DPT. Seventy five had
reactions; hard, painful red lumps on their arms, fever, dizziness, chills,
nausea, pain and suddenly elevated blood pressure. In proportion to body
weight, a ten pound infant receives TEN TO TWENTY TIMES more pertussis
vaccine than these adults did.
Pertussis toxin is highly noxious and scientists often use it to
induce experimental brain damage in laboratory animals. The department of
Health and Human Services estimates that every year in the U.S. about a
HALF MILLION shots of DPT are followed by reactions severe enough to
contraindicate the administration of more pertussis vaccine. One Swedish
study of the effects of DPT inoculations shows a rate of permanent brain
damage or death is one in 17,000 children. Fairly long odds, unless your
child is the ONE.
There is also a connection between DPT shots and SIDS (Sudden Infant
Death Syndrome) or crib death. A study by Dr. William Touch of Nevada
School of Medicine into the SIDS question showed that more than two thirds
of these babies had the DPT vaccine prior to death. Other records show that
32% of vaccinated SIDS infants died within a week of receiving a DPT shot,
and 11% die within 24 hours of the shot.
Let's look at some facts. The Insurance Institute of America states
that because of the number of lawsuits filed as a result of severe
complications following vaccination, more and more pharmaceutical companies
have stopped the production of vaccines. Seven companies used to
manufacture whooping cough vaccine; now only two do. Only one still makes
the vaccine for polio. One for measles. One for hepatitis. The number and
severity of complications from these routine injections is enormous. And
almost completely unpublicized until recently.
There is now a national organization of parents of children who have
been injured or maimed by vaccination. It's called "DPT", Dissatisfied
Parents Together, using the same initials as the
Diphtheria-Pertussis-Typhoid vaccine, the most common "baby shots." (And
the pharmaceutical companies changed the order of those initials for their
vaccine, in order to be different from this group.)
DPT is headed by Jeff Schwartz, an environmental attorney based in
Washington D.C. They are lobbying now for a national no-fault program to
compensate the families of children who suffer permanent damage from any of
the seven routine childhood immunizations: those against polio, measles,
mumps, rubella and the three diseases included in DPT.
Former Senator Paula Hawkins (R.-Fl.) said in support of this
legislation, "Children throughout America risk permanent injury for the
good of our society. It's time to stop trying to assess blame, and time to
stop pretending that the problem will resolve itself."
 70
Doctors Salk and Sabin, developers of the two most common types of
polio vaccine, have each stated in public that the other's vaccine is
dangerous!
A Few Quotes on the Subject:
James R. Shannon of the National Institutes of Health declares: "The
only safe vaccine is a vaccine that is never used."
Dr. Henry R. Bybee of Norfolk, Virginia has publicly stated, "My
honest opinion is that vaccine is the cause of more disease and suffering
than anything I could name. I believe that such diseases as cancer,
syphilis, cold sores, and many other disease conditions are the direct
results of vaccination... The medical profession not only receives its pay
for this service [vaccination], but also makes splendid and prospective
patients for the future."
Dr. Herbert Snow, senior surgeon at the Cancer Hospital of London,
voiced this concern: "In recent years many men and women in the prime of
life have dropped dead suddenly, often after attending a feast or banquet.
I am convinced that some 80% of these deaths are caused by an inoculation
or vaccination they have undergone [in childhood]... The coroner always
calls it 'natural causes'."
This astonishing and thought-provoking statement was made by another
practitioner, Dr. W.B. Clarke of Indiana. "Cancer was practically unknown
until compulsory vaccinations... were introduced. I have had to deal with
hundreds of cancer patients and I never saw a case of cancer in an
unvaccinated person."
"The vaccination practice... has not only become the chief menace and
the greatest danger to the health of the rising generation, but likewise
the crowning outrage upon the personal liberties of the American citizen."
So says Dr. J.M. Peebles in his book about vaccination.
At a seminar of the American Cancer Society Science Writers, Dr.
Robert W. Simpson of Rutgers University, warned that "...immunization
programs against flu, measles, mumps and polio may actually be seeding
humans with RNA to form proviruses which will become latent cells
throughout the body... they can then become activated as a variety of
diseases including lupus, cancer, rheumatism and arthritis."
Jonas Salk warned in SCIENCE magazine of March 4, 1977: "Live virus
vaccine against influenza or poliomyelitis may in each instance produce the
disease it was intended to prevent... the live virus against measles and
mumps may produce such side effects as encephalitis."
Dr. Leonard Scheele, former Surgeon General of the United States,
states, "No batch of vaccine can be proved safe before it is given to
children."
In 1980, scientific researcher Thomas Morgan wrote, "During the past
five years, we have collected from newspapers over 500 cases of injury or
death from vaccination. The victims died of hepatitis, post-vaccinal
encephalitis, convulsions, tetanus, erysipelas, meningitis and others."
Adverse Reactions
There is a strong possibility that such reactions are more common than
has been publicized.
Although much is NOT known about the sequelae from inoculations, it is
recognized that there is a pattern - a sequence - in the way reactions and
 71
complications occur. That is to say, if there is going to be some sort of
aftermath, it will probably follow this timing. If it begins,
1. Paralysis usually begins within 24 hours to six
months after the injection
2. Cancer usually begins on or near the injection site
sometime within three years
3. Brain damage or blindness usually has onset within
four years
4. Heart disease usually begins within 10 years
5. TB usually begins within 20 years
Since the compulsory vaccination of children, cancer has increased to
such frightening proportions that it has now become the number one killer
of children under 15 years of age. Heart disease is the number one killer
of adults; TB is on the rise; mental disease is at an all time high and
physicians tell us they don't know the cause of all this. Could it be
connected to immunizations?
WHAT ABOUT IMMUNIZATIONS? claims, "Artificial immunization has
essentially traded off the acute, epidemic diseases of the past century for
the weaker, far less curable epidemic of the chronic diseases of the
present. If immune systems are being compromised by vaccines to such an
extent that people cannot resist or overcome chronic diseases such as
cancer and a myriad of other disabling and fatal conditions so rampant in
our society, we may WISH we had the acute illnesses instead. Many of them
are treatable and death rates are lower than all chronic diseases."
London Cancer Hospital's Dr. Herbert Snow had this to say in the same
vein: "The long-term effects of vaccine, lodging in the heart or other
parts of the body, will eventually result in damage to the heart. Vaccine
becomes a time bomb in the system, festering as what is known as 'slow
viruses'."
An AIDS Connection?
It is also quite likely, and a growing number of scientific mavins
appear to hold the opinion, that the HIV was first introduced into the
human race by way of vaccinations, probably hepatitis or smallpox vaccine.
It's far too involved and complicated a subject to discuss in this book,
but this point of view about the origin of the AIDS epidemic is NOT a
lunatic-fringe, off-the-wall stance. It is scientifically valid and many
statistical studies support it. Actually, when you really investigate
what's being revealed world wide, this opinion requires a far shorter leap
of faith than either the Green Monkey theory or the genocide theory.

What God Says About It

At the very least, an understanding of just exactly what is involved
in producing and administering these inoculations will lead you to doubt
their safety and their promised benefits. And God says, "I won't put
diseases on you". So is it really likely that He approves of our going to a
physician and saying, "Oh, doctor, please put a bunch of diseases on my
child! It will keep him safe!"?
Especially when God has said over and over that HE will keep us safe!
Wasn't what He said true?
 72
I find it simply incredible that so many Christian parents think that
GOD wants them to have this biological pot pourri injected into their
children! Exodus 15:23 says, "...I will put none of these diseases upon
thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians, for I am the Lord that
healeth thee." If the medical system is designed by God as His channel of
healing, why does it routinely PUT DISEASES ON, when He said He wouldn't do
it? And why do God's people routinely submit their babies to a dangerous
and ungodly practice?
It all stems from a mind set that denies "I Am the Lord that healeth
thee," and uses the arm of flesh to raise up a protection against disease.
God, who made our bodies and sustains them by the word of His power, has
made ample provision for our healing and our health. Inoculations are
logical only if we don't believe this. (Remember, we can't say that
inoculations are His provision; He said He wouldn't put diseases on us.)
He gave us Jesus as Healer; He gave us an immune system for defense.
The Immune System
Over half of what is known about the immune system has been learned in
the past twenty years; it is a highly complex - and highly efficient -
arrangement. It would take too much time to go into detail here; suffice it
to say that contrary to aiding and augmenting the immune system,
vaccinations will by-pass its first line of defense by being injected
directly into the tissue, and secondly vaccinations deplete and suppress
the body's immune system. Instead of producing a genuine immunity, the
vaccine interferes with the immune response, suppressing it in the same way
that radiation, chemotherapy and corticosteroids and other anti-
inflammatory drugs do.
A matter as simple as breast feeding your baby is a great step toward
providing support for his God-given, effective immune system. Another
positive step is avoiding the use of antibiotics so that he can reap the
benefits of the routine cycle of attack, defense and victory over disease
germs which takes place repeatedly, especially in childhood.
And I don't think it's a coincidence that a devastating curse, AIDS,
has now come on the immune system. His first promise as our Jehovah was "I
will put no diseases on YOU, which I have brought upon the Egyptians"
(Exodus 15:26), but most of us have rushed into Egypt to receive what THEY
do in an attempt to prevent disease. If we scorn God's provision, if we
raise up our own, human, "strong tower" of defense, if we disbelieve His
word about His protection against the diseases of Egypt, then it's not
surprising that He is beginning to remove this provision. This glorious
immune system which the human race, as a whole, has considered so
inadequate, is being destroyed. We didn't value it and now we're beginning
to lose it.
There is no safety in Egypt. Christians who do things like refuse
inoculations, deliver babies at home, and wait for a LONG time - forever,
if necessary - to obtain healing directly from God, aren't doing something
wildly fanatical and dangerous. These people are the very safest ones! And
they do these things because of CONVICTION, not caprice; convictions which
are based in REALITY, not fanaticism.
It's NOT Compulsory - Yet
One final word on this subject: contrary to popular opinion,
 73
vaccinations are NOT unequivocally mandated by law; almost all states (all
except Mississippi and West Virginia) will exempt a child if the parents
object on grounds of religious conviction. Nor are immunizations required
for admission to public or private schools. There are forms for parents to
sign, available from the health department, which offer several reasons for
exemption from this law, religious conviction being only one.
The highest health authorities in the country, (the Department of
Health, Education and Welfare (now the Department of Health and Human
Services), the Centers for Disease Control, and the United States Public
Health Service), joined in 1977 to rule that THERE IS NO COMPULSORY
VACCINATION IN THIS COUNTRY, and that the final decision is left to the
parents.
In their official PARENTS' GUIDE TO CHILDHOOD IMMUNIZATIONS, it states
on page 5, "The decision to have your children vaccinated is yours, alone,
to make."
Likewise, vaccinations are not required for foreign travel. Indeed.
you may travel anywhere you like in the world without vaccines. The World
Health Organization grants American travelers the right to refuse
vaccination when traveling internationally. (One of the reasons for this
is: so many countries do NOT have compulsory vaccinations.)
 74

4. It FOSTERS DOUBLE-MINDEDNESS
There are many things which hinder receiving from God, receiving grace
or answers to prayer: unforgiveness, doubt, not knowing God's will, sin,
asking in the wrong spirit, impatience - there are many other ways we can
frustrate the grace of God and limit His ability to bless us. And one of
these is a double mind.
James 1:6-8 says, "But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he
that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
For let not that man think that he shall receive anything of the Lord. A
double-minded man is unstable in all his ways."
The opposite is the single eye, the single heart, and the service to a
single master. In Matthew 6:24, Jesus says, "No man can serve two masters:
for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold
to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and Mammon."
Jesus is speaking here of our decision about who is the god of
provision; is it Jehovah Jireh or is it Mammon? We must choose who is
really Lord over that area. Where is our faith? In whom do we trust?
Does a financial need bring forth prayer and faith in God, or a trip to the
loan company? This principle is true for other false gods as well as
Mammon. In every area we must decide who is really Lord, Jesus or the
system.
Is Faith Augmented by Mixing it with Flesh?
The deception here is that merging and mixing the world with the
kingdom will make the kingdom BETTER! This implies that Jesus is a stronger
and more dependable source of healing when He has man's system to work
through. Despite its dangers, its sinful nature and its ungodly practices,
its protocols are added to the promises of God in the misguided assumption
that God wants to use this system; that NOT using it is somehow
presumption, is tempting God, is increasing our risk. That is the position
of almost every American Christian.
Yet our God strongly and repeatedly forbid mixture. He consistently
denies us a third choice: we're either saved or lost. We're either
gathering or scattering. We are male or female: despite modern thinking,
only these two choices are permissible. He prefers either hot or cold,
despises lukewarm. Actually it's the enemy who advocates the joining of
opposites; we see Satan's stamp on everything from the yang and yin of the
Orient to such mingled beings as centaurs, mermaids and fauns.
Some Christians feel safe in trusting God for the EASY things - small
cuts, uncomplicated births, mild respiratory infections. But if it's a big
cut, or a high-risk pregnancy, or if there's fever and vomiting with our
URI, then of course it's too hard for God and we need a man.
But God says He heals; either that is true or He is a liar. If we
allow that latter option, then how can we trust Him for anything else? And
if what He says is true, then we must act like it is. We must allow Him to
heal, and to do it in His own way.
And once there is a firm decision that Jesus is Lord of the realm of
healing and health, that He is Jehovah Rapha and that if He doesn't heal us
we won't be healed, then we are single-minded, and according to the Bible,
in a position to receive from God.
John Lake was a Spirit-filled preacher in the early part of this
 75
century and the Lord used him mightily in healing. He had an outlook on
this subject that is a little different from the modern-day teaching about
receiving divine healing. He advocated our receiving Jesus as Healer once
and for all, by faith, in the same way we receive Him as Savior. Jesus said
He was Healer; we come before Him and accept Him in that capacity, and from
that point on we allow Him to be Sovereign Lord in the area of our bodily
health.
Our bodies are His, after all; bought with a price and no longer our
own. They are the temple of His Spirit. He created our bodies and he will
eventually transform and glorify them. Now, in this present life, can He
not maintain them in health and restore them if we fall ill? It is true
that, "Unless the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh in vain." (Psalm
127:1) If the Lord doesn't do it won't get done. Unless the Lord heals me,
I just won't get healed.
A total commitment to Jesus as Healer makes it so much EASIER. It
makes Him indisputably Lord of your health. The whole subject of healing is
changed, far less turmoil, less of a struggle. You don't have to fight the
battle from the ground up about how to handle it, where to go. You have
made a once-and-for-all-time decision to trust God.
Presumption? A dangerous stand? Hardly. And while it may offend many
people, it doesn't bother God one bit. Jesus never rebuked people for
trusting Him, and while the Bible is FULL of His anger, hurt and
disappointment with "Ye of little faith", there is little said in reproach
to those who simply believed His word.
The total commitment, the refusal to accept compromise or mixture, is
the very thing that releases His power. It's what mobilizes Him. It's
called faith.
"I am the Lord that healeth thee." Period.
 76

5. IT SUPPORTS ANTI-CHRISTIAN ACTIVITIES &

PHILOSOPHIES
If Jesus Christ is Lord of the medical system, then why does it
endorse, support and sustain anti-God philosophies and activities? Why are
the decisions about right and wrong made by so-called "Ethicists" rather
than by consulting the word of God?
Ethics Replace God's Principles
"Ethics" is the branch of human philosophy that deals with right and
wrong. It's a growing part of the medical system. An article in the Wall
Street Journal in March, 1987, describes the role of a medical ethicist as,
"... to counsel, educate and advise doctors, nurses and other health
professionals on the ethical dilemmas they face..."
One ethicist, Dr. Charles Culver of Dartmouth Medical school, says,
"The medical world has become so complex, it's changing so fast, that it's
useful to have people who have some well-defined concepts and who keep up
with the literature and court decisions - people doctors can call up and
say, 'what's the current thinking on this?'" Talk about walking in the
counsel of the ungodly! Do we Christians really want to trust the
"well-defined concepts" and "current thinking" of people who don't know our
Lord?
Ethics is what you have to use if you've thrown out what God says. But
we have the Word of God; it tells us all we need to know about
righteousness. We don't need to hear what unsaved men think, and what folly
it is to base life or death decisions on such vanity!
Evil Increases
There is great evil loosed in the field of health care. In 1973 the
World Health Organization recognized witch doctors, and allowed them
membership as health care providers. (It's acceptable now to believe in the
supernatural, as long as it's scientific and not religious.)
What began as organ transplants is evolving into organ harvesting.
Now two Indiana University professors are advocating keeping brain-dead
patients on life support for up to ten years, to keep their organs fresh
and available for harvest. These men, Professor Harold Shane and Dr. Walter
Daly, refer to these bodies as the undead or neomorts, and they recommend
the creation of special facilities where these bodies could be warehoused.
And the next stage is the fabricating of human parts from living human
cells. (Shades of Dr. Frankenstein!) At least three different companies are
already at work on this; Organogenesis Inc, and BioSurface Technology, both
of Cambridge, Massachusetts and Clonetics Corporation in San Diego.
In November, 1988, doctors at the University of Colorado Health
Sciences Center implanted brain cells taken from an aborted fetus into the
brain of Donald Nelson, a Parkinson's disease sufferer. He noticed a
decrease in his symptoms, and the so-called success of this procedure has
increased the controversy surrounding the use of fetal tissue. Most
experimentation on fetal tissue was prohibited until 1993, but President
Clinton removed the ban in one of his first official acts. (And he loosed a
lot more than human researchers with this decree; he opened the door for
even more evil spirits to enter the field of medicine!) How it will end
is unknown. The Biomedical Ethics Board, whose purpose is to advise
 77
Congress on such questions, was authorized by congress in 1985, but it's
still non-functioning due to continuing battles over appointments.
Don't you wonder why ANYBODY needs advice from an "expert" about what
to do with the body of a murdered baby? Is there any possibility that what
the Lord wants is for part of it to be
inserted into - and made a part of - someone else's living body?
Medical Abortions are NOT New
In our country today, this system supports abortion on demand, and
when the final word is said, the ones who have killed all those babies are
doctors of medicine. And they didn't wait till "Roe vs. Wade" in 1973,
either!
In 1958, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
estimated that 84% to 87% of illegal abortions were performed by what they
called "reputable physicians." In 1960, the estimate has risen to 90%.
These are "reputable" men, performing abortions which were then ILLEGAL.
Of course many doctors don't perform abortions, but we're talking
about the system itself and where it stands in relationship to God. And in
this case, it stands opposed to Him.
Death is the Answer
The system uses death as answers to social problems and this attitude
(held not by the medical system alone but also by the courts and other
institutions, as well as by many individuals) has pervaded our society with
the spirit of death. We see it not only in child death in all its various
manifestations - abortion, child abuse, teenage suicide, anorexia, incest,
kidnapping, caesarean section - but now in euthanasia. And in the body of
Christ we see an increase of other manifestations of the spirit of death -
the spirits of apathy and of sacrifice.
The Paganizing of Society
Francis Schaeffer and Edward Koop in their book WHATEVER HAPPENED TO
THE HUMAN RACE? speak of the process of paganizing which is taking place in
all our institutions. They say the hallmark of a system's complete
paganization is seen when that system's original purpose has been totally
perverted, turned around 180 degrees to its complete opposite. So when the
legal system, which had as its original goal the maintaining of justice,
becomes instead a means of upholding the rights of criminals to the
detriment of the law-abiding segment of society, that system is becoming
paganized.
And when the medical system, which had as its original goal the
maintenance of life and health, becomes the purveyor of death, then its
mask of sanctity is slipping.
In evil and depraved societies, the system becomes more and more
depraved, because it is NOT upheld and sustained by the power and anointing
of God. The system is of MAN, and when man lives independently, not subject
to God and God's laws, he becomes utterly depraved - and so do his systems.
On the other hand, these same conditions cause the Church - the TRUE church
- to grow purer and stronger.
In Nazi Germany the medical system performed unspeakable atrocities
(called "research" or "experimentation") upon prisoners of the state.
Maiming, sterilizing, surgery without anesthesia; we've all heard the
 78
horror stories and we all deplore them. More recently, in what used to be
the Soviet Union, doctors of medicine in hospitals "reconditioned"
prisoners with drugs, mind control and subtle torture, used as weapons in
an ideological war by the KGB and the GRU.
And now even more horror stories. Thirty six people were arrested in
Argentina in 1991 following the investigation of a mental hospital where
organs were taken and sold. Amid charges of murder, abuse, starvation and
rape, the director was accused of removing patients' eyes and replacing
them with glass balls. In a fifteen year period, 1321 patients died and
nearly 1400 disappeared.
According to the Bible, there is no such thing as human goodness.
"There is none good save God." Without His lordship, evil reigns.
I could talk about genetic engineering, test tube babies, surrogate
motherhood, animal organs implanted inhuman bodies, artificial
insemination: the list of medicine's giant strides into new and ever more
esoteric realms of knowledge and attainment is almost without limit. They
are truly counterfeiting godhood! I mention these situations only as
another indication that this system is not of God; it is not designed by
Him, not anointed by Him and not under His lordship. It is not a system by
which He brings into this world His virtue and His glory and His
righteousness.
If the medical system can still maintain a facade of virtue and
beneficence in American society, I suggest it is like a willful and
unregenerate man who may appear kindly and inoffensive merely because he is
not being crossed. Even the most selfish person can be pleasant when he is
having his own way. But thwart the will of this man and he may become a
raging beast. And those of us who have related to the system AS AN
ADVERSARY can testify that like an unregenerate man, it has a will, it
hates opposition and it wants to control.
 79

6. IT CONTROLS CHILDBIRTH
American Obstetrical Care Is Not Safe
"Life and Death: Problem of High Infant Mortality is a Persistent
Blemish on Health Care in the U.S." This was a headline in the Wall Street
Journal in October, 1988. Why is this true?
I have worked Labor and Delivery in hospitals and I worked several
years in an obstetrician's office. I had five children, and I have been
present at many hundreds of home births. Add to that a twenty-year study of
the spiritual significance of childbirth (of how the natural process is a
parable and an example of spiritual activity) and frequent, gracious input
from God on the subject, and I feel justified in saying that I could be
something of a resource person in this area.
And if I'm experienced in how THEY do it and also how WE do it, guess
which way I think is best? That's easy - I think God's way is better than
man's way. But did you know that statistics, logic and scripture all agree
with me? And increasingly, the medical system itself agrees with me! Let
me explain.
Childbirth Should Not Be Dangerous
In considering the idea of home childbirth, most people have to
overcome two different misconceptions, two traditional ideas which are just
plain WRONG. The first is that childbirth is dangerous, a major
physiological crisis, requiring a great deal of medical intervention. This
is just not true. Childbirth is a perfectly natural phenomenon; a normal,
beautiful, complex and efficient process which does NOT involve a state of
illness. It's not dangerous; it's not an illness. God designed it and
therefore it's PERFECT. It works!
Childbirth is a marvelous thing! In it we share a creative act with
God, and we see eternity touch time as a new yet everlasting creature is
brought through the veil of flesh into the here and now. It has incredible
significance and is one of God's most important teaching tools.
Childbirth Is Not Better in a Hospital
The second wrong idea most people hold is that it is better, safer,
easier and somehow NORMAL to have a baby in a hospital. This is also untrue
and I'd really like to see somebody take the opposite point of view and
defend the position that one SHOULD go to a hospital. In spite of the way
those in the system make positive, authoritative statements about the
benefits of hospital birth, they would be hard pressed to prove their
point.
In addition to the very poor statistical record, there's all that
stuff they do to you! Much of what is routine to childbirth in American
hospitals is either pointless or actually damaging in most cases, states
Diana Korte in A GOOD BIRTH, A SAFE BIRTH. The perineal shave, the enema.
routine IV fluids, fetal monitoring, chemical enhancement of labor, bed
rest, amniotomy (rupturing membranes to "break the water"), episiotomy, and
delivery in the lithotomy position are now being questioned as to their
value.
The Oxford Study
 80
A research team at Oxford University in England has recently presented
what is perhaps the most careful and systematic study on childbirth ever
done. For ten years this group, led by Dr. Murray Enkin, professor emeritus
of obstetrics at Canada's McMaster University in Ontario, focused on
studies of childbearing done from 1950 to the present which were published
in 60 major scientific journals. They corresponded with the authors of
these articles; in addition they interviewed 18,000 obstetricians to obtain
unpublished data.
The results were remarkable. Their research revealed that "... much of
what our doctors and hospitals do for pregnancy and birth is wrong,
expensive and dangerous... (they) routinely employ methods of care that not
only offer little benefit to mother or infant but actually can be dangerous
to them."
They evaluated 285 procedures and policies of care and only 100 of
them were rated as successful and safe. Sixty were rated as dangerous, and
should be abandoned; 88 had unknown effect; 37 were possibly effective.
Among those procedures found UNSAFE were:
Putting healthy newborns in nurseries (Tends to
increase infections)
Separating mother and baby (Interferes with breast
feeding and increases risk of child abuse and neglect
later)
Preforming episiotomies (Causes increased bleeding,
infection, tearing)
Using forceps (Damages both baby and mother)
Positioning mother on her back with legs in stirrups
(Adversely affects labor by interfering with blood
supply of both mother and baby)
The project labelled as "False" all five of the following statements:
1) A medical doctor must supervise the entire pregnancy
and delivery in case something goes wrong.
2) It is really much safer to have a baby in a
hospital, using the latest equipment and know-how.
3) Hospital nurseries protect newborns from germs.
4) Episiotomy eases birth and suturing the cut
afterwards prevents pain and infection.
5) Once you've had a Cesarean, all later births must
be Caesarean.
Dr. Marc Keirse of Oxford sums up the results: "Hospitals are
dangerous for both mother and baby. Having a doctor involved in ALL
pregnancies can be a bad thing. You get more technology, more hospital
infections, more unhappy mothers and more cost."
"It comes down to whether you consider pregnancy and birth
pathological (disease) or physiological (normal) events." Dr. Keirse
continues. "As soon as a doctor shows his face, everything turns toward
disease."

Quotes From the Experts

Dr. Don Creevy, professor of obstetrics at Sanford University School
of Medicine, says, "Many procedures that doctors use... are performed
because they are the force of habit, tradition. That's the way it's always
 81
been done". They're more a matter of hospital routine and policy than
prudent medicine.
Perri Klass, a Harvard medical student writing of her pregnancy for
the New York Times Magazine, says, "I came away from the course [in
obstetrics] with a sense that pregnancy is a deeply dangerous medical
condition, that one walks a fine line, avoiding one serious problem after
another, to reach the statistically unlikely outcome of a healthy baby and
healthy mother." She adds that the lectures were centered on abnormalities
and labor emergencies. There was no mention of the emotional aspects of
pregnancy. This summarizes how American doctors are trained in the field of
obstetrics.
Obstetrical Statistics
The United States ranks only #22 in the world in maternal and neonatal
safety, so there are 21 countries where it is safer to have a baby than our
country. We rank below every other developed nation. The safest place is
Holland, and there a large percentage of babies are born at home.
Worldwide, only two out of ten attended births are handled by doctors. The
rest are attended by midwives.
There are really lots of places where it is safer to have a baby than
the standard, traditional, normal, expected American hospital. Jamaica is
safer than a hospital in Washington D.C. Actually, an American taxi cab is
safer!
Allow me to quote some statistics.
The U.S. has 9.7 deaths per 1000 births
Japan has 4.4 deaths per 1000 births
Sweden has 5.7 deaths per 1000 births
Hospital born babies are six times more
likely to suffer distress during labor
Hospital born babies are eight times more likely
to need resuscitation
Hospital born babies are four times more likely to
become infected
Hospital born babies are thirty times more likely
to suffer permanent injury
Their mothers are three times more likely to
hemorrhage
That's right, the high risk is in the hospital!
In most countries, normal births are handled by midwives, and only
those with serious, risky complications are admitted to a hospital. Even in
our very "medicalized" country, home births are on the increase and the
armed forces are now favoring midwives for normal deliveries.
Childbirth is a Spiritual Activity
Up to now, we've been talking about the natural realm only, not even
considering the Lord! If you add to these statistics the dimension of
having at your side the very One who created the baby ( and who created
YOU), the One who said, "I am the Lord that healeth thee - I will perfect
what concerneth thee - I cause the hinds to calve - is there anything too
hard for God? - With God all things are possible - Come to me all ye that
travail and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest - I gently lead those
who are with young - whatsoever ye ask in my name I will do..." well,
 82
you've really got hold of something.
Statistics prove home birth is easier, safer, cheaper and far more
satisfying emotionally than hospital birth. And if it's easier and safer,
why do women pay that enormous sum to subject themselves to hospital
control and to routines and procedures which do little or nothing to help
them or their babies?
The answer, of course, is: it's what they're expected to do. And most
of them don't realize they have a choice.

Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:

Authority
Let's contrast hospital and home birth - or more accurately, system
and kingdom birth. The first and most important difference concerns who is
in control. In a hospital the doctor is the final authority and at home of
course it's the husband. The doctor has his years of professional education
and experience; the husband has his position as priest of the home and as
the one person most accountable in God's eyes for stewardship over the
baby.
The making of decisions and wielding of authority will ultimately rest
with one of these two. One of the clearest words I've heard regarding this
question was given to a young man of my acquaintance as he signed the
release and consent for treatment forms to admit his wife to a hospital.
The Lord told him, "You have just signed away your priesthood".
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
Pain
A second difference involves the whole question of comfort during
labor. Research conducted at the UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles
determined that labor speeds up more effectively when the mother stands or
sits. The freedom to move around, to assume the position of greatest
comfort, to be surrounded by family and friends who are loving and
supportive, to eat and drink as your body dictates, and to avoid procedures
that are embarrassing, painful, defiling and frequently pointless: all
these things make home birth clearly preferable to the greater
regimentation of hospitals. One girl summarized the difference this way,
"Hospital birth is something that happens to you. Home birth is something
you do."
If you are moving into faith for a painless childbirth, assigning
childbirth pain to the curse of Genesis 3 and not applicable to Christian
women who walk in the victory of Galatians 3, the chances for success are
greatly heightened by being at home. In the presence of the spirit of God,
with prayer and praise and total confidence in the Lord, then the door is
open for God to move far more freely than in the system. I have seen a lot
of childbirth, and most of it pretty painful - at least involving a great
deal of travail and effort - but I have also seen childbirth totally
without pain, and of course these births were at home.
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
God's Presence
Then there's the question of the glory and presence of God. I know
 83
that God is always with His children. He will never leave or forsake us,
and in Psalm 139, David spends several verses saying how impossible it is
to get away from God even if we're trying. But our awareness of His
presence can vary, and the anointing of His spirit and the amount of
control He has are different in different circumstances. In a home birth
which has been dedicated to Him, which is done through faith in Him, which
has been surrendered to His control, He is free to be a far greater factor
than in a situation where the decisions and control rest with the system.
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
Infection
Another difference is in the realm of infection. Infections are caused
by germs of some kind, some pathogenic organism which invades the body. As
we mentioned before, hospitals are full of germs; it's where all the sick
people go! The system tries to make the process of birthing a baby a
sterile procedure, but even so there is a risk of infection. At home, the
baby will only encounter germs resident there: familiar, family germs, and
no congregation of people with pneumonia, hepatitis, strept throat and such
are under the same roof. Only if we consider hospitals cleaner than homes
would it be logical to worry more about infection at home, and statistics
support the greater safety within your own dwelling.
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
Drugs
There are no drugs at home, and to me that is an very important
difference. Of course, hospitals have what they call natural childbirth,
and there may be no analgesics or sedatives given, but other drugs will be:
some are required by law for hospital births. And keeping a child free of
drugs should be of PARAMOUNT importance to parents today in our society.
Children born in America at this time WILL face a battle with the spirit of
sorcery - Pharmakia - and those who have never had drugs introduced into
their bodies will find it easier to walk in victory. It's FAR more
difficult to "just say no" if your parents have already said "yes" for you.
A lot of women want to be drugged. They say, "I don't want to feel
anything. Just put me to sleep and wake me up after it's all over." But
what a shame! In the first place, they are missing what can be a glorious
experience, and also they are ignoring the fact that the spirit never
sleeps and whatever happens to them WILL have its effect, even if the
conscious mind is drugged or anesthetized.
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
Attendants
Another difference is: the personnel. Things are easier at home
because of the emotional support the mother receives from her family and
friends. Surrounded by those who love her, she isn't lonely or frightened
and she is in control of things. One of the most delightful parts of a home
birth is the unity and fellowship in the spirit among the people present.
The decision about whom to invite is always a weighty one to home birth
couples, and made after prayer and input from the Holy Spirit. In
hospitals, it can be like the toss of a coin; some hospital employees are
kindly, dedicated, capable and caring. Some are not. Sometimes their
motives involve helping people, altruism, even service to God, but I can
 84
tell you from experience, there were times when the only reason this
particular nurse went to work was to earn a salary, and the needs of the
patients were WAY down on my list of priorities. It makes such a difference
when those present are there because they have been summoned by God.

Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:

Ambience
The environment that greets the baby is better at home. It's softer,
warmer, not so harshly lighted. The first sounds he hears are songs of
praise and worship to God, and there is NO separation of family. We don't
have Mama in the recovery room, Daddy in a waiting room, and baby in the
nursery. The aunts and grandmothers can be there to hug and coo and
probably cry. I heard it put very neatly one time; the baby was born and
one of those present said, "Welcome to the world, son!" Somebody else
corrected: "No, welcome to the Kingdom!"
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
Ceasarean Section
The danger of Caesarean Section is avoided by a home birth. I know a
little bit about this subject, again from both sides. Four of my children
were born by Caesarean; for four years I worked as first assistant to a
surgeon who did a number of these procedures; and I also have heard a lot
from God about it. And I am absolutely convinced that it is an abomination
to God and a serious spiritual attack on our children.
Tradition says the first baby born by this method - a surgical
incision through the mother's abdomen - was Julius Caesar, and it takes its
name from his. Caesar was quite an individual. He ruled the Roman Empire
single-handed, and defeated every enemy that rose against him - military,
political or spiritual. He was gifted with words and was a skillful writer.
He was married but he had a torrid affair with the queen of Egypt (that
sounds mighty symbolic to me) but he was also reputed to be bi-sexual.
After his triumphs at war and government, his person was declared to
be sacred, even divine, and each year the citizens of Rome burned a pinch
of incense as worship to Caesar, the god. He ruled only four years, but his
reign established his family in line for political power for generations,
and his name is still used in many languages to indicate a despot, a
monarch - like "Kaiser" in German and the Russian "Czars". He died of
knife wounds at the hands of assassins. (How's that for symbolism? Born by
the knife, died by the knife.)
I got my first indication of Caesar's connection with childbirth while
in New York City, where a friend and I had gone to talk to ladies who were
establishing home birth in their local body. They reported that most of
their opposition came from women who had Caesarean deliveries. My friend
said, "Like a spirit of Caesar or something."
Then it started opening up; the nature of Caesar and his role which
represents the skill, strength and authority of MAN; the scripture in
Matthew 22:21 "Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's;
and unto God the things that are God's." And the fact that what determined
whether or not it belonged to Caesar was "Whose image and superscription
are on it?" If we, and our babies, are to be conformed to the image of
 85
CHRIST, not of Caesar, then they must not be "rendered" to Caesar.
"Render" is Strong's #591 and it means "To give away, give up, give
over, DELIVER" (emphasis mine), and it is formed by two other words
(Strong's #575 and # 1325) which mean "separation, departure" and "bring
forth, deliver". We do this to Christ, not Caesar.
"Caesar" is the name of the Strong Man, the Satanic high prince over
the organizations and sphere of humanism. In the kingdom of humanism, man
sits on the throne, and is both the center and ruler of all things. He has
no need for God, he IS god. And he can do anything, even bring forth a
baby, all by himself, without calling on God. Actually, he can improve on
God! And how 85D Section falls in line with this philosophy!
I've heard girls praise Caesarean Sections; they say it's easier, no
need for labor, and you can pick the date and plan ahead; they seem to
consider it an improvement. But what a perversion! True there may be no
labor, but the pain of a surgical incision is far worse. And, yes, you can
pick the birth date for your child. But God already has a date picked and
His way and His timing are ALWAYS perfect. "...there is a time to be
born..." (Ecclesiastes 3:2).
It ISN'T better. It ISN'T easier. It's a major operation, it sheds a
lot of blood, and makes birth more traumatic and risky for both mother and
baby. It circumvents the timing and purposes of God by imposing human will,
and it leaves permanent scars - and not just the physical ones. There are
spiritual scars. It is a violation, a defilement and a mutilation of the
entire person.
One of my daughters can trace a life-long problem with fear of man and
fear of knives to her birth experience. Her father was out of the picture,
off in some waiting room and not there to support or protect or be a
conduit of God's power on her behalf. I, her mother, was lying strapped to
a table, drugged. Her first contacts with the world were masked men with
knives, reaching out to drag her from the warmth and protection she had
known into the cold, harsh light of an operating room. No welcome of mama
and daddy speaking soft words in familiar voices, no gentle comfort. Only
cutting and grabbing and the soul of MAN in charge. Her spirit was aware of
all these things, of course, and her being felt their effects for over 25
years.
I know this can sound very far out and radical, but there is a spirit
of Caesar abroad in our society. And it is typified by despotic, humanistic
man ruling without the Spirit or wisdom of God. This way of looking at
things is not common, but it's valid and it gives a far greater perception
of REALITY than assuming that the seen, temporal, common sense world is all
there is.
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
Unclean Hands
Another danger home birth avoids is "the laying on of hands" which are
contaminated.
The Lord showed me this parable, and it's as compelling a reason as
any I know for having babies outside the system. There was once a condition
known as Childbed Fever. It was prevalent back when women first switched
from midwives to doctors for delivery. Those doctors didn't yet know about
handwashing to prevent the spread of infection and they'd go from tending
sick people or from performing an autopsy right into the delivery room,
 86
without washing their hands. The death rate from the resulting
contamination was horrible, as high as fifty percent in some places.
A few doctors were beginning to believe the theory that germs cause
disease, but most of the profession laughed at the idea of a little bitty
organism, which couldn't even be seen, which was said to cause infection.
Men like Semmelwiess and Lister, who advocated the idea of hand washing,
were ridiculed for their beliefs. But once handwashing became an accepted
practice, the infection rate went down and Childbed Fever diminished.
Well, the Lord showed me that this was a NATURAL phenomenon - an
infection spread by contaminated hands - hands which hadn't been properly
cleansed. And now we're seeing the same thing in the SPIRITUAL realm. There
can be an unclean spiritual substance on uncleansed hands. Since 1973, the
profession of medicine has endorsed death and over 30,000,000 babies have
died at their hands. The killing of these innocents leaves a spiritual
contamination on the hands of these certain doctors; they go directly from
performing abortions to delivering babies without a spiritual cleansing of
their hands. There is an unseen agent attached to the hands of a man who
does abortions. Like germs, it is not discernable to the natural eye, but
it is nevertheless real and the danger is real. There is something imparted
by the laying on of hands and it is very dangerous to have the first hands
which touch a baby those of one whom God considers a baby-killer.
The only way to cleanse those contaminated hands, those which have
performed abortions, is by the blood of Jesus. A simple washing in water
won't suffice for that kind of stain. Pilate tried to wash the sin of
murder from his hands; it didn't work.
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
The Angel of Death
And there is a spirit of child death hovering over and within
hospitals in which abortions are performed. These spirits have a legal and
spiritual right to inhabit those hospitals, and they take full advantage of
this right. Surely God doesn't want HIS babies brought forth on territory
so yielded to enemy activity.
A few years ago, in 1983, there was quite a battle in Florida over the
right to have home birth unattended by medical personnel. The medical
system felt this was dangerous to the unborn child, and fought it
vigorously within the courts - and within the even stronger corridors of
power: within HRS. I found it illogical to allow a woman the right to kill
her baby by abortion, but not to allow her to have a baby at home because
it might die. Apparently, the woman could bring death to a baby legally,
provided to was done within the system.
I was involved to some extent in this battle - I felt the legal
requirement to receive medical care and to submit all newborn babies for
such attention was neither constitutional nor scriptural. I asked the Lord
for a summary of His viewpoint; just one sentence that I could use to
"convince the gainsayers". He gave me one, and like everything He says, it
was meaty, memorable, pointed and true.
He said, "It is ironic that the system which has killed 30,000,000
babies in the last generation presumes to hold itself up as the legal and
moral guardian of infant safety." Oh, yes. Lord!
This attitude must hurt Him, the creator of the babies. But how much
more painful it must be when His own people, the vast majority of them,
 87
AGREE with the system's point of view, and give to it the place of honor
and respect and authority it has presumed to usurp from God.

Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:

Sacrificial Rites
In a hospital, the baby is delivered then handed off to a nurse for
routine newborn care: drops in the eyes, blood test from the heel, etc. A
midwife friend of mine accompanied a young couple to a hospital to be with
them during their delivery and she witnessed this post-natal "care" with
distress. The baby was screaming, fighting the drops, resisting the heel
stick, frightened by the rough and unloving hands of a stranger, and my
friend saw all these procedures as a means of "branding" the baby. She
believes these activities are a ritual of sacrifice; a means of dedicating
the baby's eyes, his body to the false god who rules in hospitals.
Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:
No Mixups
Here's another danger - a rare one, admittedly, but still it exists.
If you have your baby at home, you won't ever have to worry that your baby
was switched with somebody else's!
 88

Comparing Home and Hospital Birthing:

Whose Blood?
One final (at least for this little book) difference between home and
hospital birth. The blood of the lamb was put on the door of the HOUSE, not
on some public building in Egypt! It was within their private dwellings
that the Lord promised protection. "The Lord will pass over the door, and
will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you."
(Exodus 12:23b) But there was an injunction given: "None of you shall go
out at the door of his house until the morning." (Exodus 12:22b) When an
enemy is on the prowl, be he spiritual or natural, we are safer within our
own homes than anywhere else.
More Than A Baby
But safety isn't our major benefit. There is far more involved in home
birth than just successfully bringing the baby out. If I have learned
anything about Christian home birth, it is this: if He's allowed to, God
always does MORE than merely delivery a baby.
There are many things God would like to do, for us and through us, and
in order to work His will on earth He needs our cooperation. He needs our
faith, our unity, our praise, our prayers, our commitment to Him and His
word, and He needs us to keep at it till He's through. I have seen
countless examples of the "more" God does: healings, salvation for family
members, revelations from God, deep and soul-shattering repentance, the
breaking down of enemy strongholds in families, miracles and angelic
presences. I saw the dead raised. A baby who had not breathed for 24
minutes by the clock was restored to life with no adverse effects from her
long period of anoxia. These things happen far more readily where God has
been put directly in charge.
And sometimes I wonder what these "babies" will face in the next
thirty or forty years. I've seen incredible changes in my fifty-odd years,
and within the past ten years the changes have been so rapid, so radical,
so wide-spread that no one could have predicted them. Half of America's
children are raised in single-parent homes. One girl in four and one boy in
six is sexually assaulted before adulthood. High schools are armed camps,
with God evicted, overt Satanism welcomed and government-supplied condoms
on demand. Communism is breathing its last; our own governmental leaders
are revealed as law-breakers. We have polluted air, diminished resources,
and a species-threatening, one hundred percent fatal pandememic which can't
be handled effectively because of political and civil-rights issues. Organ
transplants; surrogate-mothers; rampant, open, homosexuality; witches and
goddess-worshipers on TV talk shows; and God walking through His temple
again, whip in hand, to clean out the defilers. How will things be in
another twenty years? Will we even last that long?
I sometimes consider the circumstances which will face this new
generation, and I thank God for those who are born in Zion, born into the
kingdom - not subject to the world, to its evils or its gods; unspotted by
its drugs, its controls or its unclean hands.
So when Christians have the idea of home birth presented to them,
either directly by God or indirectly by testimony from others, and they
choose to submit to the system instead, my response isn't really one of
judgment or condemnation. My response is one of great sorrow and a sense of
 89
loss, knowing the glory that might have been. It's knowing what the
potential was, what can result from stepping out of the boat and walking on
the water, that makes me grieve so when almost all of God's people chose
the other option. And I agree with the poet who said:
Of all sad words of tongue or pen,
The saddest are these: "It might have been".
My Answers to "What If..."
Here lately, when people start with the "What if something goes
wrong?" I just shake my head. "Yeah, how could we possibly survive? All we
have is GOD!" I'll say. "And in the hospital, of course, it's all safe:
there's technology. Things NEVER go wrong in the hospital!" (My skills at
sarcasm are being finely honed!) But most Christians really think the
flesh., man's system, is better than GOD!
And sometimes, if I'm feeling particularly feisty, I may even says,
"Look, if your God isn't big enough to get a baby out of the mama's body,
then you need a new God." Honestly, why do they bother to serve a God who
is too powerless to do even THAT? I want to holler like Elijah, "How long
will you halt between two opinions? If Baal be god, then serve him, but if
Jehovah be God, then trust HIM. Trust Him completely, totally, without
reservations."
But Christians say things like, "Maybe home birth is okay for some
people, but I need medical care because I have certain problems", or
"because I had a bad experience with my other births", or "because I'm high
risk", or worst of all "because I need to have a Caesarean Section". Don't
they realize what they're saying? Do they really believe that God can only
handle easy things? It seems they can trust His power and His willingness
to move on their behalf only if there are no problems, no potential
problems, nothing to deviate from perfection. But, boy, if there's anything
at all that might possibly go wrong, they need a MAN; they're convinced
that human beings and modern technology are better than God in case of
crisis.
I think of Elijah, who went out of his way to make it hard for God! (I
Kings 18) The odds were 450 prophets of Baal to one prophet of God. He gave
them the first turn at bat, and he gave them HOURS to work at it..Then he
soaked Jehovah's altar and the sacrifice with twelve barrels of water - in
the depths of a drought! And the fire fell! Well, of course it would!
God was delighted to honor Elijah's prayer.
Don't you just love the way Elijah taunted God's enemies as they tried
to get Baal to move on their behalf? He laughed at their efforts! Doesn't
sound like he'd have the doctor's phone number by the bedside, "just in
case something goes wrong". No, not this man. Here he was: long before the
cross, without our "better covenant", without the indwelling Spirit of
Christ, without the full Logos, without the reality of the resurrection,
just an assurance that God is who He says He is. But this man Elijah
challenged the enemy to a life or death encounter, and he WON! Of course he
did! It is IMPOSSIBLE that our God should be defeated!
Maybe instead of saying, "Where is the God of Elijah?" we ought to be
wondering, "Where are the Elijahs of God?" Where is the faith of God's
people TODAY?
It breaks my heart! How must God feel when His people have more faith
in a worldly system than they have in Him? And how will these Christians
 90
feel when they stand before God and must explain to Him their lack of
faith?
Now I'll get off the soap box and continue.
Spiritual Lessons From Childbirth
The things that can be learned from considering childbirth from a
spiritual viewpoint are really instructive. For one thing, the process of
conception and birth is one of the most common parables in scripture, and
parables are used to teach us spiritual truths from our understanding of
natural phenomena.
"The kingdom of God is as a seed planted" - so is natural birth. "Ye
must be born again" into the kingdom of heaven as into the natural state.
"Ye shall through much tribulation enter the kingdom," and through much
effort pass from the womb into the world. We go from tightness,
"straitening," into enlargement; we pass into successive stages of
spiritual growth by repeatedly going through a process which is just like
natural birth.
We are intimate with our heavenly Bridegroom and a seed is planted -
the seed is the word of God. It enters, joins, and gives life to, something
within us. It is nourished and begins to grow. We are a little Bethlehem, a
House of Bread. In the fullness of time, that holy thing within us is
brought forth through the travail and labor of the female part of us - the
soul. It comes through the veil - the flesh - from the hidden realm into
the realm of the senses and is manifest.
Natural birth is accompanied by the breaking and outflowing of water
and the shedding of blood. In the same way, everything which is birthed
from the unseen realm into the sight realm is accompanied by the outflowing
of water (which is symbolic of the Holy Spirit) and the shedding of blood
(which is symbolic of the sacrifice of the Lamb on the cross for our
atonement). The children of Israel put blood on their doorposts, and
crossed the water of the Red Sea. Jesus' work on the cross was accompanied
by the outpouring of His blood, and water flowed from the wound in His
side. Always, water and blood.
Natural labor to produce a natural child is very much like spiritual
labor to bring about spiritual increase. Knowing about the natural process
makes the spiritual walk more comprehensible.
As a student nurse at Tampa General Hospital YEARS ago, I witnessed a
13 year old, mentally retarded girl in labor. When she was not having a
contraction, she was coloring in a color book. When contractions came, she
was totally devastated. She had no understanding of what was happening to
her; it was just a horrible state of capricious pain, coming sporadically,
without cause and to no effect. It was one of the worst labors I've ever
seen. There was no "joy set before" her, no rational cause for it. (Even
with knowledgeable women, I have discovered that one of the keys to a
joyful labor is having the mind set on the baby, not on the present
suffering.)
This is true of spiritual birthing, too. If we are the equivalent of a
mentally retarded 13 year old, then the dealings and chastenings and
prunings of God will devastate us. We won't see cause or pattern or
ultimate reward.
But when we can say, "Oh, yes, things are rough, but I'm in labor with
something GREAT, and this is just another contraction to bring it forth,"
 91
then we can handle it a lot better. It's just another way of understanding
Romans 8:28.
Description of Christian Home Birth
I could describe Christian home birth for hours without ever really
imparting the flavor of it. It is kind of like a party, but you're expected
to work and your hostess might well ignore you and do her own thing for
hours at a time. It's kind of like a prayer meeting, but you find people
eating and drinking and taking naps and doing a lot of
unprayer-meeting-like things. It's very spiritual, with lots of scripture
reading and psalm singing and praying and such, but almost everybody is
barefooted, sitting around a bedroom watching a scantily dressed lady.
You've been invited, they know you're coming and the host and hostess have
prepared for their guests, but the house is usually a mess, with Bibles and
shoes everywhere. It's very family oriented, with often three, and once in
a while four, generations together, but you'll also meet people you never
saw before, and you're expected to treat them like brothers and sisters.
It's always centered on God, but the real star of the show is a little
fellow who isn't even there for most of the get-together. And it might last
all day!
And the whole thing ends with the guests helping the hostess shower,
changing the sheets on her bed, cleaning up the house, telephoning dozens
of people, doing the laundry, taking out the garbage, passing around the
new baby, washing dishes, taking pictures, crying, eating birthday cake,
singing, praying and finally leaving in a state of real glory. But that
still doesn't explain it.
I guess you'd have to be there.
After all that, I summarize with this: in childbirth, as in
everything, in Jesus we have a better covenant.
 92

7. IT DEFILES
The last thing I will name that the system does is: it renders those
who touch it unclean. It leaves them damaged and defiled.
Methods of Desecration: Miscellaneous
This is done a number of ways; by the shedding of innocent blood, by
the use of drugs, by the cutting of flesh, and by the laying on of unclean
hands. The scriptures which deal with all these subjects are listed
elsewhere in this study.
Methods of Desecration: Death
There is also a defilement which results from touching a dead body or
being in the dwelling where someone has died. "He that toucheth the dead
body of any dead man shall be unclean..." (Numbers 19:11) and "This is the
law, when a man dieth in a tent, all that come into the tent, and all that
is in the tent shall be unclean" (Numbers 19:14).
Methods of Desecration: Invasion
In addition, we are defiled by any procedure which violates the
borders of the body or the secrecy in which God works. This includes any
breach of our bodily integrity by endoscopy, Xrays, spinal taps; also by
any kind of imaging such as sonograms; by internal monitoring, and by
penetrating the body with any instruments, including needles, scalpels or
catheters. These are intrusive procedures which are a violation of God's
revealed will; and the enemy takes these opportunities to claim ground
within our very beings.
Methods of Desecration: Surgery
Of all intrusive procedures, surgery is of course the most prominent
and most destructive. In addition to the violation of the integrity of the
body, there are the effects of being drugged, and of having surrendered our
God-given authority over our body to another person. We have presented our
body a living sacrifice to someone other than God. All these factors must
be considered in redeeming our physical being from the aftermath of
surgery.
In reality, surgical operations are something of an exchange: we
surrender blood and physical tissue, and we get a scar and a demon. (And a
bill.) The spirits which invade and set up residence within our bodies as a
result of surgery are always aligned with the operative site, or with the
organs removed.
For example, a hysterectomy will result in barrenness; not only in
physical barrenness but also in demonically-controlled spiritual
barrenness. We will be unable to have more NATURAL children of course, and
we will find it increasingly difficult to reproduce in every other realm:
in our finances, our prayer life, our relationships, our thought life, our
business or ministry. Every part of our being is influenced by this spirit
of barrenness..
A vasectomy produces sterility; it produces both natural and spiritual
sterility. The cutting of the vas deferens in the physical body will
prevent our begetting natural children, and the spirit which enters our
body, when we surrender it to a procedure which God has forbidden, will
 93
prevent our begetting spiritual offspring.
An abortion, of course, leaves a spirit of child death RESIDENT WITHIN
US. And just as the sin of murder remains until it is repented, this spirit
of death remains until he is commanded to leave. And again, the really
horrifying consequence is: the spirit isn't content merely to operate in
the physical realm; he'll kill wherever he can. He may reach out to snatch
another child, or a new business, or a chunk of our finances, or a
friendship, whatever. He has a legal, established right to operate within
our life. He is "the enemy within" which God says to rout.
There are spirits which align with every possible surgical procedure,
and with things like amniocentesis, internal fetal monitors, cardiac
catheterizations, even tubes-in-the-ears for children.
Because we are ONE triune being, whatever is done to the body affects
the soul and spirit as well. Especially for Christians, it's FOOLISH to
think that anything as traumatic and as catastrophic as surgery is has no
effect on the spirit man. And it's just about as foolish to think that the
effect will be beneficial.
In the same way that we can be healed on both sides of the veil by
adhering to divine principles of healing, we can be diminished, damaged and
cursed, both physically and spiritually, by yielding to counterfeit
healing.
Methods of Desecration: Nakedness
In considering medical defilements, we need to address the question of
the uncovering of nakedness. The Lord is very specific about who can do
what to another person's body; in marriage he says the woman's body belongs
to her husband and that the reverse is true. And He forbids the looking on
or handling of the body of another man's wife. The things that are done
within the medical system in the name of health, healing or therapy are
often things forbidden by God.
There are no scriptural exceptions for doctors or nurses; if we assume
an exemption we're in error. The handling of bodies in an intimate way
outside marriage is forbidden, and to assume it's acceptable to God because
it has a supposedly righteous purpose is illogical and dangerous.
For example, when a doctor does a pelvic examination on a woman, it
violates God's laws about sexual purity, and the procedure will leave that
woman with an uncleanness - a unseen residue of defilement. In addition,
there is a sin to be repented, usually a spirit of fornication to be cast
out and a soul tie with the doctor to be broken. (I'm sure there is also a
contamination of the doctor's being from his participation in activity
which God has forbidden, but that's not what we're discussing here.)
Results From Defilements
I know that in almost every case, this isn't a knowing, willful sin.
It's simply a matter of doing what everybody else is doing without even
thinking about it, but this lack of knowledge - this assuming that we know
the mind of the Lord, or indeed never even thinking about it at all - is
the very thing that can "carry us into captivity" (Isaiah 5:13). The Lord
says we perish - we are destroyed - for lack of knowledge (Hosea 4:6), and
whether we know it or not, whether or not we understand the dynamics of it,
there is an effect from these things. Their power does not depend upon our
knowledge. And we can't trust our ignorance to alter predictable cause and
 94
effect patterns.
When we come before God to pray, to present to Him our petitions and
our intercessions, how much better it is to stand free and clear of all
these things which might hinder His answering. I don't mean to imply that
God is a legalist, or with- holds our answer out of annoyance, but our
enemy IS legalistic, and his legally-held positions within our lives CAN
hinder God's response. It's not the only impediment to answered prayer and
spiritual growth, but it's one of the most common, and one very few people
seem to consider.
The Antedote
Annulling the sequelae from this kind of uncleanness isn't a
complicated matter. The main thing is to believe that it exists; to
consider that possibly some of the problems we experience are rooted in the
spiritual effects from ungodly medical care; then we take the steps
necessary to reverse the evil consequences of these experiences. Almost
always, that involves repentance from sin, deliverance from evil spirits,
reversing curses - such as the curse from leaning on the arm of flesh
(Jeremiah 17), as well as the curse resulting from various test results and
diagnoses, breaking soul ties with medical personnel, reclaiming
surrendered authority and asking God to cleanse what has been dirtied.
What About Christian Health Care Workers?
If all this is so damaging and so dirty, how do we react if we're part
of the system? What do we do about all this defilement, this uncleanness,
this danger in the medical system? If we get enough Christian doctors and
nurses and if we pray over the patients and ask God to bless, and if we
call it a Christian hospital, won't that make it clean?
I quote from Haggai 2:12-14. "If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of
his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or
oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said no.
Then said Haggai, if one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of
these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be
unclean."
So the principle is this: the unclean is NOT cleansed by contact with
holiness. It works the other way. We don't cleanse their filth by joining
them; we become dirty ourselves.
The Christians within the system aren't going to purify it; they won't
change how God feels about drugs and unbelief and blood and defilements and
such - what He says about these things reflects their REALITY. They are
REALLY dirty - objectively, truly dirty - and no amount of effort and
prayer on the part of Christians who serve within the system will change
that reality. There are many things about it that God hates and has judged
UNCLEAN, and we need to adjust to HIS point of view and not continue in the
futility of trying to change HIM. We'd better change because He changes
not.
We can't clean it up. The only way out is OUT.
"Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the
Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you." (II
Corinthians 6:17). We're not able to cleanse what God has called dirty; we
can only avoid contact with it.
 95

A WORD OF EXPLANATION
Before you even begin this section, I'd like to address some of the
various assessments and comments we've heard about our point of view, and
examine their validity.
One attack is that it's all just too Charismatic, too much like the
"What you say is what you get" school. You know, "Blab it and Grab it". Or
more poetically, "Shout it, don't doubt it, no longer be without it". We've
been compared to those who pray one little prayer, then talk about claiming
their healing, holding on, believing God for a miracle and such - without
ever asking Him why they're sick in the first place, and what He might be
wanting to do in their lives. This objection can be summarized as: "You're
trying to control God, making Him into a power you can use for your own
purposes."
Actually, the exact opposite it true. We are actively looking for a
way to yield to God, die to self, become purer. We don't want to control
God; we want to surrender control TO God.
Another accusation is that we are totally centered on avoiding
suffering and don't believe in the discipline of God. And that isn't true
either. We believe that the thing that separates Divine and human love is
the element of CORRECTION, that we're perfected through suffering, and that
chastening is the hallmark of God's love. (We know the Scripture doesn't
say, "Whom the Lord loveth, He blesses.")
So to the best of our ability we embrace the dealings of God, counting
them all joy. And the point of this book isn't that we should necessarily
be healed at all costs - the point is that if we do seek healing, it ought
to be via God's route rather than man's.
Also, we've been accused of being formulaic, of believing that we have
a lock on God, and of assuming we know all the right moves to make. Of
thinking we can wrestle Him to the ground and get our way no matter what,
because we have our little lists. We just keep on pushing buttons till we
find the right one, and finally prevail over God.
And that's not true! None of this is a formula! Let me stress again
that all of this is merely to explain a point of view, and to illustrate
precepts. The principles I expound are never to be considered a substitute
for God's input, but merely a tool to help.
I don't want to point to lists and experiences and observations: I
want to point folks to Jesus. I do not think I have all the answers; in
fact I know I don't, and certainly one of the main goals in this kind of
operation is that each one hear from God personally. That's what's needed -
not hearing what God told ME, but each person hearing from God for himself.
Another comment which we've heard in opposition to our position is
that it puts God in a box to totally reject the medical system. The people
who say this think that God might possibly prefer to use man's system. Of
course, we don't think that's conceivable. (He might be forced into using
the system, but He would NEVER choose it.)
Do these people think that the goal of being healed is so important
that it overrides God's clear admonitions about faith vs. flesh? Do they
think anything goes as long as we get the physical symptoms alleviated? I
wonder if these people ever draw the line. If so, where? Do they believe
that God should be given the option of using psychic healing? Does refusing
 96
to use witch doctors and satanic rituals also put God in a box? How gray
does gray have to be before it gets to be just plain BLACK?
Then there are those who agree with us that the medical system is
ungodly and dangerous, but still believe that physical healing should be
attained through natural means. These include all the people who put their
trust in herbologists, naturopaths, nutritionists and the like. They use
herbs, follow dietary laws, and maybe have excercise programs. And none of
these things can be considered actually sinful - but putting faith in them
for healing IS. What is forbidden is trusting in the realm of the natural
instead of in God.
God gave us herbs (and these other things) for SERVICE (Psalm 104:14);
they are given to maintain health. But HEALING comes from the stripes of
Jesus, from His word and our faith in that Word. Divine health is
wonderful, and if eating certain foods helps you stay healthy, fine. But
when you need divine healing, that's a different matter, and it is
SPIRITUAL. No natural means will ever bring about a victory in the Spirit.
Of course we're called elitist and judgmental and critical and lacking
in love and all of that, but that just goes with the territory. It's some
of the suffering which we believe will be good for us, and we count it all
joy.
 97

FINDING THE ROOT OF PHYSICAL ILLNESS

1. THE POINT OF VIEW
I once heard a preacher say that over ninety five percent of what
Christians believe is based in the world's ideas, rather than in the word
of God. I wondered where he got his numbers, but even without knowing his
source, I agreed with his percentages. Most of us cling to the traditions
and beliefs we grew up with, or those which prevail in our society, or
those which appeal to our intellect and logic, even when they're contrary
to what God says. There is a way (of thinking) that seems right to a man,
but the end thereof is death.
Bill Gothard defines "wisdom" as looking at life from God's point of
view. It sounds good, but how many of us actually do it? We need to
earnestly seek to know what God says, how God feels, what God thinks about
things, and not assume that what we've always believed is true. We need the
renewing of the mind, to conform to what Scripture teaches rather than what
the world says.
What I'm going to say is contrary to what almost all Christians
believe, but remember, that doesn't mean it's wrong. On this subject, as on
every other, God's word is TOTALLY at variance with the world's way of
thinking. I urge you, do your own studying, you and God. The Bible says,
"Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be
ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (11 Timothy 2:15). And it says
"study", not "be instructed". They're not synonymous; to study is active,
to be instructed is passive. What does GOD say about this subject? Let God
be true, and every man - even you and me - a liar. He is our only source of
truth.
Spiritual Causes, Spiritual Cures
When we advocate a spiritual cause of physical illness, it's almost as
offensive to many people as when we advocate a spiritual cure, because the
hallmark of human reasoning is: MAN IS AT THE CENTER. There is a drive - a
striving - to find natural causes and to find natural solutions to human
problems. There's strong resistance to the spiritual point of view, because
it has the effect of de-throning man. Human beings don't want to walk in
the spirit realm (until their thinking has been re-conditioned by God)
because they know instinctively that in the spirit realm, they are not in
charge. If they think they are, they're deceived; they're actually in
bondage to enemy spirits, who are really the ones in authority.
A friend of mine once said about childbirth: "Before my home birth, I
thought bearing a child was a natural procedure, with a little bit of
spiritual activity accompanying it. After our birth, I realize that
bringing forth a baby is a SPIRITUAL process, with a TINY bit of natural
activity attending it."
Of course this is true not only of childbirth, but also of EVERYTHING
which touches a child of God. Certainly it is true of illness. We are
spirit beings, and our bodies only reflect the things which influence the
spirit man. This concept is IMPERATIVE to understanding healing.
Three Parts of Our Being
Consider the extent of a human being: the height, depth, breadth and
 98
duration of his existence. We can liken it to an iceberg, with the enormous
expanse of the spirit stretching from everlasting to everlasting and from
the here and now unto the uttermost reaches of the universe; and even the
soul extending far beyond our ability to see, understand, remember or
control. The physical body is only the tiniest tip of this incredible
iceberg, the puny little temporary part of our being which extends beyond
the veil into the realm of sight and flesh and mortality.
If we are seeing ourselves from God's point of view, from the realm of
the spirit, of eternity, a physical illness loses some of its magnitude. It
becomes easier to regard illness in light of the whole person, not merely
the body.
I repeat what I've said many times: the things which happen within the
realm of sight - the realm of the physical, natural, fleshly part of our
being - are parallel to, and result from, things which are happening to us
in other spheres of our existence. That hidden part of the iceberg which is
the most significant portion of our being, the soul and spirit part which
is out of sight under the water - that's where the action is. It's where
the roots grow, where the causes begin, where our attention should be
focused, because it's where God is centering His attention.
Does God Want Us Healed?
Is it always the will of God to heal? Can we take the words John
wrote in his third epistle, "Beloved, I wish above all things that thou
mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth" as God's will
for us, or are they merely John's will for Gaius? Is physical illness ever
sent by God for our correction and chastisement? For His glory? Exactly
what was accomplished "by His stripes" in reference to our physical
healing?
There are many points of view about all this, and I don't intend to go
into them now; I'll merely assume that whatever we believe about God's
goals, WE want healing. I have found that people almost always want to be
healed, regardless of their beliefs about the will of God.
Especially in modern America, where we are used to getting our needs
met and our problems solved - where we are conditioned from birth to
consider this our RIGHT - the idea of accepting physical pain and disease
without a battle is very rare. So for the purpose of this book, we'll
assume a wholehearted desire to be healed.
Hearing God Yourself
Like everything else with God, this subject involves personal contact
WITH the Lord far more than formulas or information ABOUT Him. Just as you
can't get saved by following a list of rules, so you can't understand the
spiritual significance of your illness without God's personal input to you.
The possible causes for physical illness are numerous, possibly infinite,
and in order to discover what is relevant to your own situation, what is
needed is not so much this summary of my understanding of the subject, but
your own communication with the Lord.
Now, having said all this, I will review the things I've learned on
the subject, in the hope it can help others. But remember, this can never
be a "How To" handbook; it is merely a summary of my own conclusions.
Roots
 99
We begin by thinking of the disease itself as merely a symptom of some
deeper problem. (And by "deeper" I mean just that - less on the surface,
less superficial.) If we have headaches, arthritis, measles, cancer, AIDS,
a dislocated joint, allergies, dermatitis, boils, diabetes, morning
sickness in pregnancy, WHATEVER, our first question should be WHY? What
conditions exist that cause, at least allow, the body to be sick? Only as
we know and treat the TRUE cause can we be healed totally.
Here's an example of this. For years, I suffered from headaches; very
severe, frequent and long-lasting. After I was saved, I moved into that
realm of faith which involved not taking aspirin, praying, and enduring -
but I still had headaches. I can't recall a single time that my little
regime of no aspirin, prayer and "holding on" resulted in a healing. I had
others pray, I said all the right things, I persevered - but I still had
headaches. One night I was praying about this, in intense pain, frustrated
and confused about my record of zero success, and more than a little angry.
It wasn't working and I really took God to task.
"Don't you WANT to heal my headaches?" I demanded.
And He said something that transformed the way I believe about
healing. He said, "No. I want to heal the CAUSE of your headaches."
Oh, ho! Even better! I yielded at once to the deeper work. I agreed
that healing the cause is preferable to healing the symptoms - always.
And over the next eighteen months to two years, God dealt with my REAL
problem, which wasn't headaches at all. My problem was anger - a lifetime
of hatred and resentment toward others. I had managed to suppress it; I
seldom showed anger, but underneath my cheerful surface I was boiling with
fury. I went through lots of repentance and forgiveness, some deliverance,
some tearing down of strongholds of deception, some attitude adjustments
and even some more headaches. But God was faithful and now I have no more
headaches - and I'm also cleansed of the seething internal lake of rage
which I had carried for over forty years.
That was the REAL disease. That was the root; the headaches were
merely a symptom. And no aspirin, no doctor, no counselling sessions, no
physical treatment of any kind could heal my sickness of heart and soul.
Only God could do that; and even He couldn't unless I aligned with Him and
let Him. I had to agree with Him about my sickness, about its treatment and
about His goal.
Components of "A Dealing"
I could recount literally hundreds of such examples. They would all
have the following factors in common:
1. The individual involved agrees to the deeper work,
makes a commitment to stand
2. It is NOT a quick work; God is never in a hurry 3.
When the healing comes, it is total in both the
natural and the spiritual realms
4. God is glorified
5. The individual learns things about God he could never
have learned any other way; it deepens his walk with God

Walking Through "A Dealing"

So, let's enumerate some of the steps we usually take.
 100
It starts when we have some problem big enough to get our attention.
(It doesn't have to be just physical illness - I believe any time we have a
situation which doesn't respond to prayer it's a sign God wants to go
deeper - but we'll stick to the arena of sickness for the purpose of this
book.) We may not realize this situation at first; it sometimes takes a
while before we comprehend that, "Hey, this thing has been around a long
time, and I'm not getting victory."
We see that what we thought was just a little problem is probably
going to be a DEALING! Oh, gosh!
We begin by asking, "God, what is your goal in this situation?" We
can pretty well assume His first priority is NOT the quick, easy healing of
the natural disease - or we'd already be healed! We face the fact that He
has something else on His mind. We take by faith the CERTAINTY that His
will is good, better for us than the quick healing would be. And we need to
put our desire for natural healing on the back burner and let God have His
way.
This isn't easy, ever, but especially if the disease is painful or
debilitating. Family members, Christian friends, folks at work and anybody
else the devil can get hold of call us foolish. They accuse us of tempting
God, not using wisdom ("God gave us common sense, didn't He?"), and speak
horrible consequence over us. Even if it touches only a minor thing, the
world HATES the walk of faith, and frankly, so does most of the church.
They don't want this kind of Christianity, and they'll make it as rough as
possible for us.
SO? Isn't that exactly what we've been promised? He never said it
would be EASIER; He just said it would be BETTER. And some of the most
glorious promises in the book are the rewards for SUFFERING!
And there's simply nothing like it to get our attention!
Now That I Have Your Attention...
I recall a precious young man whose wife was in labor. He realized at
a certain point that nobody else was going to get there in time for the
delivery: he would have to handle this birth alone. The description of his
reaction to this realization was funny, but also a valid picture of an
ingredient sometimes lacking in Christians: The Fear of the Lord. This
expectant father relates that he hustled all over the house; getting rid of
newspapers ("They have horoscopes in them"); putting the kids' Easter
Baskets in the garage ("They're pagan"); trying in every way possible to
please God. Finally, he sat down on the couch and spoke to God.
"Okay, Lord. You have my attention. I'm focused on You."
I'm sure God was pleased. How seldom do we get trapped by
circumstances that way, with the Red Sea before us and a bunch of angry
Egyptians charging up from behind. We are totally at God's mercy, REALLY
living out Psalm 127: "Unless the Lord build the house, we labor in vain...
Unless the Lord watch the city, the watchman waketh in vain..." Unless YOU
do it, Lord, it won't get done. If You don't move, we are lost. Unless You
heal, I won't be made whole.
We almost never find ourselves in that state; if we do, we don't stay
there! We do SOMETHING: we call 911, we take a drug, we borrow money from
the bank, we seek advice and counsel from anybody who'll listen, we eat TWO
big bowls of ice cream, we sue somebody, we quit our job, we file for
divorce. We're Americans! We're Christians! We aren't supposed to SUFFER!
 101
We do ANYTHING to crawl off the Potter's wheel, to prevent God from having
a free hand.
But how He loves it when we don't! This young man's wife had a
glorious, less-than-two-hour, uncomplicated, totally successful delivery.
And at least for a few hours there, Jesus Christ was truly Lord of that
family, all the way down to the roots.
And when we're in pain, and it's likely we're going to stay in pain
till God moves, then like this expectant father we bustle around our lives,
getting rid of things that might offend God. And we say with all sincerity,
"You have my attention. I'm focused on You."
We battle fear; Job said what he greatly feared came upon him (Job
3:25). Fear is the opposite of faith, or it is faith in what the devil can
do. It can have the effect of bringing upon you whatever it is you fear. (I
rally believe that fear of cancer is one of the strongest carcinogens in
the world.)
And we commit to trusting God, waiting on Him, allowing Him a free
hand, and we resist the negative words we get (from almost everybody!). If
we can't trust the fact that He is GOOD, we might as well hang it up and go
find us another god.
Pick-Up Stix
Then begins the search, the questioning, the listening. My sister
often used the kids' game of Pick-Up Stix to illustrate this activity. You
remember? There are all these little sticks, all different colors, dropped
in a pile on the table. We're looking for the sole black one, and sometimes
it's on the very bottom. That represents our answer, and we keep moving the
other little sticks out of the way, trying to get to the black one.
Sometimes there are LOTS of other little sticks!
We hold onto the big picture ("God has allowed this for my good; it
will produce a wonderful harvest in my life; I can trust Him"), and stay
attentive to hear each tiny HINT of the next step we are to take.
We repent of this sin; we forgive that person; we separate ourselves
from a particular sin or pattern in our family tree; we study the subjects
relating to our illness in the Bible and look up specific words to find
their meaning; we battle certain demonic influences; we relinquish old,
close-held beliefs as God shows us we were in error; we clean house
spiritually; we clean house naturally; we renounce curses; we pray God will
cleanse us of defilements; we guard against just putting the thing to
tribute and learning to live with it in more or less peaceful co-existence.
On and on and on until the work is done. It's not quick and it's not
simple. But when it is done, it is total and final. God has healed us by
laying the axe to the root, by bringing hidden things out of the depths of
darkness into the light and air. Light and air will kill a root, and then
the branches, leaves, blossoms and fruit shrivel up and die.
We don't have headaches any more.
We go on our way rejoicing, until after a while, somewhere along the
road, we hit another problem that doesn't yield to prayer. We don't get
healed despite our faith, and lo and behold! we have another DEALING!
No Medical Care
We receive no input or ministry from the world's system of healing: we
 102
obtain no medical care. And this is the real separator. Lots of people can
agree with the rest of our ideas and methods, but this is considered
radical, dangerous and offensive.
Why don't we "believe in doctors"? (Of course we BELIEVE in them -
they exist and we know it - it's just they have no part or portion of OUR
healing.) Let me see if I can explain it. Actually this whole book is my
explanation, but for now I'll just say, briefly, that we believe that
seeking medical care from the system is:
1. FORBIDDEN: it offends a jealous God who hates a
mixture, and hates confidence in the flesh.
2. COUNTERPRODUCTIVE: any authority we surrender to
another will decrease God's activity on our behalf. Adding
flesh to Spirit doesn't increase the Spirit; it nullifies it.
3. DANGEROUS: the devices and ministrations of man are
never as wise, as loving, as powerful or as trustworthy as
those of our Father.
We believe it must be one or the other, not a mixture of both. As I've
said before, you can have God OR Baal, Jesus OR Barabbas, flesh OR spirit,
blessing OR cursing, but you can't have both at the same time in the same
area. No man can serve two masters.
The following are some notes I've taken over the years as we learned
more and more about the "Pick-Up Stix" phase. I pray they'll be of help to
you.
 103

2. POSSIBLE CAUSES OF DISEASE

We assume every physical illness - including trauma, infection,
inflammation, tumors, irritation, allergy, paralysis, atrophy, etc. - is a
result of some SPIRITUAL reality. The natural realm - the realm of sight -
is always parallel to, and results from, some spiritual activity. The
physical manifestation is just the fruit of some spiritual root.
Possible roots include:
1) Generational (blood line) sins, curses, diseases,
familiar spirits, genetic weaknesses
2) Unrepented and unconfessed sin
3) Blood infusions, organ transplants
4) Defilements
5) Curses, including medical diagnoses and test
results
6) Drugs, especially those called "medications"
7) Not discerning the body (I Corinthians 11:29,30)
8) Bitterness, bitter roots, bitter harvests
9) Unforgiveness (A sin as #2, but so basic and
significant it needs its own section)
10) Demons
11) Calling illness "good", a way to get attention,
sympathy, release from responsibility, etc. Accepting
disability payments
12) Miscellaneous such as inoculations, lack of faith,
double mindedness, not asking God to heal you,
impatience

In the following comments, I will explain very briefly the dynamics by

which each element works to cause physical illness, and the customary
method of counteracting it. All these subjects are far too broad to be
dealt with in any detail. Remember, we're trying to expound a point of
view, a way of looking at life and how the universe operates, not trying to
tell each person what his own particular root problem is. We must deal with
underlying principles, not specifics (except when we use specifics to
explain the general). This little book can never become a cross-reference
of diagnosis.

1) GENERATIONAL (BLOOD LINE) SINS, CURSES, DISEASES,

FAMILIAR SPIRITS, GENETIC WEAKNESSES
We're the product of our ancestry, affected physically via genes and
chromosomes. Ps. 139 refers to the genetic code, the blueprint God put
within each cell: "In thy book all my members were written while I am
continually fashioned..." We receive our physical make-up from our family
 104

line. And we're patterned after them spiritually as well.

Even the world recognizes this: those with problems of substance abuse
come from parents with these difficulties; fathers with violent tempers
produce offspring who are full of anger. If the grandmother was
controlling, if the mother used emotional manipulation, there's a good
chance the daughter will operate in witchcraft (which is controlling other
people through spiritual power). She inherited it, with its attendant
demons, and there will be no clear victory unless she addresses the
spiritual aspects of the problem. (Some of this may be a result of living
with the example, but most of it is spiritual.)
In addition, we are somehow credited with, or held accountable for,
the actions of our ancestors. For example, in Hebrews 6:9-10, we read,
"...Levi also, who received tithes, paid tithes in Abraham, for he was yet
in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him". Levi was in some way
a partaker in the action of his great-grandfather.
We are part and parcel of our family tree, and when we have a DEALING,
we need to see if it's rooted somewhere in past generations. As a wise lady
once said, "If it happens once, you have a problem. If it happens over and
over, you have a pattern." We can often see the repeating pattern: some
families have allergies, some have weak eyes, some have difficult
pregnancies,

the same problems over and over in successive generations. All these things
and countless more are spiritual in origin.
In Exodus 20:5, the Lord says. "...for I the Lord am a jealous God,
visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and
fourth generation of them that hate me." The harvests and penalties for
sin are included in this arrangement, and frequently they exacerbate.
Here's an example. Abraham called Sarah his sister (Genesis 20) and
because she was his half-sister, we can consider this a half-lie. A
generation later Isaac said Rebekkah was his sister (Genesis 26) and
although she was a kinswoman, she was no sister, so this was a full lie.
The third generation had Jacob claiming to be Esau (Genesis 27) which was a
 105

full lie, in conspiracy, to steal his brother's inheritance. The sin of

lying got worse.
Or we can see this principle with a modern family, the Kennedys.
Joseph Kennedy had a long-lasting, fairly public affair with a movie star,
Gloria Swanson. His sin: adultery. In the next generation, two of his sons
shared a movie star, Marilyn Monroe. This was adultery with a hint of
incest - if the Mosiac law forbid a man to "take" the wife of his brother
(Leviticus 18:16, 20:21), now much worse would be the sharing of a
mistress? (And incidentally, all three of these gifted and idolized young
people died by violence; at least two were murdered).
A generation later, the Kennedys' nephew William Smith was publicly
tried for rape; fornication with violence. The sins of the fathers keep
coming back again and again to successive generations, getting worse and
worse. For this reason, many curses flow down a blood line.
When we're busy "picking up sticks" to find the little stick of
healing, we consider this principle. And if it seems a possible source of
trouble, we repent for our sins and the sins of our "fathers", pray for
God's action on our behalf to correct generational difficulties, and we
separate ourselves from the sins, curses, etc. of our ancestors. We put the
Cross, the benefits of the Atonement, between us and these destructive
harvests.

2) UNREPENTED AND UNCONFESSED SIN

Persistent, uncontested sin renders us unblessable, outside the
"commonwealth of Israel". It separates us from God (Isaiah 58) and hinders
His work. Despite a lot of modern teaching, grace does not cover persistent
disobedience to the revealed will of God. He may not require our
perfection, but He does require submission to His hand in our lives.
Healing is only one of MANY things we can't receive if we persist in sin.
In this particular area - of physical illness - the sins are often
those involved in dealing with the medical system itself; the various
things they do, the things we allow them to do, and our attitude toward
them. These sins include idolatry, presenting our bodies a living sacrifice
unto a false god, the taking of drugs, unbelief and such. And they're the
 106

greatest hinderance sometimes.

If we were asking God for something in the financial realm we would
realize the need to stop sinning in that area. We wouldn't expect God to
bring in money supernaturally if we were involved in theft, embezzlement,
non-payment of just debts and such. We would want to go to Him with clean
hands, at least in the area where we're praying. The same thing is true of
healing.
We need to stop sinning.
In this realm and all others, sin is repented and confessed.

3) BLOOD INFUSIONS, ORGAN TRANSPLANTS

The earlier section on the subject of blood was fairly comprehensive,
so I'll limit myself here to the remedy. If we believe the taking of blood
could be a root of our illness, we repent for the sin of disobeying God's
commandments, and we command the foreign soul life to be gone from us. We
ask God to cleanse us of any defilement or any "confusion of persons". We
ask that our entire being be made clean and whole.
If we have donated blood, again we repent of the sin, and we call back
the soul life we have poured out. We ask the Lord to restore our being,
whole and clean. We cast out a spirit of Sacrifice. (Sacrifice is ALWAYS a
part of the deliberate shedding of blood.)
To be honest, I have never dealt with anyone who has received an organ
transplant. But I know that in the case of tissue - as opposed to blood -
the recipient accepts all the components of the FLESH: uncrucified,
unregenerate flesh which probably died violently, from another human being
(or from an animal!) There is growing evidence that the recipient takes on
characteristics from the donor, in behavior, tastes, attitudes, skills,
even appearance. (I have wondered: when the cells of the donated organ
begin to replicate, whose DNA governs, the donor's or the recipient's?)
Evil which comes in by these routes must be REPENTED, and the mixture
purified, if that be possible. There must be separation from the foreign
elements within. But it's possible that a person who has received an organ
implant may be beyond redemption. What about people who are given a
baboon's liver? Can this mixed being ever go to heaven as God's child?
 107

Hasn't he become a "giant" as in Genesis 6:1-8? I'm not saying this is

true; I just wonder.
Since I have no experience in this area - and I cannot STAND the
promulgating of what is merely THEORY - for those who are interested in the
subject I recommend UNHOLY SACRIFICES OF THE NEW AGE, by Mary Pride, and
THE LAND OF THE GIANTS, by David Alsobrook.

4) DEFILEMENTS
The Mosaic law addressed the question of defilements, and made
provision for cleansing. Even under our better covenant, there are still
defilements and these can prevent our receiving healing.
Any breach of the individual's borders - his dwelling, his privacy,
his stewardship, his will, his areas of God-given authority, his body (his
skin, his gates such as eyes, ears, mouth, genitals etc.), his mind, his
relationships - anywhere these boundaries are invaded there WILL be
defilement.
The Greek word which is translated "profane" in the New Testament
literally means to cross the threshold, to pollute or defile. It is
bringing something unholy through a doorway into a holy place. (Mathew
12:5, Acts 24:6, 1 Timothy 1:9).
We can compare this phenomenon to house-breaking, or rape, or any
other invasion: the enemy comes within. Even people who are ignorant of the
spiritual realm know when their borders are breached, and most victims of
these crimes say they feel contaminated, ravished, violated. If the natural
invader can have such an effect, the spiritual is far greater! There are
countless ways these invasions can take place; and any natural trespass
will have its spiritual parallel.
Since we're talking about physical healing, again I must stress the
defilements in the area of medical care: stripping the body, cutting or
puncturing it, laying hands on - or IN - it, looking inside it via
technological imaging, etc.
It is FAR more difficult to obtain healing for a body which has been
defiled! The residue left by these procedures is a great hinderance to our
prayers. We must pray that the Lord will heal us, cleanse our beings of the
 108

contamination left by enemy invaders - Vandals - who breached our barriers

and came within. And we must repent of allowing our bodies, which are the
temple of the Holy Spirit, to be so abused.

5) CURSES
The Random House Dictionary defines curse, "The wish that misfortune,
evil, etc., fall upon another; an evil that has been invoked upon another;
to wish calamity on another." Unger's Bible Dictionary says of curses,
"These divine maledictions are not merely imprecations, nor the expression
of impotent wishes; but they carry their effects with them, and are
attended with all the miseries they denounce or foretell."
That is, they are predictions of what will happen if we violate God's
word or principles. They are the opposite of blessing; there are at least
72 curses in scripture, and many of them are from God.
In Deuteronomy 28, we have the primary Biblical contrast of the
blessing or the curse; and in Deuteronomy 30 we have the three choices:
life or death, good or evil, blessing or cursing. It's our choice.
Proverbs 26:2 says the curse "causeless" (free, without effect,
without cost) can't "come" (apply, rest, besiege, befall). We can supply a
"cause" - a basis or ground for a curse, the nesting place, so to speak -
by not giving glory to God's name (Malachi 2:2), by being under the works
of the law (Galatians 3:10), by being wicked (Proverbs 3:33), by trusting
in the arm of flesh (Jeremiah 17:2), by being born out of wedlock in the
past ten generations (Deuteronomy 23:2), by rewarding evil for good
(Proverbs 17:13), by not obeying God (Deuteronomy 28:15), by bringing an
accursed thing into our home (Deuteromony 7:25, 26), by loving cursing
(Psalm 109:17); these and many, many other conditions permit curses to
"come".
And in the area of healing, we can come under a curse because of their
words over us. When we accept another person's evaluation of our condition
instead of God's, we are open to being cursed. (One of the most fruitful
ways the devil has of getting us to accept a disease or physical problem is
to pronounce it over us out of the mouth of someone we trust, like a
doctor.)
 109

Many illnesses come from the diagnosis: we give the system authority
over us, we pay them, we believe them, they curse us, and we have it. Their
words become true, and maybe a Medic Alert bracelet will sustain them. And
it's very hard to get DIVINE healing unless you reverse them.
What about Galatians 3? What does the Cross really do, reverse ONLY
the curse of the law, or any curse we apply it to? In my experience, the
power of the Atonement is sufficient to reverse cursing and establish
blessing in every case where we remove the "cause".
We gain victory over curses by removing the ground they rest on and
then reversing them.

6) DRUGS
The taking of drugs is sin, a very dangerous sin. And those drugs
called "medications" can be especially detrimental, because we have called
them "good". Because we have turned to something which God has forbidden -
drugs - to obtain something God has promised - healing - we have augmented
their spiritual power over us. And they are indeed spiritual. Their
physical effects merely reflect their action within the spirit.
We've covered this subject earlier, so I'll merely repeat that God
does not advocate the use of drugs to heal. AS HE LEADS, and IN HIS TIMING,
we may have to break free of drugs to obtain healing. This MUST be done
under the leading of the Holy Spirit.
If the taking of drugs - illicit or legal - is a root of sickness, the
sin needs to be repented and the physical effects of the drug countered
with prayer.

7) NOT DISCERNING THE BODY

Paul says, "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and
drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this
cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep". (I Corinthians
11:29-30) Several versions translate "sleep" as "die". If this is a clear
Scriptural cause of physical illness, we need to examine it. It may reveal
a little black stick!
There seem to be two factors: first, receiving the elements of
 110

communion unworthily, without examining ourselves or being in sin. And

secondly, not discerning (Strong's # 1252, "separate thoroughly, withdraw
from, oppose, decide, hesitate, judge"), the body (Strong's # 4983, "the
body as a sound whole").
These verses are subject to several interpretations, and one we've
found which has a clear relationship to physical illness is this: we must
learn to discriminate and to contrast the ORGANISM, the Bride of Christ, a
beautiful, unified, living, growing, procreating being; and the
ORGANIZATION, which is the counterfeit of the Bride.
There is a harlot church today, operating in a religious spirit; she
is an adversary of the true Church. She functions in bondage instead of
freedom, in the law and efforts of the flesh, in deception rather than
truth, and her paths lead to hell. We must recognize that not every
organization which calls itself a church and not every person who calls
himself a Christian IS. (Of course the vast majority are mixtures of
varying purity.) Our membership in - and submission to - a false church can
hinder healing.
If this seems a likely source of our illness, we need to pray for
discernment to know what is His body and what is not. We know there are
wolves in sheep's clothing - and some in shepherd's clothing. We must be
able to recognize them by the Spirit. We must refuse, renounce and get rid
of ungodly coverings and soul ties. We must be healed and cleansed of any
effects from their destructive words or ministry.
It's very difficult to receive healing from God if we're sitting in
submission to a man who does not believe in divine healing. If we live
under this man's authority and covering, if he stands between us and God,
then his unbelief can block our healing.
This is so common it's heartbreaking!

8) BITTERNESS, BITTER ROOTS, BITTER HARVESTS, JUDGEMENTS

God is a God of order. There are laws governing the physical universe
like gravity, inertia and thermodynamics, and there are similar laws which
operate in the spirit. Principles like sowing and reaping, rejecting lawful
authority, honoring parents, judging others, etc. are ordained by God and
 111

they never fail. Judging another will bring a judgement on you

(Matthew 7:1); you will become either guilty of, or victim of, the thing
for which you condemned the other person. If you sow hatred, you will be
hated. If you steal, others will steal from you.
And there is an immutable, consistent and predictable cause and effect
relationship between bitterness and illness. Anger and hatred which are not
repented can become bitterness and bitterness, over time, can become a
bitter root which will spring up and defile many. We simply cannot continue
in the climate of these negative emotions and receive healing from God.
When we have violated these principles, we must repent, and ask God to
correct the wrong we have set in motion. He always forgives, but as for
blocking the harvest due from our sinful attitude, well, sometimes He does
and sometimes He doesn't.

9) UNFORGIVENESS
Not forgiving others seventy times seven is sin, it renders us
unblessable and hinders God. Forgiveness is Square One with God; it
precedes our receiving forgiveness FROM God. Unforgiveness creates a
soul tie with the person we're not forgiving and keeps us in bondage. It
constructs a nesting place for demonic activity: in Matthew 18, it's the
wicked servant who won't forgive who is turned over to the tormentors.
If we're in this predicament, in the clutches of demonic torturers,
the Lord will do almost anything to set us free; and that includes getting
our attention by allowing an illness to linger.
If the sin of unforgiveness is our little black stick, the answer is
simple: to forgive. And forgiveness is an act of the will, not an emotion.

10) DEMONS
This is an enormous subject! There's so much to talk about here, it's
more a matter of what NOT to say! I'll try to limit myself to how demons
relate to delayed healing.
Elbert Willis says any cause of disease which has LIFE is demonic:
germs, viruses, tumors, etc. I tend to agree, and even illnesses which are
strictly functional (broken bones, for example) have a demonic element. I
 112

believe any SIGNIFICANT difficulty in a Christian's life will involve

demonic activity to some degree. Usually we don't have just A sin, or AN
illness, or A demon, we have a combination of all these things and others
as well. So our dealings about healing usually involve some spiritual
warfare.
Some people divide demons into 4 groups: unclean, oppressive, occultic
and infirm. If this idea is true, and if the divisions are equal, it would
mean that one quarter of the enemy's ground troops function to make us
sick. Still, there is a root underlying the demonic attack: how'd they get
there in the first place? It just keeps going: if the demon is the root of
the illness, what's the root of the demon? We keep moving little sticks.
I want to point out that drugs support and nourish demons, and much
medical care aligns with their goals. The system MAY cause a decrease of
symptoms, but it will strengthen the enemy's hold; via unbelief ("The
system healed me") and via drugs (they reinforce demons).
If this is a part of the illness, we need to recognize it, identify
the spirits, and "wrestle" with "weapons not carnal". Christians do a lot
of different things in warring against demons: they "take authority over"
them, bind them, rebuke them, "come against" them, cast them out. My
personal favorites are to "trample them under foot" as in Psalm 91, or to
do as Jael did with Sisera in Judges 4:21 and hammer a tent peg through
their temples and pin them to the ground!
We have no choice about whether or not we're at war - that's already
established - but we do have a choice about whether or not we win.
Remember, there's nothing left out there that hasn't already been defeated,
so the question never is, "Will we win?" If we fight, we win. They only
triumph over us when we allow it.

11) CALLING ILLNESS "GOOD"

A lot of people like to be sick, WANT to be hospitalized, even
operated on. They think it's a way to get attention, sympathy, a feeling of
importance, release from responsibility, etc., or even a way to put guilt
on others. In some cases they are paid to stay sick; both insurance
companies and the Social Security system pay "disability" compensation, and
 113

our accepting those payments - and our agreement that we are "disabled" -
will strongly hinder our being healed. These payments may seem a good
thing, but again we must remember King Saul in I Samuel, and his assessment
of the Amelakites as "good" when God had called them "evil". This failure
to agree with God produces great loss, it's a part of the reason Saul lost
the kingdom.
And healing is part of the kingdom. We cannot be like Cain who didn't
recognize God's judgment of the cursed ground and offered God its fruit. We
must always agree with God and HIS evaluation of things. Most Christians
agree that illness came on the human race as a result of the fall of Adam,
and as such it is NOT a good thing. Even if God uses it for our perfecting,
it is not His will that we embrace illness FOR OUR OWN PURPOSES. God
doesn't want us coddled, important in our own eyes, free to abdicate our
responsibilities.
If we enjoy our illness and receive comfort from it, God is thwarted
in healing us. We must understand and renounce our deception and agree with
God.

12) MISCELLANEOUS
Most of these are covered in other parts of this book but I will
mention them again.
INOCULATIONS: This is a deliberate act of seeking out and
soliciting an illness. God almost NEVER operates in opposition to this kind
of active choice on our part.
The elements injected in the body may remain for decades, and may have
an effect of fostering other illnesses, even in adulthood. We need to
repent of violating God's principles, then command any residue from the
"putting on of disease" to be gone. We thank God for HIS immune system and
ask Him to restore what might have been damaged. We need to tell the spirit
realm that we are NOT Egyptians, (not of this world, but of God's kingdom)
and therefore no disease may be put on us.
LACK OF FAITH, DOUBLE MINDEDNESS: Of course, in order for
God to work on our behalf, we have to believe that He both can and will.
Like with Mary and Martha in John 11, He stands before us and says, "I
 114

am..." whatever it is we might need: your Provider, your Healer, your

Peace, your Defender.
And the next, absolutely ESSENTIAL step is ours. We must respond,
"Yes, Lord, I believe. Thou art..." my Provider, my Healer, my Peace, my
Defender. This is the point where faith is released and the "thing hoped
for", the "thing not seen", comes through the veil from the spirit realm
and makes us whole.
It's first person, singular. Jesus talked to those women one-on-one,
and He does that today. What do YOU believe about Jesus Christ? Can He
heal? WILL He heal? It's done unto you according to your faith.
In my experience, very few believe in Him. My heart breaks as I see so
many Christians knocking on the World's door, hat in hand, saying, "Oh,
please help me! My God has failed, He is too weak!" I think it's
ASTONISHING to see how many Christians serve a God they consider inferior
to the natural efforts of man! I tell you, if I had a god who claimed to be
healer, and he didn't heal, I'd have trouble believing anything else he
said.
NOT ASKING GOD TO HEAL YOU: The Bible says: "...ye have not,
because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye
may consume it upon your lusts". (James 4:2-3) The word used all three
times for "ask" is Strong's # 154, "ask, beg, call for, crave, desire,
require". We have to make a strong petition to God to receive from Him.
Like everything else in the kingdom: we believe it within, and some
words need to come out of our mouths to confirm the belief. We may get a
natural healing because our bodies are fearfully and wonderfully made to
restore themselves, but we don't get divine healing without somebody asking
for it.
IMPATIENCE: "Be followers of those who through faith and
patience possess the promises". Hebrews 6:12 is only one of several
Scriptural connections between faith and patience. And with healing,
especially, we need the fruit of patience (Strong's # 3115, to be long-
spirited, forbearing, longsuffering). Healing is a PROCESS, and I for one
an convinced that those zip-zingo, instantaneous healings that sometimes
happen are more properly defined as miracles.
 115

Impatience can impede healing because it urges us to do anything but

wait on God. If we hit the Ephesians 6 position of "...and having done all,
stand...", and we DO just simply STAND, we have all the forces of the
world, the flesh and the devil coming against us. The soul who is waiting
with composure, patiently enduring tribulation, is so close to the Father,
and so susceptible to the ministrations of the Holy Spirit, that the enemy
just can't stand it! And mighty changes are made in that soul, from glory
to glory.
 116

2. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE LOCATION WITHIN THE PHYSICAL BODY

When God made Adam from the dust, did He have a pre-existing pattern?
Why are we bipeds; why composed of these particular elements; why
these organs, systems, tissues, functions?
Many people believe there WAS a pattern for our bodies. They believe
our physical bodies resemble our souls; that the two are counterparts if
not duplicates. This would mean that the locations of the various functions
of the soul would align with the locations of these same functions within
the physical body.
Therefore, it's often helpful to consider the part of the body
involved in a physical illness, and to think about what Scripture says
about that specific organ or member. (A good idea is to go through Proverbs
and note any reference to the specific body part that's affected; or get a
concordance and check the whole Bible.) There's almost always a correlation
between the physical body part involved and the spiritual, soulish or
symbolic meaning attached to it.
The following is a "bare bones" outline of what a few of these natural
body parts may represent in the spirit.

For example, the feet are symbolic of faith; the ankles involve
putting faith into action, like the lame man in Acts 3. Our "walk"
symbolizes our growth and progress in the faith. (I think it's significant
that those healed of lameness - foot problems - don't simply walk, they
leap or run or dance. They have come through the illness and healing with
an INCREASE.)
The clearest example about healing (or not healing) feet is Asa, II
Chronicles 16: he was "lame on both his feet", went to the physicians and
then died. My sister said that large evangelistic ministries which blend
the gospel with medical care are demonstrating the spirit of Asa; they take
the "feet generation" - the last part of Jesus' body to touch earth - to
doctors. And the result is, they're "lame on both their feet". One of these
men said that God told him, "Send forth healing teams", but he sent MEDICAL
teams instead. He didn't see the difference! No wonder this titanic
 117

enterprise failed to prosper.

If our illness concerns our feet, we consider all the many, many
Scriptural references to feet: the bruising of the heel of the Woman's
Seed, the anointing of the big toe of the priest, the piercing of Jesus'
precious feet on the Cross, the statue with toes of iron and clay. Feet
should be shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace. Our feet should
not be swift to run to mischief; they can be beautiful upon the mountain,
and like hind's feet on the high places. We should wash the saints' feet...
We study and pray and meditate, and sooner or later something will be
illuminated. Something will click, and we'll know the next step to take on
the road to healing.
The mouth, with the hands, is one of two primary instrument of
worship. The spoken word is creative; life and death are in its power.
Praise should continually be in our mouths (Psalm 34), but it's also the
seat of lying spirits, as with the Prophets of Ahab. Our words are one of
four things for which the Bible says we'll be held accountable. The mouth
is one of the gates to our being. (Remember, the word "profane" means
bringing something unclean across the temple threshold.)
The tongue runs things - it is the rudder, the bridle, and the fire of
James 3. No man can tame it; poison may be under it.
The mouth and the tongue depict taste, which is symbolic of pleasure,
desire and experiencing ("Oh, taste and see that the Lord is good", and we
"hunger and thirst after righteousness"). It also represents consuming. Our
soul's intake can be "sweet in the mouth, bitter in the belly" just like
natural food.
Our teeth are referred to as weapons; the enemy's teeth are broken in
our defense: "pulled" or broken teeth render the ungodly helpless.
Other tissue is touched by blood - the nutrition comes in and the
waste goes out via blood. But teeth are bathed in saliva, and according to
Scripture, there is poison under the tongue. Teeth are somehow under a
slightly different covenant, because they're not naturally regenerative
like other tissue (even other bony tissue) but naturally tend to decay.
All this probably means healing per se doesn't apply, but what's
needed is a miracle. On the other hand, teeth are "twins" in Song of
 118

Solomon.
There is so much in Scripture about the mouth, tongue, teeth that much
study is required to find possible roots for their diseases.
The head represents the authority. The head is bowed to show respect,
submission and worship; it is covered for protection; anointed for
consecration, crowned for the role of ruler. It is lifted up in
exhilaration and sprinkled with dust or ashes in grief. "Wearing a hat"
denotes the filling of a role and hats are often part of a uniform.
We must be careful about false or evil coverings of the head (as when
the father surrenders his authority over the family to someone else) and
false anointings (as when we have or heads sprinkled in baptism into a
cult).
The neck is symbolic of submission or stubbornness; a stiff-necked
generation is resistant to the Lord. The neck is the seat of rebellion or
of yielding and taking the yoke. The neck is also affected by control
spirits. Neck tension can cause headache; a stiff neck brings pain to the
Head, both naturally and spiritually.
Hair is connected with strength (as in the Nazarite vow, as with
Samson) and with rebellion. The length of hair speaks of rebellion and of
shame, for both men and women. In I Corinthians 11, Paul says women should
have long hair, men short. Today's women are often shorn; men have long
hair and earrings. Paul would be appalled!
Baldness is associated both with mourning and with degradation.
The eyes are the window to the soul. It's another one of the gates,
especially for light. The eyelids allow closing this gate: we can't close
the ears. (Serpents have no eyelids, and can see even when asleep!)
Eyes are indicators of the emotions; joy (twinkling), sorrow (tears),
fear (enlargement of the pupil), anger and rage (flashing), peace (clear
and steady), grief ("running down", being "consumed"). Bitter, hurt people
often close off, and their expression becomes hard and set, also indicating
an emotional state.
When pupils don't react properly to light it can indicate brain
damage, and there is certainly a spiritual parallel to that. John 3:19 says
the rejection of light is THE condemnation. If the eye is evil, we're dark
 119

inside. God wants a single eye (Matthew 6:22), without motes and beams. If
our right eye offends us, we should pluck it out; it's the route for "the
lust of the eye" and can lead us into sin. Curing blindness - of one born
blind - was a predicted Messianic miracle. In Song of Solomon, the Beloved
has Dove's eyes, and that means eyes which can see only one thing at a
time.
In Israel, they speak of "Arab's eyes", those which are very
insensitive to light. The opposite of photophobia. The Arabs have no
problem in the bright desert sun, which causes others to reach for
sunglasses. Here's the spiritual parallel: the sons of Ishmael also have a
spiritual insensitivity to the Son's light also.
All the organs of sense parallel their spiritual equivalent. The eyes:
vision of course; we see with both our natural and our spiritual eyes. The
ears represent hearing; they are the first sense organ to awaken from
sleep, the last to lose their function. The skin, especially the hands,
represent feeling, touch, pressure, pain; the skin is a significant border
which is not to be breached by cutting, injecting, etc.
The nose is designed for smelling aromas in the natural, and the
equivalent in the spirit is the discerning of spirits.
The thorax, the chest cavity and lungs, is the seat of "pneuma" (the
wind, breath, spirit) within our being. Lungs function to breathe in life-
giving air, breathe out poison. Some people believe it's the site within
the physical body for the spirit.
And the blood is of course the site of the soul. "The life of all
flesh is in the blood thereof". The blood contains every facet of soul:
intellect, memory, emotions, will. An outflowing of blood may reflect loss
of soul power in whatever part is bleeding. It frequently indicates an
attack from a spirit of death.
As we said before, one wide open door for infirmity is taking blood or
blood components: we receive into our being another person's soul and there
is no immunity given, or walls built, against "strangers within".
This sets up civil war within; the recipient's body naturally rejects
the invader - the foreign, discordant blood or the strange flesh - and
drugs are used to inhibit or destroy the body's defense against this
 120

infringement of its integrity. If we receive a portion of the donor's soul

and flesh life, we become one with him, a house divided against itself, and
a mixture.
Cannibalism today is manifest through the giving and taking
(consuming) of blood and tissue. The same spirits of sacrifice, false
worship and death that acted in ancient or primitive societies are in
operation today. And the same attitudes prevail ("This is a good thing, a
benefit, brings a good result, it makes the donor's death a proper thing").
God still HATES it. (Too bad much of His Church thinks it's so great.)
The interchange of body parts is called good. It's being supported and
encouraged by our society, and because this practice is in reality
canniblism, the spirits of cannibalism, of human sacrifice and idolatry,
have a legal right to operate. It's the same principle as when legalized
abortion loosed the spirit of child death in America.
More and more serial killers are cannibals today because that spirit
is now loosed in our country; and how about "Silence of the Lambs"? Most
honored film of 1992, all about a cannibal. Or Disney's "Alive!" in 1993,
about plane crash survivors who turned to cannibalism? But I digress.
If we have given or taken blood in the past, we pray about its being a
cause of delayed healing.
The bones represent the spirit part of us, the substructure of life,
the support and configurations of the being. Their marrow is the site of
the beginning of life of the blood - red cells are born within the bone.
The Bible has many things to say about bones: none of Jesus' bones
were broken; but Psalm 22 says (of Jesus) "...all my bones are out of
joint". Jacob became Israel after his thigh was dislocated; bones were the
site of Jeremiah's "fire" to prophesy. Bones are a sign of kinship ("bone
of his bone") and they are the last remaining part of natural body. Even
after his death, the bones of Elisha were used to heal. The Man seated on
throne in heaven is flesh and bone, no blood.
The most common "what if?" we hear from those who question the wisdom
of our stand outside the medical system is; "What if you had a broken bone?
You'd need to have it set, wouldn't you?"
I only know that God never allows a trial without supplying the grace
 121

to handle that trial without sin. If He allows a broken bone, He'll make a
way for healing that doesn't involve using something He has forbidden.
If we have a disease that concerns bones, we consider things which
have to do with the spirit.
The joints are symbolic of relationships, the way people fit together
and relate. We should join together spirit to spirit (bone to bone) not in
the flesh or soul. Every joint should supply, and this is hindered by wrong
relationships. Derek Prince once said that there is enough provision for
the entire body, and nobody would lack anything if the joints were rightly
aligned and supplying - and receiving - properly. But over ninety percent
of the money given to God in America goes to build and maintain BUILDINGS.
Joint diseases like arthritis are often based in dysfunctional
relationships. If the joinings hurt, the joints hurt.
The stomach is the seat of the appetites, of digestion. The abdominal
cavity as a whole contains "the belly", the residence of the god of the
belly, the bowels and the other organs of digestion. There is some
connection with the emotions; different Scriptures mention the belly in
association with mercy, with physical love (Song of Solomon), and as the
source of living water which flows out.
If there are stomach and digestive problems, we might consider what
we're taking in - both naturally and spiritually. What tastes sweet in the
mouth can be bitter in the belly.
The kidneys are called the "reins of the heart", and as with a horse,
the reins control where we're going and how fast. This involves the matter
of CHOICE; the setting of our will. The kidneys are also concerned with the
elimination of poison. If we're persisting in a wrong choice, taking in an
accumulation of some kind of spiritual poison, this may be a root of
illness.
The liver has all kinds of functions; it's involved with the
metabolism of carbohydrates, the clotting of blood, even circulation. With
the heart, kidneys and brain, the liver was an organ most frequent used in
pagan cultures for cannibalism; and today for organ transplants, which is
modern cannibalism.
The face is the countenance, and it turns toward or away from the
 122

Beloved, or from light. It's expressive of the disposition within the soul.
Setting the face like a flint indicates firm purpose.
The gall bladder is the reservoir of bile, a very bitter digestive
juice. It's the location of bitterness, of bitter roots. Malfunction of the
gall bladder causes problems in the digestion of fat; with cramping, severe
pain, especially if there are stones in the common bile duct. A typical
patient for gall bladder surgery is female, fair, fat, forty.
Lots of modern techniques make the elimination or extraction of stones
a fairly simple process. But the real problem is bitterness, the stones are
just a sign of it.
The breasts are concerned with the nourishment of young; they
symbolize the outpouring of kindness, nurture, the flow of life to another.
Compassion is called "the MILK of human kindness".
Lactating women who cannot nurse a baby have first pain, then
engorgement, then clogged ducts, possibly infection. There is the same
sequence in the spirit: those who have a nourishing deposit of God within,
and no route to pour it out to others, will suffer pain, engorgement,
clogging, etc. Like the Dead Sea, which cannot sustain life because it has
no outlet for what pours into it, the breast becomes painful and swollen,
and what should have ministered life to others become dead. A Dead Sea.
Many local bodies are guilty of quenching the flow of nourishment by
demanding that all life flow from the pulpit, and most "pew-sitters" are
both starving and engorged. The flow of provision is clogged by the
assumption that only the pastor and/or his assistants are fit to feed
others; and that these leaders need no feeding from the body at large.
Have you ever come home from church grieved, feeling somehow
frustrated and suppressed? This might be because you didn't get to "nurse
your baby"; that is, to pass along some spiritual nourishment to someone,
and you're feeling the pain. Or maybe you leave church unsatisfied, still
hungry, sick and tired of a pacifier. You're like the baby who's not being
fed properly.
When we either refuse input, or are hindered from giving out, we can
have this kind of consequence.
Hands speak of work and ministry; they are instruments of praise and
 123

worship, and they are the members used to impart and stir up gifts. The
laying on of hands opens a channel to pass along whatever is inside. The
Bible says our hands should be clean and holy, and they should not shed
innocent blood. Hands write, make war, bare wounds like Christ. They're
often used to symbolize God's power.
Gideon's men could chose whether to drink water from their hands or to
lap it up, and this was grounds for a separation. Wounds in the hands
demonstrate the Christ nature; Jesus used His wounds to convince Thomas
that He was risen.
"YAD" means the open hand - as opposed to a fist - and it means POWER.
"YAD" is a part of the word "YADAH" (Judah) which means PRAISE. Praise and
power are often connected in Scripture.
The fingers align with each of the five-fold ministries, and the nails
are protection.
The shoulder denotes government; also burdens, responsibilities, other
masculine functions. I think it's significant that today women pad their
shoulders to look - as indeed they have actually BECOME - more manly, to
assume the masculine role. They say it's to make their hips appear smaller,
but why are big shoulders acceptable and big hips not acceptable? Just
because rounded hips are feminine? We don't see men wearing hip pads, to
make their shoulders look smaller, do we? Well, not yet, anyhow.
To pull away the shoulder means to resist.
The back relates to punishment, the most prominent example being the
stripes of Jesus (Pro. 26:3, Is. 50:6, Ps. 129:3). The back also refers to
affliction, where long furrows prepare the way for planting the word (Psalm
129:3).
Back trouble can mean rejection of light, turning back, back sliding.
But pain and dislocation of the back also mean wrong burdens, false
burdens, burdens not from the Lord, or other people's burdens we've picked
up. God gives grace and anointing to carry any burden He ordains - His yoke
is easy and His burden light - but not those falsely imposed by other
people, local bodies, the law, or our own misjudgment.
The heart is the central core of the being, our most important organ.
It spreads the blood to the lungs to be exposed to the air, then propels it
 124

throughout the body to carry food and to eliminate toxins. We're warned
that it should be guarded with all diligence, for it contains the issues of
life. It has desires, intents; can be hard, soft, flesh, stone; it can
become sick from deferred hope; it fails for fear.
Like the eyes and the belly, the heart has some connection with
emotions. It is the reservoir of our words. The heart of man without Christ
is "desperately wicked" and unknowable. In the end times, prophecy says,
"men's hearts fail them for fear", and heart attack is now the number one
cause of death in American males.
The mind is a component of the brain, and within it are situated
intellect, knowledge, wisdom, understanding. This is the organ through
which all sensory input is received and processed. The brain has control of
the body and its functions by either the central or autonomic nervous
systems. The former is primarily the forebrain, the site of the higher
functions, while the latter controls heart rate, digestion, temperature,
blood pressure, release of hormones and enzymes, etc.
We're born into this world as carnal beings, our minds at enmity with
God, and they're either renewed - leading to our transformation, or they're
darkened - leading to a reprobate mind. The mind is the site of many
strongholds based in deception.
Many people consider the mind the primary battleground for possession
of our souls. It is the arena in which we contest the enemy for dominion
over our own beings. It's the ground in which he plants the seed of sin. We
must continually wash our minds in the water of the word; to believe a lie
or to give place to fear are both powerful supports for illness.
The loins are the location of the organs of reproduction: the male
begetting, the female bearing and birthing. They are all aligned with their
spiritual parallel. Adam's "rib" which was removed to create Eve was
literally "chamber" - the womb. "Woman" means "Womb-man, that is: man with
a womb".
The whole human race is female in relation to God's male role; the
church is Jesus' bride, His womb. Gender confusion and all the modern
unisex movements are an assault on this fact. The press for women's rights,
for equality, liberation and such, and the same-with-same activities (such
 125

as homosexuality, humanism, peer-pressure etc.) all try to deny the God-

ordained distinctions between male and female.
The first word from God to our race was "Go forth and multiply..." He
says children are a gift, a blessing, and HE
wants to control the womb, to open or close it. If we frustrate His
authority, it can cause sickness or hinder healing.
(It's interesting to note how many barren wombs in scripture brought
forth very special people: Sarah, Rebekkah, Rachael, Samson's mother,
Hannah, and Elizabeth birthed Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Samson, Samuel and John
the Baptist respectively. And a virgin womb brought forth Jesus!)
In our ministry of home childbirth, we have seen many of these
"spiritual roots of physical difficulties". For example, breech births.
This is a situation where the baby is not in proper position; he's bottom
first or feet first. The cause of this is some "breach" in proper
relationships, most often in the chain-of-command. I Corinthians 11 gives
us God's word on order: reading from the top down it goes God, Christ, Man,
Woman, and from other references we know that the children come next. If
this arrangement is distorted anywhere, the result can be a breech birth.
Of course the problem is NEVER Christ, but it can come anywhere else along
the line. The husband might not be submitted to Christ or wife might be in
rebellion against her husband. However, in most cases we find it's the
children who are unruly. (There are many unruly - that means "not ruled" -
Christian children because many Christian parents buy the lie that
discipline is abuse, despite God's assurances that it is a PROOF of love.)
Morning sickness is the result of somebody - usually but not always
the mother - rejecting the pregnancy. If the baby is born with the
umbilical cord around the neck, it's the spirit of death. This can come
down the generational lines, or from abortion or other deaths of siblings,
or from somebody CLOSE not wanting this baby. (If a pregnant woman has
previously lost a child, or if the expectant father is angry about the
pregnancy, this is a very common aftermath unless the situation is dealt
with.)
Perineal tears can result from past defilements. Difficult and painful
labors can be the result of not the parents agreeing with God about the
 126

subject of discipline (not calling chastisement and correction a good

thing, not disciplining children, and resenting it when they're disciplined
by God). Labor is also adversely affected by leaven within or without; and
of course by past mutilations and defilements in previous births.
This area is FULL of parallels and we are totally convinced that
comprehensive preparation in the spirit realm will result in a perfect
birth.
So in our picking up sticks, we consider the part of the body involved
in light of what the Bible says. We study to see what the Scriptures tell
us about that particular part of the body.
 127

BIBLICAL REFERENCES TO SPECIFIC DISEASES

But before we go into the next point, let me re-cap our position, and
emphasize that the first step in trusting God ALONE as healer is to forget
a lot of what the world believes. We must realize that the true causes for
diseases are totally in conflict with what the world teaches; with natural,
carnal intelligence. We believe that these causes actually originate within
the spirit realm and represent the root from which the "bitter fruit" of
illness springs.
If we are wise we will believe what God says, not what man says; so to
discover truth about illness we search the Bible, not the world's medical
books. This search often yields pertinent information.
The following is a TINY sampling of the different illnesses which are
specifically mentioned in the Bible, either by etiology or by treatment. In
addition, I mention others which have only anecdotal evidence, but enough
to convince me, at least, of the truth about it.
Sleep disorders can lead to futility and despair (Job 7:3). One
frequent cause of sleep problems is: previous anesthesia. Drugs which
induce anesthesia leave a residue of sleep disorders, and also a demon.
Analgesics and soporifics have the same effect, but much milder.
Blindness can result from following blind leaders, and there is no
growth in God (2 Peter 1:5-9). Blindness can come from rejecting light, or
from worshipping an idol.
Worshipping an idol? In twentieth century America? Certainly! Of
course most Christians wouldn't even tip their hats to the likes of Dagon,
Osiris, Kali, Moloch, et al. But how about sports - the events, the teams,
the stars? Or money, or possessions, or television, or music, or food, or
men they honor, like pastors or doctors or movie stars. This can also be
idolatry.
And worshipping idols can cause (at least spiritual) blindness. The
idols are blind and we become like what we worship (Lam.4:13-15). Some
physical results of these roots are cataracts, glaucoma, detached retina,
other vision problems.
Warts are rooted in witchcraft; witches are usually depicted with a
 128

wart or two. The witchcraft might be inherited, or active and deliberate

occultic behavior. It's not necessary for the one afflicted to have full
knowledge of what he's doing, but if he does, healing requires repentance
and cleansing. Warts can also be an indication that you're under oppression
or attack by someone who's operating in witchcraft.
Plagues, epidemics and other communicable diseases stem from not
having proper fear of God (Deut. 28:58-61). These diseases can be visited
on the children of parents who don't listen to God.
Gluttony and alcoholism (and probably other forms of substance abuse
as well) result from rebellion or stubbornness (Deut 21:18-21). This is the
way it works: refusal to yield to proper authority (which is rebellion)
produces bondage to UNLAWFUL authority (which is slavery); we become slaves
to an addiction. (That word's from the Latin ADDICUS, meaning "slave").
Stubbornness makes getting healed even more difficult.
Castration and transsexual surgery produce the status of: "not in the
congregation" (Deut 23:1), which is spiritual alienation. It can manifest
in isolation, loneliness, withdrawal, or possible mental illness. Surgery
for the purpose of sterilization can have the same effects, to a lesser
degree.
Adultery can result in menstrual disorders: irregular periods, painful
periods, endometriosis. It can also cause bowel cancer.
Diarrhea can result from cursing others, from showing no mercy. It may
be deliverance, too. Demons which inhabited "the belly" may come out via
diarrhea. (This happens especially with the spirit of cancer; in many
cases, this spirit is delivered through diarrhea.)
Arthritis comes from unforgiveness which is producing resentment and
bitterness toward others, usually long-standing, deep rancor with possible
alienation, within close relationships. It's most often within the family.
Healing requires repentance, forgiveness and the RELEASE OF DEBTS, that is,
the price we feel we're due for old un-met needs and past offenses. We must
let go all those past "unpaid debts".
Nothing that happens today can compensate for the love we DIDN'T
receive as a child; for example, nothing a husband can do for his adult
wife will fill the gap left by a lack of love from her father years ago,
 129

when she was a little girl. Only JESUS can heal these old wounds and pay
off all the old debts, and even He can't do a total work, until forgiveness
flows and we release all the un-paid debts.
TB of the bone and cancer of the bone can be the consequences of
grief, depression, or fear (Psalm 31:10). Other bone diseases ("rottenness
to the bone") may result from an unfaithful wife (Pro.12:4) or envy (Pro.
14:30).
Heart diseases stem from stress (Ps. 73:21, 26), heart failure from
fear (Luke 21:26).
Nail biting, especially when the cuticle and the flesh around the nail
ares also bitten, is rooted in cannibalism. Many of the diseases which at
root may be a condition where the body consumes itself, such as gastric
ulcers (the stomach lining begins to digest itself) or anorexia nervosa
(the body burns muscle tissue for fuel) may have a spirit of cannibalism.
(These may also be rooted in spirits of self-hatred and suicide.)
Remember, this spirit of cannibalism is greatly strengthened in our
country by the acceptance and affirmative legislation concerning organ
transplants.
Leaven - yeast in a state of fermentation - is a symbol of a hidden,
pervasive influence. It is forbidden in the natural in the Old Testament,
and warned against in the New Testament. In the latter case, it is the
spiritual leaven, that of the Pharisees, Sadducees, Herod, Corinthians,
Galatians, that the Lord is talking about. Both injunctions apply today.
Natural leaven might be abominations in the homes (Deut 7:26). Things
like statues, drugs, paraphernalia connected with false religions or the
occult, pornography, evil music, stolen articles, etc. plus countless more.
Spiritual leaven would include religious externalism, unbelief in the
supernatural, worldliness, compromise, infectious sin, false doctrine.
Both natural and spiritual leaven can produce vaginal yeast
infections, fungal infections of the skin (Athletes' Foot, etc.), certain
scalp conditions, and ear aches in children. If the natural body manifests
a yeast infection, there is a parallel within the DWELLING, either the
natural home or the spiritual abode.
Disobedience and self-effort (Humanism) cause "the diseases of Egypt"
 130

(Deut. 28). These attitudes are always a potential root of illness; these
people - the spiritual equivalent of Egyptians - are not under the covenant
of healing; in fact, God has promised to put diseases on them.
Hemorrhoids (varicose veins of the rectum) are a judgement from God
because of defiling and abusing the things of God (I Samuel 5:6). "Things
of God" may well include the person's own body.
Breast infection, inflammation: some clogging up of ministry or of
spiritual activity. An example might be refusing Baptism in the Holy
Spirit, refusing to answer a call of God on your life through which you
might feed others, or staying in a dead church which either is not feeding
you or is suppressing some ministry God has called you to. This effect can
come because we ourselves actively resist God, or it might be that someone
else is hindering our ministry.
Another root of breast infections is a renunciation of the female
role. If we reject the functions of helpmeet, mother, homemaker and such,
if we long for and prefer the more masculine roles, this can result in
breast infections. It can come down the family line, and not really be
present in the afflicted party, but may be seen in her mother, sisters,
aunts and such.
This of course doesn't mean we can't hold positions outside the home;
but it does mean we have to accept - all the way down - the fact that
we're female and there are certain functions and roles which God assigned
to females. And we must accept the fact that they are GOOD.
Harlotry or the spirit of harlotry causes venereal diseases and cancer
of female organs. This doesn't need to be literal, physical harlotry; the
spirit can come through any activity which involves seeking an immediate,
illicit, destructive, expensive answer to a need, instead of the answer God
has provided.
Kidney problems can come from envy of men (Ps. 73:21), or offence at
God (Job 16:13).
Idolatry and lawlessness cause cancer of the bowel (2 Chron 20:12-15,
18-19).
Eye problems which cause tearing or discharge (sties, "Pink Eye") can
come from grief and sorrow (Ps. 31:9, Job 17:5) and eye problems in
 131

children may be the result from parents who flatter (Job 17:5).
Headache can be caused by strongly suppressed, long-held negative
emotions, particularly hatred and anger. Migraine headaches often stem from
control spirits - especially through past religious affiliations not fully
broken, such as the Roman Catholic Church or small, close-knit local
bodies, where the ruling spirits still attempt to control. Soul ties must
be broken, past idolatry repented, and certainly any formal covenant
renounced.
Another possible root of migraine is a control spirit from a mother
operating toward a grown daughter. After the children have reached
maturity, parents must drop any reins they may still hold. Parental love
must grow from the stage of wielding the rod and of being responsible for
our children; it must mature as the children do. It will either develop
into agape and friendship, or it will deteriorate into apathy, or into
manipulation and control. This latter kind of relationship can cause
headaches.
Headaches result in pain in the natural body, and a hopelessness in
the soul. Some kinds of headaches remove the helmet of hope.

So there you have it, a very rudimentary overview of what we do to

receive healing. It's very far from presumption; of praying and then doing
nothing, which is what most people assume we do. That indeed would be
foolish, and it would frustrate the purposes of God.
I want to reiterate that these lists should serve as examples only;
they have hardly scratched the surface of the information available from
the Bible.
 132

IV
SUMMARY
Divine healing isn't imaginary; it's not simply the exercise of
willpower or denial. It is not immunity from sickness, nor is it
presumption. It is the direct power of God on the human body.
Why is it so seldom believed in the American church today?

Why Do Christians Use Man's System?

There are all kinds of reasons why Christians go into the system, why
they don't trust God alone. Most of them never even consider it; it just
doesn't occur to them NOT to go to a doctor. They think they're supposed
to; they think it's God's provision. Or maybe they've been taught it's
presumption to ask God to heal directly. Maybe they lack faith, or they
don't understand what faith really is. Perhaps they don't want the
responsibility. It could be any of these things, and more.
But probably the biggest reason for using doctors and hospitals
instead of God alone has got to be because they don't think it WORKS to
depend on God alone.

Why So Little Divine Healing Today?

Most Christians have a pretty dismal record of healing. They may have
a few experiences where natural healing came a little faster than usual,
and they've heard some testimonies in church about people who were healed,
but for the most part, they don't see enough divine healing manifested to
make trusting it a smart option.
So why doesn't it work?
At the risk of sounding arrogant, I must say I don't think many people
know how much is involved in appropriating divine healing. It's so often
diminished to the simplicity of "Do you have enough faith?" Of course,
faith is needed, but there is so much more. Even more, we need to see
physical infirmity as a reflection of spiritual activity, and begin our
quest with that mindset. "Why am I sick? - Injured? - Wounded? - Suffering?
What does this natural phenomenon indicate about the spirit realm?"
 133

We need to be single-minded. Sometimes things aren't really

surrendered to God. Frequently, it seems that people pray for healing, and
while they might DELAY consulting the system, there are very few who just
leave it with God, and if there's no healing, or if things get worse, well,
so be it. No, the vast majority approach healing with the idea of giving
God a shot at it, but having as the last resort the thing that REALLY
works, the system.
But that is counterproductive in itself, because it's only when you're
TOTALLY committed, with no other options, when you don't look on the
counterfeit as GOOD; in short, when you "hate and despise the second
master" as in Matthew 6:24, that you even begin to understand supernatural,
divine healing.
Another thing which hinders divine healing is: it's corporate to a
large extent, and because the body as a whole doesn't believe in
scriptural, supernatural, direct healing, we don't get much. Your typical
healing testimony today in the American church goes something like this: "I
got sick, and the doctor said I'd be in the hospital a week. I was only in
the hospital six days. Praise God!"
Couldn't the God who created the whole universe, who holds it together
by the word of His power, in whom all things consist; and can't His people,
who have dwelling in them the same spirit that raised Christ from the dead,
do any better than THAT?
Also, there isn't much healing in the church today because that isn't
where the authority lies. We have done exactly what Adam did. God gave him
dominion over the earth, and Adam surrendered it to Satan. Jesus gave
healing and dominion over sickness to the Church, but we have surrendered
it to the system. That's where our faith lies - almost all of us - and
without faith in GOD, no mountains are moved and not many get healed.

A Modern Version of James 5

It seems to me the modern day American church has rewritten scripture to
this effect:
James 5:14-16, in the original, goes like this:
 134

"Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let
them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the
prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and
if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him."
Today it reads like this (at least in practice):
"Is any sick among you? Let him go to the doctor's office, and let the
doctor do a physical exam, some lab tests and xrays, giving him drugs in
the name of the system. And the natural healing processes and the regimens
of the system will raise him up, maybe, and if he have committed any sins,
they shall be ignored because the only thing that matters is getting the
physical problem alleviated and the idea that his problem is spiritual in
origin just isn't considered."
If our pattern is Jesus' healing as recorded in scripture, we see only
natural or supernatural healing - never artificial healing. (And He never
hurt anybody as He healed. The system inflicts a lot of pain and damage.)

What About Luke?

We hear a lot about Dr. Luke, and his profession is taken as a divine
endorsement of the whole medical system, but there is no evidence that he
was ever used by God to heal AS A DOCTOR. Nor is there a mention by Luke
himself of being used in the profession of medicine; he wrote 52 chapters
in the New Testament so there was ample opportunity for him to mention it.

And nobody considers tax collecting, commercial fishing or political

activism as especially holy, and other disciples followed these
professions.
 135

Hinderances to Healing
Many things can block healing; a state of sin, bitterness,
unforgiveness, not discerning the body. Sometimes the problem is a
confusion of need. A person asks prayer for healing, and what he really
needs is deliverance, or a miracle - he asks amiss and doesn't receive.
Maybe we don't differentiate between illness, symptoms, habit patterns,
demonic attack or whatever.
All these situations give the appearance of another vain prayer for
healing, another failure, when in reality it was a matter of mistaking the
need.
It's not simple; our bodies reflect the activity of our souls and
spirits and without doubt the first thing we need to do is hear from God
about how to pray. It takes more than just faith.
But it does take faith, and faith cometh by hearing. And not many
people are preaching it. But if and when the body begins really to believe
God, to shun the use of things He has forbidden, to consider obedience more
important than relief of symptoms, when the elders we call when we're sick
are themselves full of health and life and not in bondage to illness and
drugs, when we stop going back into Egypt to have our needs met and go
there only to give of the life and truth in us, then we'll see God move in
power.
I have been trying to balance this little discourse between scripture,
facts and statistics, logic, experience and opinion. I have been trying to
show that the medical system is not godly by origin or practice, because of
what it is, what it uses and what it does. I feel each Christian must
prayerfully, with light and truth at his service, decide for himself
whether the medical system is a part of the worldly cosmos, damned to
destruction with the rest of Babylon, or is instead a part of the kingdom
of God, with its origin in the mind and heart of the Father, its power from
the Holy Spirit, its authority in the name of Jesus, its practitioners His
disciples, and its goal being the glory of God.
It's not neutral. It can't be neutral. The fact that God has claimed
to be our healer makes that office divine, and if another claims to be
 136

healer, he must back it up with righteousness and the anointing of God, or

be branded a usurper.

It's Not a Popular Viewpoint

It seems most people don't want to believe in unmixed healing, healing
which comes directly from God; they don't want it to be true. There is a
strong attachment to the system and attacking it brings up the same
reaction as if one attacked the flag, motherhood or apple pie.
I have wondered why so many resist this truth. Those who stand outside
the system can say with such great relief, "I'll never have to have another
shot, another blood test, another hospitalization insurance payment,
another doctor's bill, another dangerous or embarrassing examination - I've
been set free from all that..." Why wouldn't everybody want that?
Well, maybe because it isn't comfortable to trust God alone. The faith
realm is seldom as comfortable as the natural realm. And very few people
are willing to forsake what's comfortable.
So those of us who proclaim our walk with Jehovah Rapha, who trust
Jesus ALONE for physical healing, come into this arena of battle with
Aesculapius, Apollo, Hygeia. Panacea, Asa, Sorcery et al at a very
interesting time. On the one hand, God is speaking more and more about
maturing, about obedience to the Word, and about coming out of the world,
so it's not completely out of sync with His timing.
But on the other hand, the system is incredibly powerful at this time,
entrenched in our society by tradition, habit, archetypes of mind control
and by a close alliance with the governmental arm, the media, the law, and
the institutional church. Despite increasing publicity about its dangers
and flaws, people lean on this system as never before. So we fight an enemy
which most of the church views as not only a friend, but an especially
godly, sacrosanct one.

Increasing Evil
The system is evil now; it was evil in origin and several thousand
years haven't improved its nature. But let's imagine what it will become in
the future.
 137

As we know from II Timothy 3:13, in the end times "Evil men and
seducers shall wax worse and worse". Incidentally, the word for "seducer"
is Strong's #1114, and it means "One who wails, a wizard [as muttering
spells], BY IMPLICATION AN IMPOSTER." (Emphasis mine). Like I said, a
counterfeit.
It's not getting better; no matter how many discoveries are made, how
marvelous the technology, how organized and mechanized and well funded it
is, it will never become godly. On the contrary, it too shall "wax worse
and worse". If it's going to grow more evil, what will the result be? What
kinds of changes? One way it's changing is that it's gaining more and
more control. The idea that we are sovereign over our own bodies is waning,
and our rights to determine what kind of health care, if any, is given our
children is already gone. I know personally of four cases where children
who were taken to Emergency Rooms were subjected to tests and procedures
the parents objected to; they were threatened with state intervention if
they refused. In the HRS, we have publicly supported and legally sanctioned
kidnappers; their rights of entry, their legal clout, is incredible. And
most people don't even know it.
"Withholding medical care" is translated "child abuse" in the state of
Florida now, and the death of a child by abuse is a capital crime; they can
invoke the death penalty. (Nothing is said about the children who are
submitted to the system and die. That's accepted, considered normal. As a
gentleman from the State Attorney's office once told me, "Well, you know,
we expect people to die in hospitals.")
So I see the system becoming more and more in control of our bodies
and our children's bodies, enforcing the system's point of view and
decisions on us, over-riding our wills and opinions if necessary. Not just
in the matter of things like child birth or immunization, but expandingly
and increasingly, till we face things like mandatory surgery, permission
needed to have children (maybe having to pass "Parenting" classes and prove
psychological fitness), psychological and psychiatric testing for children,
commitment to psychiatric institutions for "social abnormalities",
conscription of organs ("donor parts") from the dying, the system's making
the final decisions about who dies and when - not just euthanasia but also
 138

the practical immortality of life-support systems - and the development of

a whole new code of ethics to accommodate all the new situations created by
science gone mad.

Personal Responsibility: An Endangered Principle

I read an article once in a magazine written for successful
businessmen. In the article, the author told his readers all the different
experts they needed to live a safe and prosperous life in modern American
society. An attorney, of course, an accountant, an estate planner and
insurance consultant, at least one physician (more if there were any
conditions that required a specialist), a stock broker and market analyst,
a banker, possibly a business manager - the list went on and on, until
there was no area of the readers' lives left to their own discretion. In
this age of experts, they were encouraged to portion out little chunks of
their God-given authority, responsibility and stewardship, to be controlled
and governed by others. Seems it's a growing trend.
The system wants to make the decisions about your body.

King Saul's Costly Blunder

It's very dangerous to call "good" something God has called "evil". In
1 Samuel 15, Saul loses the kingdom for precisely that. God had told him to
smite and utterly destroy Amalek, spare not and slay everything. Saul came
back to Samuel with "the best". He had spared the King, the best of animals
and "all that was good". But God had said it was all evil. How could there
be anything "good"?
God always despised Amalek. In Exodus 17:14, He said, "I will utterly
put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven." And of course Amalek
represents, "That Satanic attitude of self-sufficiency and independence
which is characteristic of the flesh, the carnal mind". (THE SAVING LIFE OF
CHRIST, by Major Ian Thomas). God was at war with Amalek from generation to
generation.
But Saul couldn't believe God really felt that way. Such a judgment on
Amalek seemed to be unwarranted, a fanatical exaggeration of the issues; so
in defiance of God's word, God's mind, God's will and God's judgment, he
 139

tried to discern between good and evil in something God had wholly
rejected. And Saul lost the kingdom.
Samuel said to him, "...thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and
the Lord hast rejected thee from being king over Israel." (I Samuel 15:26.)
If God says something is evil, we'd better believe Him.
It seems most people think the system is all right, maybe not quite as
faith-filled as walking outside it, but certainly allowable. At least
until our faith grows for the radical stance. But again I state; there is
no Biblical basis for believing that the medical system was designed by God
to bring forth divine healing. It is damaging and defiling to those who
submit to it; it is truly evil, using and endorsing many things which God
has forbidden. So our coming out of it might just possibly be a matter of
OBEDIENCE.
Maybe what is needed is not so much "faith to believe" as it is "grace
to obey". If it's evil, and I can see no other conclusion to draw from an
examination of its nature and practices, then we need to shun it. And that
takes a ready will, not hyper-faith.