Is There Healing in the

Atonement?

Rev Rodney A Gray

 A Study in Matthew 8:16,17

Is there healing in the atonement? This text in Matthew’s gospel is crucial to a biblical
understanding of the question, not to mention its answer. On the basis of this text many believe
that Jesus was not only our sin-bearer but also our sickness-bearer. They claim that he bore our
sins and our sicknesses in the same way, in his own body on the cross. They believe that just as it
is God’s purpose that everyone who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ will be saved from sin, it is
also God’s purpose that every believer should be delivered from all sickness. In this view it is
always God’s will for Christians to be healed and healthy. It is never his will for us to be sick. If
we are sick it is because we are not trusting Christ for healing.

The so-called “faith healing” movement has been around a long time. Today it is one component
of the “health and wealth gospel.” The premise of this false religion is that it is always God’s will
for you to be healthy and wealthy. God does not want his children to be sick, but neither does he
want them to be poor. He does not want you to be struggling to make a living. He does not want
you to be living from hand to mouth. He wants you to have an abundance of this world’s goods,
and you are entitled to expect God to give you great wealth and prosperity. This message of
health and wealth has many leaders, and they have multitudes of deceived and deluded followers.
Some place a greater emphasis on prosperity as the keynote of their false religion. Others place
the accent on physical healing. But they all share in common the foundational principle that God
is willing to give you unqualified health and unbounded prosperity immediately, directly, and
universally.

Let us be sure we understand the point at issue. We are not dealing with the question whether
God heals people. Certainly he does, and we must acknowledge that in the final analysis all
healing is divine healing. In other words, God does it. Most of the time God uses secondary
means and causes, such as medical research and science, skilled nurses and doctors, surgery and
drugs, hygiene and sanitation. But sometimes he heals people without these things, and even in
spite of these things. Sometimes God in his sovereign grace providentially makes sick people
well and there is no way of explaining it except, “the Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in
our eyes” (Psalm 118:23). So we are not disputing whether God heals the sick. But he does not
heal everyone, not even every Christian believer. And he does not heal everyone who wants to be
healed immediately, directly, or universally.

We are considering the question, Does the atoning death of Jesus Christ assure healing for all
who will trust in him, just as it assures forgiveness of sins for all who will trust in him? Not all
“faith healers” will specifically claim that healing is in the atonement. Some make the focus of
their “ministries” the supernatural gift of healing or working miracles. They believe that all of
the extraordinary gifts and powers identified in the New Testament are active and available
today, including the miraculous gift of healing. They, of course, possess that gift, and they
possess the formula or key to unlocking the power and effectiveness of that gift. Large sums of
money flow into the pockets of these faith healers from people anxious to access their power to
heal. The power to heal sickness has never failed to create a sensation. But there is more to it
than the inevitable excitement and entertainment. We noted above that the faith healing
movement has a long history. It has also had some serious and influential defenders.
Let us make note of a few important names from 19 th century America. A. B. Simpson, a
Presbyterian, was the founder of the Christian and Missionary Alliance. He wrote the words to
the gospel song, “Yesterday, Today, Forever” and other songs. In 1881 he claimed to have been
healed of a heart ailment. He supervised the founding of what is now Nyack College and
Alliance Theological Seminary, which held its first graduation in 1884. That same year he coined
the phrase, “Christ our Savior, Sanctifier, Healer, and Coming King.” This formula became
known as “the Fourfold Gospel.” Today the C&MA doctrinal statement states: “Provision is
made in the redemptive work of the Lord Jesus Christ for the healing of the mortal body. Prayer
for the sick and anointing with oil are taught in the Scriptures and are privileges for the Church
in this present age. (Matthew 8:16–17; James 5:13–16).”

A. J. Gordon, a Baptist, was named after Adoniram Judson, the great Baptist pioneer of
American foreign missions. Gordon College and Divinity School were named after him. Gordon
composed the tunes to “My Jesus, I Love Thee” and “In Tenderness He Sought Me.” In 1881 he
published a book called The Ministry of Healing, or Miracles of Cure in All Ages. In his book he
made such statements as these: “That we have Christ set before us as the sickness-bearer as well
as the sin-bearer of His people” … “that Christ endured vicariously our diseases as well as our
iniquities” … “that our Redeemer and Substitute bore our sicknesses, it would be natural to
reason at once that He bore them that we might not bear them” … “we urge the transgressor to
accept the Lord Jesus as his sin-bearer, that he may no longer have to bear the pains and penalties
of his disobedience,” so we should urge the sick “to accept Him as his pain-bearer.” He made
these statements in his explanation of our text, Matthew 8:17.

There was another 19th century man named R. Kelso Carter. We know him as the author of the
gospel song, “Standing on the Promises.” He experienced a healing from heart trouble in 1879.
In 1884 he wrote a book called The Atonement for Sin and Sickness. Carter’s argument was that
physical healing was in the atonement and that Jesus took our sins as well as our sicknesses upon
himself in his death on the cross. Carter was one of the strongest advocates of this notion in his
day until later in life when he modified his views.

Let us come to the 20th century. Prior to World War II, perhaps the name of Aimee Semple
McPherson dominated the faith healing landscape. In 1915 she left her husband to become a
traveling preacher and faith healer. She created a great sensation and attracted large and excited
crowds. She founded the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel in 1927. It was based on
a vision she claimed to have had in 1921 of Ezekiel’s four-faced image. The four faces
represented, she claimed, the fourfold gospel of salvation, baptism in the Holy Spirit, divine
healing and the second coming of Christ. Today Jack Hayford, the author of the song “Majesty,”
is perhaps one of the best known leaders in this group. A good deal of scandal surrounded Aimee
in her latter years. She claimed to have been kidnapped in 1926, divorced her third husband of
only four years in 1935, and died from an overdose of pills in 1944.

Oral Roberts became one of the most popular and influential faith healers after World War II, in
part due to the influence of television. He had a conversion experience in 1935 and a few days
later believed he was healed of tuberculosis. He firmly believes that there is healing in the
atonement of Christ. In an article he wrote in 1976, called “Why I know that God wants to heal
you,” he said, "For the knowledge of the truth look toward Jesus of Nazareth who himself took
our infirmities and bear our sicknesses. If Jesus took our sicknesses we need not bear them any
longer. Sickness is part of the curse and Jesus came to destroy the curse. He suffered in our stead
because he did not want us to suffer disease. He took our specific diseases and infirmities upon
his own sinless, perfect body in complete payment for the penalty of sin. ... I know it is God's
highest wish for you to be in health. ... Sickness is not part of God's plan and not devised by
God's will.”

There was also a man named William Branham who was famous in his day. He died in 1965, and
his followers regard him as virtually equal with God and his words as equal with Scripture. You
might remember the name of Katherine Kuhlman, who died in 1976. There was A. A. Allen, who
died alone in a motel room in 1970 at the age of 59, three years after divorcing his wife of 39
years. All of these were bright and shining lights in the faith healing business.

Today we have leaders such as Benny Hinn whose position, according to his web site, is that
“Deliverance from sickness is provided in the atonement and is the privilege of all believers.”
Jimmy Swaggart holds the same view: “The redemptive work of Christ on the cross provides
healing of the human body in answer to believing prayer.” Another healer, Tom Brown, states on
his web site that “Healing is part of man’s redemption in Christ; therefore it belongs to every
believer. There need be no questioning as to whether it is God’s will to heal; if it is in the
redemption, it is his will.” Another of the prominent voices in the movement is Morris Cerullo.
He is not afraid to make statements that apparently mean that the whole purpose of God is the
deification of man. “Did you know that from the beginning of time the whole purpose of God
was to reproduce Himself? … And when we stand up here, brother, you're not looking at Morris
Cerullo; you're looking at God. You're looking at Jesus” … “You represent all that God is and all
that God has … Jesus was the visible expression of God. Jesus was the Son of the Living God.
Now, who are you? Sons of God … everyone say it. What is working inside of us is the
manifestation. When you look at me, you are looking at Jesus…To see Jesus was to see God. To
see me is to see Jesus. Jesus knew who He was. Don’t you think it is about time we know who
we are?” To be charitable, statements like these, if they are accurate, are at best misleading and
confusing. But for anyone who accepts this estimation of himself, the claim to be able to heal
makes complete and logical sense.
The position of the Assemblies of God is that “divine healing of the sick is the privilege for
Christians today and is provided for in Christ's atonement (His sacrificial death on the cross for
our sins).” The United Pentecostals believe that “Christ's suffering and death purchased healing
for us – physically, mentally, and spiritually. ‘Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our
sorrows...With his stripes we are healed’ (Isaiah 53:4-5). This promise definitely includes
physical healing, for the Gospel of Matthew says this passage was fulfilled by Christ's healing of
people who were sick: ‘He cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: that it
might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaiah the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities,
and bare our sicknesses’ (Matthew 8:16-17). (See also 1 Peter 2:24).” The Pentecostal Holiness
denomination states, “We believe in divine healing as in the atonement (Isaiah 53:4-5; Matthew
8:16-17; Mark 16:14-18; James 5:14-16; Exodus 15:26).”Other groups hold similar views.

We began this study with the question, Is there healing in the atonement? Does God hold out the
promise of physical healing to all who will trust in Christ, just as he promises eternal salvation to
all who will trust in Christ? Many have been taught that the only possible answer is an
unequivocal “Yes!” Some of them are sincere Christians, and they wonder why they have not
been healed. They wonder why God would withhold that which has been secured for them in the
atoning work of Christ. They pray for something they expect God to give them, and he does not
give it to them. They question God, or their understanding of God becomes perverted. At the
same time they wonder what is wrong with their faith, or what kind of faith they need, or how
much faith they lack. If Jesus Christ is their sickness bearer as well as their sin bearer, are they
not entitled to expect to be healed as well as forgiven? Is there healing in the atonement? Does
the Bible teach this in this text or in any other text?

What is the Nature of the Atonement?

If we are asking whether there is healing in the atonement, we must first understand what the
Bible means by “atonement.” The principle and necessity of atonement were embedded in the
worship of Israel under the Law. God instituted the Day of Atonement as one of their great
annual observances (Leviticus 16). Aaron, the high priest, was required to appear in the Most
Holy Place just once a year. The ark of the covenant was placed there, with its cover called the
“atonement cover.” Inside were “the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the
stone tablets of the covenant” (Hebrews 9:4). But Aaron could not proceed without a sacrifice.
He needed a “sin offering to make atonement for himself and his household.” Only after he had
made atonement for himself and his family could he proceed to do the same for the community
of Israel. In both cases he sprinkled the blood of the sacrifice on and in front of the atonement
cover. He had to atone for the Most Holy Place, the altar, and the tabernacle itself because of
Israel’s uncleanness. In the end he would have made “atonement for himself, his household and
the whole community of Israel.”
We must understand that this was atonement for sin, not sickness. The sacrifices were presented
to God as sin offerings, not sickness offerings. The blood of bulls and goats was shed, not for
sick people, but for sinful people. Atonement cannot be made for sickness and disease.
Atonement is not required because of headaches and back injuries. Atonement will not cure
diabetes or a broken hip. Atonement is for sin, and the sacrifices that were made for sin and guilt
were sin offerings. Sacrifice had to do with making satisfaction for sin. Man offends God by
sinning, not by being sick. Sinners need to trust in the merits of a substitutionary sacrifice to turn
away the wrath of a holy God and pay the penalty for their sin against him. It is precisely this
role that Christ fulfilled in his atoning death on the cross. “God presented him as a sacrifice of
atonement, through faith in his blood” (Romans 3:25). “For this reason he had to be made like
his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in
service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people” (Hebrews 2:17).
“He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the whole world” (I
John 2:2). “This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an
atoning sacrifice for our sins” (I John 4:10).

The Epistle to the Hebrews demonstrates that the Lord Jesus Christ has replaced the priesthood
of Aaron. He is both the final priest and the final sacrifice, and he accomplished a full and final
atonement for the sins of his people. He entered the Most Holy Place in heaven itself by the
merits of his own blood, having accomplished eternal redemption for us (Hebrews 9:12). He “has
appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself”
(Hebrews 9:26). The ritual that the high priest in Israel repeated year by year has been fulfilled
by Christ’s single and final act of atonement for sin. He died for our sins, not our sicknesses.
“Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people” (Hebrews 9:28). There was
nothing in the atonement, either in the old covenant or the new, that provided for physical
healing instantly, directly, or universally.

What is the message of Isaiah 53?

The latter part of Isaiah’s prophecy included four segments that have become known as “Servant
Songs” (42:1-9; 49:1-6; 50:4-9; 52:13-53:12). The identity of the Servant is gradually clarified as
the songs unfold, until it is clear that the Servant of the Lord is an individual appointed by God to
die a substitutionary death for the sins of many people so that they can be reconciled to God
through him. The intended theme of Isaiah 53 is substitutionary atonement for sin. It is rooted
and grounded in the great Day of Atonement of Leviticus 16. The idea of “transgression” or
rebellion is mentioned four times (verses 5,8, and 12). “Iniquities” occurs repeatedly (verses 5,6,
and 11). The servant’s life was made a “sin offering” (verse 10) and “he bore the sin of many”
(verse12). This is language calculated to point us to Christ’s atonement for sin. He was made a
sin offering, not a “sickness offering.” But is there anything here to suggest that Christ would
somehow atone for sickness?
In Isaiah 53:4, the word “infirmities” (“griefs,” KJV) is the same word that appears in the
sentence, “Your whole head is injured/sick” in Isaiah 1:5. The context in the first chapter is the
Lord’s indictment of Israel as a “sinful nation, a people loaded with guilt, a brood of evildoers,
children given to corruption! They have forsaken the Lord; they have spurned the Holy One of
Israel and turned their backs on him” (Isaiah 1:4). The sickness of the head is used
metaphorically to describe the sin of the heart. The word “sorrows” must also be understood in
the context of sin. These are sorrows associated with sin, or sorrows that are the consequence of
sin. The emphasis is on the spiritual nature of sin, not the physical nature of sickness. The word
is used in Jeremiah 30:15 where the Lord spoke of “your pain (“sorrow,” KJV) that has no cure,”
and said that it was “because of your great guilt and many sins.” The same two words, “iniquities
and sorrows,” are used in reverse order in Isaiah 53:3 to say that the Servant was “a man of
sorrows, and familiar with suffering” or iniquity (“grief,” KJV). He did not become sick for us,
but he became sin for us. We must also notice that the words “took up” and “carried” in verse 4
are used again in verses 11 and 12. “He will bear their iniquities” and “he bore the sin of many.”
Clearly this is atonement for sin and nothing else.

Luke the doctor understood this and he provided an excellent illustration of the same truth. When
the Jewish authorities complained that Jesus associated too intimately with “sinners,” Jesus’
answer was exactly to the point. “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not
come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:31). Luke had a perfect
opportunity to say something about healing in Christ’s atoning death if he believed that was what
Jesus was going to accomplish. But he understood that Jesus was using sickness as a metaphor
for sin (cf. Matthew 9:12,13). Sin is a spiritual sickness.

What is the meaning of Matthew 8:17?

Matthew most likely wrote his gospel account for the benefit of an organized church of mostly
Jewish converts. His purpose was to convince them that Jesus was the Messiah and that all the
Scriptures were fulfilled in him. This accounts for his genealogical record and for his repeated
references to how Jesus fulfilled the Scriptures (1:22,23; 2:5,6,15,17,23; etc.). It explains why he
recorded Jesus’ use of Scripture in his temptation. He fulfilled Scripture by his ministry in
Galilee (4:1-17). Jesus claimed that he fulfilled the Law and the Prophets and proceeded to assert
his authority over them (5:17-48). He declared that everyone’s eternal destiny depended on a
personal trust in him (7:21-27). So also here, in chapters 8 and 9 of his Gospel, Matthew wanted
to demonstrate that Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament. Matthew’s purpose in this instance was not
to say anything about the atonement that Christ would accomplish by his death, but to show that
Christ’s healing ministry was a fulfillment of Scripture. He found a point of contact between the
miracles of Jesus and Isaiah 53:4. The point of contact is not with Christ’s death on the cross,
which was still two or three years future. So Matthew’s point was not that he understood Isaiah
to say that the Messiah would atone for sickness as well as sin, that Jesus did that, and therefore
he is the Messiah. Rather his point was that the Old Testament said that physical healing would
be one characteristic of the new age that would accompany the Messiah’s coming (Isaiah 25:6-8;
29:18; 32:3,4; 35;5,6). Matthew understood that the miracles of Jesus were for the purpose of
pointing him out as the one sent by God to be the Savior of sinners (Acts 2:22). So Matthew was
not making any comment on the atonement. He was commenting on the fulfillment of Scripture.

It is also important to recognize the language Matthew used to make this connection. He seems
to have deliberately chosen words that would not imply that he thought Christ came to atone for
sickness. It is true that he was talking about “infirmities” and “diseases,” since he had just
reported how Jesus “healed all the sick.” “Infirmities” can refer to sickness or weakness.
“Diseases” has already appeared in 4:23,24. But notice what Christ did with these infirmities and
diseases. “He took up” is not the same as “he bore.” The difference is that he did not take
infirmities and diseases upon himself and make them his own so that he was sick instead of the
sick people. He did not bear them vicariously. But when he bore our sins he bore them as his
own so that we do not have to bear them. When he “carried our diseases” it did not mean that he
was personally afflicted with those diseases. Jesus did not become sick and diseased with every
human illness as our substitute. Rather he healed people who had diseases and thus demonstrated
his power over them. The apostle Paul said, “Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you
will fulfill the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2). He did not mean that the burden was now yours
and it was no longer the brother’s, but that you should demonstrate a genuine interest and
helpfulness. The Lord Jesus brought the power and presence of the kingdom of heaven to bear
upon all aspects of life in this world. The wind and waves obeyed him, but it was not because he
specifically atoned for their raging. Sickness and disease obeyed him because of his sovereign
authority and power, not because of his atoning death.

The apostle Peter referred to Isaiah 53:4,5 in I Peter 2:24. “He himself bore our sins in his body
on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been
healed.” Peter was clearly dealing with Christ’s atonement for sin. He had already established
that he is the suffering Servant of Isaiah 53, who suffers vicariously for the sins of others. The
word he used for “bore” is a word that means something more than “take up” or “carry.” It is
used in the context of sacrifice and atonement as, for example, in Hebrews 9:28 – “Christ was
sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people.” “Taking away” sins is atoning for sins.
Those who are united to Christ by faith, whose sins he took away, have died to the power of sins
so that they may live to righteousness (cf. Romans 6:1-14; 7:1-6). This is explained by the fact
that “by his wounds you have been healed.” Physical healing is not in view here. The subject is
atonement for sin that has been accomplished by the sufferings of Christ.

What is the Testimony of the New Testament?

Not only is it essential that we interpret these texts in their contexts, but it is also necessary to
understand them in the light of biblical revelation as a whole. As we think about the question of
healing in the atonement, what is the message of the New Testament? What is the gospel, and
how was the gospel preached? How did the apostles summon people to a response to the death
and resurrection of Christ, and why did they do so? What did they assure people they were
entitled to expect if they believed in Jesus Christ? What did they proclaim as the message of
Christianity? The answer to these questions is embedded everywhere in the New Testament and
is not difficult to discover. Consider some examples:

In the beginning of the gospel story the angel instructed Joseph, “You are to give him the name
Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). When John the Baptist
and the Lord Jesus Christ began to announce the coming of the kingdom of heaven, they both
preached a message of repentance for sin (Matthew 3:2; 4:17). After his resurrection Jesus told
his disciples that “repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations”
(Luke 24:47). John the Baptist proclaimed that Jesus is “the Lamb of God, who takes away the
sin of the world!” (John 1:29). On the day of Pentecost Peter preached the message of Christ’s
death on the cross and called upon his hearers to repent and believe “for the forgiveness of your
sins” (Acts 2:38-41). The apostle Paul instructed the Roman believers in the gospel, explaining
that it is powerful to save because it reveals a “righteousness from God”(Romans 1:16,17). Sick
people do not need righteousness, but sinners do. He focused on the same theme when he
summarized God’s method of salvation in Romans 3:21-26. Christ’s redemptive work was aimed
at the fact that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23). Christ “was delivered
over to death for our sins” (Romans 4:25). In the pivotal section outlining the representative
headship of Adam and Christ in Romans 5:12-19 the issue is sin, not sickness. In chapter 6 it is
clear that without Christ we are slaves to sin, not sickness, and the grace of God releases us from
that bondage. Paul reminded the church in Corinth that the gospel by which they were saved was
“that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (I Corinthians 15:1-3). “God made him
who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (II
Corinthians 5:21). Christ gave himself for our sins and not for our sicknesses (Galatians 1:3-4)
and he “gave himself to redeem us from all wickedness” (Titus 2:14). “In him we have
redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins” (Ephesians 1:7).

Consider also the bearing the claim that there is healing in the atonement might have on the
doctrine of the security of the believer in Christ. The Bible teaches that Christ saves all those that
the Father has given to him and that none of them can be lost (John 3:16; 5:24; 6:37-40;
10:28,29; Romans 8:28-39; Philippians 1:6). If the physical healing of the body was secured by
the atonement in the same sense as the salvation of the soul, it would follow that those who are
saved should never lose their physical health and ultimately never die. But this is a patently
ridiculous idea because it is self-evident that Christians usually do experience changes in their
physical health and Christians often die from sickness and disease. We have received the
redemption of our souls, but we wait for the redemption of our bodies in the resurrection of the
last day (Romans 8:23). The body that will die is weak and perishable, but it will rise to an
imperishable, glorious, and powerful life (I Corinthians 15:42-44). Perfection whether in the
realm of the spiritual or the physical awaits the glorification of the whole person (Romans
8:29,30). Not until Jesus comes will he “transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his
glorious body” (Philippians 3:21).

Related to this is the question of the assurance of salvation. The Bible teaches that a Christian
can know that he has eternal life (I John 5:13). But if physical healing and eternal salvation are
both guaranteed privileges for all who trust in the atoning sacrifice of Christ, what then? On what
grounds may a person be assured of his salvation if he prays to be healed by faith and he is not
healed? If both are available by faith in the same atonement, then assurance of salvation depends
on both in the same person’s experience. But assurance of salvation does not depend on physical
healing any more than it depends on sinless perfection. Christians still get sick, and Christians
still commit sins. Christ has saved us from the penalty of sin, he is saving us from the power of
sin, and he will save us from the presence of sin. We are never taught to expect either physical or
spiritual perfection in this life. Assurance of salvation rests upon an understanding of the gospel,
believing what God has said, and trusting what God has done.

Many faithful servants of Christ have been afflicted with serious disabilities and diseases from
which they have not been healed. Preachers of the gospel have either been born blind or have lost
their eyesight. Some have been totally deaf. Many have labored with impaired hearing. The
physical diseases that are common to man have always been common to Christians. Some of the
greatest and most useful saints have suffered with sickness. We may think of the apostle Paul
himself and his “thorn in the flesh.” He asked God three times to deliver him from it. God’s
answer to the great apostle was, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in
weakness” (II Corinthians 12:9). Whatever it was, he believed that God had a purpose in not
granting him healing. We may think of Trophimus, whom Paul had to leave in Miletus because
he was sick (II Timothy 4:20). There was Epaphroditus who was so sick he almost died
(Philippians 2:26). These men were associates of Paul, yet apparently they were not healed. In
more recent times a man like David Brainerd comes to mind, who died of tuberculosis at the age
of twenty-nine. Or we may mention Henry Martyn, the great Anglican missionary who died in
Asia Minor at about the same age after years of physical sickness and suffering. Robert Murray
McCheyne, the Scottish minister of the gospel, died at around the same age after battling
sickness much of his life. And to come to the present, we need only mention the name of Joni
Eareckson Tada, who has lived in a wheelchair for most of her life. But these are representative
of the vast multitude of God’s people who have understood and trusted in the atonement our
Savior accomplished for sinners on the cross. They have rejoiced in the God of our salvation
whether in sickness or in health, content with his assured promise, “My grace is sufficient for
you.”

July 20, 2008