This writeup is posted in this forum just so it is not limited to Baptists to respond. Those who have read anything I've posted before about this know I am not "on the fence," or haven't come to any conclusions. But I am trying to consider this question from both angles. There have been some discussions about neo-pentecostalism on the board recently, and as expected, they usually come down to 2 chief dilemmas-- glossalia [tongues] and miraculous healings. The emphasis here will be on the latter. For shortness, the word disease will be used to encompass all types of physical ailments, temporary and permanent injuries, and deformities. And, like most threads on this board, it will be assumed the reader has a basic grasp of the scriptures, so there will not be citations for every point. First, a summary of why some Christians think miracles of healings are to be expected today: -- Because disease, by way of sin, is the work of Satan, and the purpose of Jesus' victory over sin is to destroy the work of Satan. --Because Jesus did heal people of their diseases when he was here on earth, and scripture says he is "the same yesterday, today, forever." --Because Jesus said that whatever we ask in his name he will do for us. --Because miracles affirm the presence and moving of God, and he is praised when people see him work. Next, a summary of why some Christians think miracles of healings are for God to choose, but not for us necessarily to expect today: --Because miracles were rare even in times of recorded scripture; mostly limited to the Exodus, the days of Elijah and Elisha, and to the earthly ministry of Jesus and the apostles. --Because diseases are just one consequence, among many, for man's sins, and since others are still with us-- e.g., thorns & thistles, natural disasters, physical death--why expect diseases to be so punctually taken away? --Because all things work together for God's purposes; including for the ultimate, if not the immediate, good of his people. --Because we should not expect to share in Christ's glory and not share in suffering for him, as scripture says we are privileged to do. Are there points of agreement between these 2 "camps?" Yes, I think so => God is to be glorified...God has the power to miraculously heal...the present world is not a paradise...we long to be free from the presence of all the consequences of sin. What's the problem, then? Why so much contention between 2 routes to the same goal? Perhaps the pride of seeing what we've been taught affirmed by proof-- or perhaps by lack of proof. Either position can color the lenses through which we see 'action.' Just recently, a woman I know had a son who had a motorcycle wreck that broke his tibia-- that is what happened to me almost 4 decades ago, and does play a part in my views of this, but that's not the point here and now. She told about his distress, having just moved away from her home and starting an adult life, and suddenly there are medical bills totaling $115,000. A couple weeks later, she had a "praise" that his insurance and associated discounts brought those down to $5000 that he owes, and he is 'ahead' in his recovery. Miracles(s) or not? I think she thought so, and that's what she meant by "praise" for what good news there is. In my view, it's hard to see it as anything like a miracle-- nothing unusual for similar situations today, and a miracle should be taking care of all the pain and debilitation of the leg. This should be enough to start with, but I'm a bit weary and need to knock off at this point tonight.