ENERGY HEALING: A CHRISTIAN THEOLOGICAL APPRAISAL

One feature of our postmodern world is the attention given to health and lifestyle issues, such as diet,

fitness, mental health, stress reduction, and the treatment of illnesses. Across the twentieth century many

major breakthroughs have occurred in medical diagnosis, surgical procedures, and the treatment of

previously incurable diseases. However there has been a groundswell of concern over the

depersonalization of patients and the seemingly endless proliferation of drugs. Add to this the escalating

costs of surgery and health care in most Western nations, and it is hardly surprising that many people now

opt for consultations with holistic or alternative healers.

Paradigm Shift:

This swing towards holistic or complementary medicine in the closing decades of the twentieth century

has coincided with the shift into postmodemity. Postmodernity represents a major shift in ideas in

Western thinking. Major shifts in the way people understand themselves and civilizations develop have

occurred down the centuries. Medieval Europe, for example, was a feudal society. It capsized with the

advent of both the Renaissance and Reformation. These twin movements departed from the structures and

basic assumptions of medieval society, and gave rise to new political, philosophical and theological

frameworks.

In the eighteenth century another innovation in thought occurred which was known as the Enlightenment.

Our modem era emerged from the Enlightenment, which had undergirding it an anti-supernatural bias.

The emphasis was placed on finding absolute certainty in knowledge through human reason and science.

The assumptions of the Enlightenment world have now collapsed as being unworkable, and it is being

replaced by a new mindset, which at present is called postmodern.

In the postmodern framework we can discern two principal features. First, postmodernity represents a

critique of the inadequacies of the Enlightenment agenda to find absolute certainty in reason and science.

Second, it stands for a fresh way of understanding life in the context of an emerging global civilization.

The bias against the spiritual, which characterized the modern world, is winnowing away. One of the

major spiritual expressions of postmodern thought in the West is new age.

Holistic Healing:

Accompanying this broad shift in ideas is the movement of holistic health. In holistic health the entire

person in body, mind and spirit is treated. This deep attention to the whole person is immensely

appealing, particularly when contrasted with the perceived depersonalization of patients in mainstream

medical practice. Holistic healers bring to their work considerable personal interaction with their clients.

These healers quite rightly emphasize the need to not merely tackle the symptoms of illness, but to

address wider lifestyle issues that are conducive to fostering health and well being.

The signposts of this popular swing towards alternative or complementary health care are easy to

measure. We need only peruse the magazine stands in most newsagents to find titles such as WellBeing

International, Nature & Health, Good Medicine and so on. There are numerous Alternative Therapy

Colleges where one can study acupuncture, aromatherapy, homeopathy, massage and reiki. The

University of Southern Cross (Lismore, NSW) now incorporates aspects of complementary medicine in

formal medical and nursing degree studies. The journal LAMP, which is the official periodical of the

NSW Nurses Association, devoted an entire issue to the positive use of complementary therapies. Some

health insurance funds now recognize certain alternative treatments for purposes of coverage and

reimbursement. Our bookstores are also brimming with a multitude of texts and testimonials to holistic

healing.

2

Energy Healing:

Some alternative therapies are built upon the concept of healing through energy. Some of these include

acupuncture, kinesiology and reiki. The idea that there are various energies we can tap into to heal is not

new. We find this notion in ancient Chinese healing, Hindu folk religion, in the hermetic traditions and in

primal societies. Spiritual healers such as Emmanuel Swedenborg, Anton Mesmer and Mary Baker Eddy

likewise spoke of drawing on various magnetic or energetic forces. The relationship between healing and

religious belief is itself a very ancient one found across many cultures.

The renewed emphasis on energy healing has some continuity with these ancient traditions. However

some healers have taken the concept a step further and amalgamated it with insights from quantum

physics and the hologram. Since Einstein’s day we have become aware that at a sub-atomic level energy

never “dies” but changes form. The “stuff” of the universe, namely matter, consists of energy in different

forms. The new physics, which is bewildering to most lay people, has provided a new framework, indeed

even a new mythological stance, for understanding reality. It is in this context some healers are persuaded

that quantum physics confirms the validity of their approach to energy healing.

Energy healing is gaining widespread acceptance in society and even with some mainstream medical

practitioners. Christians can ill afford to ignore neither this trend nor the challenges thrown up by this

phenomenon. A colleague of mine at the Presbyterian Theological Centre, Sydney, had this brought home

to him when he entered the local hospital for treatment to a back injury. A nurse told him that he needed

to have his energy centres reharmonized if he was going to recover. I believe it is imperative that we

grapple with complementary medicine and develop a theology that properly addresses it.

Two Opposing Camps:

At the present time I see two mutually exclusive stances taken by Christians on the subject. The first

group comprises Christians who endorse the use of alternative healing techniques, including those based

on energy. In general when challenged about using them these Christians reply, “I use them because I

know they work and I pray that God uses me to help others. ” This is a very pragmatic stance, but its

advocates rarely offer any substantial biblical or theological reasons to justify their approach to healing.

One exception to this is the former Campus Crusade worker Monte Kline who has apparently written in

defence of their use. Kline is now a practitioner of alternative therapies and has been criticized by the

evangelical apologist Elliot Miller.

The second group is very suspicious of alternative medicine, especially remedies based on energy. These

Christians offer two principal objections. One is that there is no scientific evidence to support the claims

about a mystical energy force, and so energy healing is debunked as unscientific. The other objection is

that these references to a mystical energy force have occultic or demonic overtones. Since many, though

not all, alternative healers tend profess some form of new age spirituality, the model of energy healing is

understood to be spiritual in nature. Since it is a spiritual source, and the originators of the techniques

were not Christian, it is argued that Satan must be deceiving people.

I find both stances to be somewhat deficient in their theological understanding of this subject. I believe

that a solid Biblical and theological framework must first be developed before attempting to embrace or

reject energy healing.

Theological Mapwork:

The proper starting point is grounded in God’s character and nature. The Bible declares that by the very

act of creation, God gave life to human beings, animals and plants (Gen. 1). The portrait of creation in the

Bible is not that of a static work, like a wound-up clock left to run on its own. Rather, the Bible affirms

that the entire creation depends on God to keep it in existence. Thus in Hebrews 1:3 it is disclosed that

Jesus Christ is the creator and he upholds all things by the power of his word. Paul taught that the whole

creation was made by, for and through Jesus Christ (Col. 1:16-17). Paul also preached that it is in God we

all live and move and have our very being (Acts 17:24-28).

3

In the Old Testament the Hebrew word ruah appears more than three hundred times. It is translated,

according to context, as spirit, breath and wind. It is God’s ruah that hovers over the creation (Gen. 1:2),

renews the ground (Ps. 104:30), and maintains and sustains all things (Gen. 6:3; Num. 16:22 & 27: 16;

Job 10:12, 27:3 & 34:14). The ruah is the fountain of all life (Ps. 36:9), is present everywhere in the

creation (Ps. 139:7). The breath of life is given to humans (Gen. 2:7) and all creatures (Gen. 1:30). In the

New Testament it is reaffirmed that the breath of life comes from God (Rev. 11: 11).

B. B. Warfield, in Biblical and Theological Studies wrote that, “The Spirit of God in the Old Testament is

the executive name of God – the divine principle of activity everywhere at work in the world.” (p. 131).

Warfield affirmed that the Spirit of God is the “principle of the very existence and persistence of all

things, and as the source and originating cause of all movement and order and life.” (p. 134) R. C. Sproul

in The Mystery of the Holy Spirit likewise avers that “there is another sense in which all mankind,

believers and unbelievers alike, ‘have’ the Holy Spirit. In the sense of creation (as distinguished from

redemption) everybody participates in the Holy Spirit. Since the Holy Spirit is the source and power

supply of life itself, no one can live completely apart from the Holy Spirit. ” (p. 88)

So another key element is a theology of the creation in which we discover the Spirit of God at work. This

work of the Spirit did not end with the act of creation, but continues on in all ages. At times Christians

seem to develop so much of their theological understandings based on the fall of humanity (Gen. 3), at the

expense of any developed theology of the creation. The redemption of humanity is not divorced from the

sphere of creation, because the incarnation of God in Christ takes place in time and space. Although the

redemption focuses on individual humans, the creation is swept up in the work of Christ. Indeed the

eschatological picture is of the whole creation renewed and restored (Is. 65:17-25; Rom. 8:22; 2 Pet. 3:13;

Rev. 21). In other words, a holistic theology will not set the creation and the fall off against one another,

but rather will keep both teachings in balance.

God as the Healer:

Another clear-cut teaching of the Bible is that it is inherent in God’s nature to heal (Ex. 15:26).

Throughout the Old Testament God heals various individuals (Gen. 20:17; 2 Chron. 30:20), and in the

New Testament Jesus exercised a ministry of healing (Matt. 4:24, 8:8-16, 12:15; Lk. 6:17, 9:11, 13:14,

22:51). The apostles likewise were agents of healing (Acts 3:11, 4:14, 5:16, 8:7, 14: 9, 28: 8-9). Healing

was seen as one of the gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12: 9,28, 30), and James exhorted Christians to anoint the

sick with oil and pray for healing (Jam. 5: 16).

The Bible indicates that God in his general kindness to all humanity makes provision for our basic needs

(Matt. 5:45; Acts 14:17). We see that God bestows healing on both believers and unbelievers (2 Ki. 5; Lk.

17:12-17). God’s Spirit sustains all life, and death comes when the ruah is withdrawn by God (Ps. 146:4;

Eccl. 12:7). S. I. McMillen was a Christian medical practitioner who wrote the little classic None of These

Diseases. McMillen found that God’s Word also set forth principles for diet, fitness, hygiene, emotional

health and spiritual well being. He concluded that the Biblical guidelines of morality, lifestyle and well

being comprise God’s prescription for a healthy and happy life. So we find that all healing, be it

miraculous or not, occurs under God’s sovereignty.

From Biblical times until the present, Christians have happily affirmed that the work of physicians is an

extension of God’s general blessings to a fallen human race. With the modern day advent of the

mainstream medical profession, Christians do not seem to raise any alarm bells about doctors and nurses

who happen to be atheistic, agnostic or the devotee of a non-Christian faith. Perhaps one reason why this

is so stems from an implicit trust in science as something that is provable and works. It is interesting to

note that some medical treatments were discovered or developed by non-Christian physicians. For

example, Jonas Salk is renowned for developing the polio vaccine. Since the late 1970s, Salk has been

involved in new age and alternative health care circles, whilst remaining committed to mainstream

practices. If Christians are willing to endorse mainstream medicine as one of God’s blessings, even though

many practitioners do not believe in God, then why is alternative healing set aside as a special case?

4

Science versus Energy Healing:

As noted earlier, one major reason why many Christians dismiss energy healing is because it does not fit

in with their understanding of science. Thus far, it is argued, no scientific proof exists to show there is a

mystical energy force we can tap into. The conclusion drawn is that in the absence of scientific

verification, energy healing is pseudo-science and is therefore wrong.

Now we are by creation creatures of reason and God assuredly wants us to use our minds to his glory.

Through the use of rational analysis and rigorous scientific testing we can establish whether someone is

trying to con us. Even professional stage illusionists, such as Andre Kole and Danny Korem, have

demonstrated how certain psychic healers employ sleight-of-hand tricks when purporting to make

incisions by their fingers, withdrawing tumours and closing up the patient’s body. Snake-oil merchants

and charlatans have abounded in every civilization, and we ought to be discerning lest unscrupulous

people exploit our naivete. So there is some wise counsel and caution here to be on the alert for fakes and

frauds.

Another moot point is whether energy healers can justifiably leap from quantum physics to the universal

life force they claim exists. It is one thing to talk about energy and matter at a sub-atomic level, and

entirely another thing to talk about the whole cosmos in the spiritual terms that some healers do.

It is also undeniable that through scientific research and experimentation, a variety of cures have been

discovered. There is, however, a potential blindspot for those who feel that science is somehow the “be all

and end all”. We must be mindful of the fact that the stance of the modern era was based on an antisupernatural

bias and a commitment to the idea that objective knowledge could be uncovered through

reason and science. Postmodern thinkers have underscored the difficulty with this outlook. Knowledge

arises and is interpreted in the matrix of many factors including one’s gender, ethnicity and culture.

My colleague Ross Clifford has a marvellous illustration of this bias in his book Leading Lawyers Case

for the Resurrection. His illustration concerns the Australian mammal the platypus. In the nineteenth

century European zoologists refused to believe the claims emanating from Australia concerning the

existence of the platypus. The creature was unknown in European scientific taxonomy. A duck-billed,

spiny, webbed mammal that lays eggs like a reptile was deemed to be a hoax. This perspective was

maintained even when a carcass of the platypus was sent to England. The prevailing scientific mindset

could not accept the evidence for the platypus because it contradicted accepted norms of zoological

understanding. Despite their scepticism, the platypus was indeed a real Australian mammal, and these

days live specimens can be seen in most zoos.

John Warwick Montgomery offers another illustration with respect to the classic “Table of Elements”

devised at the end of the nineteenth century. Within the classic table there are the inert gases: neon, radon,

xenon, krypton, argon and helium. It became orthodox scientific opinion that these gases, because of their

zero valences, could not be combined with other chemicals to produce any compounds. Yet in the 1960s,

and in the absence of atomic physics, new chemical compounds were produced. These compounds could

have been produced when the gases were discovered, but the prevailing mindset had already deemed it

impossible. Thus it took over seventy years to show up the inadequacy of the orthodox opinion, which

had been a genuine barrier to making these discoveries. That presuppositional barrier occurred inside the

context of a paradigm governed by the absolute confidence in the objective, bias free nature of scientific

research.

Lessons from Science:

The first lesson for us is that even using the scientific method, zoologists were not bias free and

academically neutral. They rejected the evidence because their presuppositions acted as filters. The data

did not fit in with their assumptions. The same was the case for the inert gases in the table of elements.

The second lesson is what postmodernists have underscored, namely that knowledge and the

interpretation of data can be powerfully shaped by a variety of social factors. The scientific method is not

necessarily a neutral or bias free tool. The scientist comes to research and experimentation with some

useful skills and critical tools, but also operates with certain beliefs that act as filters.

5

There is a specific applied lesson for Christians who cannot fit energy healing into a scientific framework.

To be sure, energy healing at the present time does not fit into current scientific understanding. That very

fact ought to make us cautious because it may turn out in years to come that a plausible scientific

explanation is forthcoming. Thus to simply reject the reality of energy healing because it does not fit in

with our cherished assumptions, would be as Kline says akin to a contemporary defence of a flat earth.

It was an established scientific stance that the earth was the centre of the solar system around which the

sun and planets revolved. This geocentric stance has given way since the discoveries of Copernicus and

Kepler. So we are reminded by this illustration that science involves an exploration of uncharted spheres

of knowledge where theories are subject to constant revision. So whilst we should applaud the efforts of

scientists and sceptics who have exposed cases of fraud, science itself is a discipline where conjectures

and theories are made and always subject to modification or rejection as further insights are gained.

Modern astronomy has its roots in ancient astrology, just as chemistry and metallurgy began with spiritual

alchemists searching for the elixir of life. Both astrology and alchemy are hermetic or occult traditions.

Modern medicine is itself just a recent phenomenon. In pre-Industrial societies folk remedies, herbal

healing, and various other techniques prevailed. It is also important to note that in mainstream medicine

there are many things that work, but doctors do not necessarily know exactly why they work. Christians

need to be more self-aware of their own commitments to a modernity mindset, which can actually run

counter to Biblical beliefs. A modernity mindset can put cataracts over our eyes, simply because what is

unfamiliar or unknown does not fit in with what we are prepared to accept as true or real. Christians need

to recall that in the modernity mindset, Jesus could not have risen from the dead, because the

presupposition from the outset is that resurrections are impossible. Despite such a bias the historical and

juridical evidence makes such an assumption untenable.

Mystical Energy & The Devil:

The other major reason why many Christians reject energy healing is that it is considered to be spiritually

dangerous and possibly satanic in origin. This style of critique, which has been advanced by evangelical

apologists such as John Ankerberg, John Weldon, Paul Reisser and Elliot Miller, reminds the Christian of

the need for spiritual discernment. The Bible itself makes repeated warnings about being deceived by

false teachings, false prophets and so on (Deut. 13:1-5, 18:18-22; Matt. 7:15ff; Acts 20:26-32; Eph. 4:11-

16; 2 Cor. 11:3-4,13-15;1 Thess. 5:21;1 John4:1-3).

The stance taken by these apologists is firmly grounded in the theology of the fall, and takes very

seriously the Biblical teachings about the Devil and demons. These apologists are usually quite adept at

describing other systems of belief and identifying flaws in those beliefs. They see a crucial link formed

between a non-Christian’s beliefs and spiritual deception. As some discoverers of alternative therapies

have had commitments to non-Christian beliefs – such as D. D. Palmer the discoverer of chiropractic, and

Samuel Hahnemann the discoverer of homeopathy – the apologists hone their criticisms on the therapist’s

worldview. The conclusion that is generally drawn is that new age healers who advocate energy healing

are promoting a false worldview and the reality of the energy source is identified as being satanic in

nature.

Potential Drawbacks:

The great strength of the apologists who argue against energy healing is their unswerving fidelity to

Biblical teaching. However I believe there are some weaknesses with their approach to energy-based

alternative healing. Firstly, their explanation is what I dub a “devil-of-the-gaps” theory. In the history of

science whatever was inexplicable was once attributed to the hand of God. This became known as the

“God-of-the-gaps” theory. Unfortunately as more gaps were filled in less and less was there a need to

appeal to God as a factor in the equation. It seems to me that the same drawback applies here in

attributing the unexplained energy source as being devilish. If it is demonstrated sometime in the future

that the energy source has a scientific explanation, then the devil as the answer will disappear. If energy

healing remains beyond science, it does not necessarily follow that the spiritual source must be the devil.

A second point is that their theological base rests on the fall and does not consider a creation theology.

6

Earlier I discussed some elements in a creation theology, particularly with respect to the Spirit of God

working in the creation. We discovered that it is inherent in God’s nature to heal and the Spirit is

maintaining the very existence of the cosmos. I referred to the works of two prominent Reformed

evangelical theologians of the twentieth century, B. B. Warfield and R. C. Sproul. Both were addressing

the issue of the work of God’s Spirit in the creation. Both underscored the Biblical fact that it is the Spirit

of God who keeps all life going. God in his general grace to humanity makes blessings and provisions

equally on the just and unjust. We noted that even the Bible records cases where unbelievers were directly

healed by God and remained in their unbelief.

Devilish Healing:

One major question to be addressed concerns the claim that energy healing derives from the devil. Most

evangelical apologists tackling this subject tend to follow the approach of Walter Martin (1928-1989).

Martin was an evangelical pioneer in counter-cult apologetics. From the 1950s until his death, Martin

inspired many evangelicals to take the cults and occult seriously. In his assessment of the teachings of

movements like Christian Science, Martin raised theological doubts about cultic and occultic healing. He

acknowledged that genuine healings could be documented in these movements. However, he argued,

since the teachings of these groups contradicted Biblical revelation, the source of such healing must be

devilish.

The basic Biblical justification of Martin’s stance is grounded in passages concerning counterfeit miracles

(Ex. 7:8-12; Matt. 24: 24; Acts 8:9-24; 2 Cor. 11:3-4, 13-15; 2 Thess. 2:9). Although none of these

passages expressly mentions healing, it is inferred because miracles and signs and wonders are

mentioned.