# James 5.14 - "Anointing him with oil"



## Bodigean

I am currently preaching through James’ epistle. I will be soon be arriving at chapter 5:14, “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:”

Any thoughts on what it means regarding “anointing him with oil?” 

Thank you in advance.

Sincerely,


----------



## LawrenceU

Not to be trite, but it means to anoint him with oil: smear a bit on his head and pray for God's healing on his behalf. I know that many do not do this today, but it is what it means. I have heard all types of allegories made regarding the practice; I refrain from them. But, in my ministry I've always followed the text in regard to this practice.


----------



## PresbyDane




----------



## chbrooking




----------



## Knoxienne

LawrenceU said:


> Not to be trite, but it means to anoint him with oil: smear a bit on his head and pray for God's healing on his behalf. I know that many do not do this today, but it is what it means. I have heard all types of allegories made regarding the practice; I refrain from them. But, in my ministry I've always followed the text in regard to this practice.



Exactly - I don't know what else it would mean besides what it says. I've talked to several Christians who have either been very ill or who have worked with people who are, and they've always said they don't know why more Christians don't do it - and that they would like to do it or have it done. Seems like a wonderful way to minister to an ailing person.


----------



## bug

The first thing we should note is that the emphasis in the greek is on the prayer, the act of anointing the person with oil is secondary to the prayer. This becomes even more evident in the very next verse which reads (NKJ James 5:15) 'And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.' note that no reference is made to the oil here, the focus is on the power of prayer. 

Secondly it can also be noted that oil is used on occasions with a purely medical sense, eg Luke 10:34. In Mark 6:13 we read that the disciples poured oil onto the sick and healed them, it does not say the oil was part of the act of healing. We know that Jesus did not resort to the use of oil in some in his healings, nor do we read of it being the practise of Peter or Paul in Acts. So it is a little hard to take this as being a binding command if those whom we are to emulate did not do it. 

The consideration that the oil could be purely a practical medical effort to care for the sick person is entirely possible, and must be considered. Something interesting to note though is that the word used for 'sick' is 'astheno' which means to be feeble, or without any strenght. It is as if the condition has worn the person down, they are housebound. this verse then is with reference to those who are very seriously ill, not those who can make it to the prayer meeting. In such a circumstance says James it is appropriate that the elders visit the person to prey over them and care for them. Perhaps if we are to take the anoiting with oil literally, rather then as speaking of providing the general medical care for the person, we should take it literally that it is the elders, not just an elder or pastor that must go. To me, this is beginning to sound a little too ritualistic. 

However it should be noted that some do believe the oil to symbolises the healing power of Christ, and forms part of the prayer for the person's healing. I am not against that idea, and judging by the responses above nor are quite a few other people. If one wishes to anoint with oil as a symbolic act of ones petition then go ahead. One thing this verse certainly isn't saying is that we can neglect medical treatments available to us, and expect the lord to heal, nor in any way does it support the modern faith healer's practices.


----------



## rbcbob

Mark, I taught on this passage and it can be accessed at
SermonAudio.com - Calling the Elders to Pray
"calling the elders to pray"

Bob Brown
RBC Louisville


----------



## reformedminister




----------



## Bodigean

Not making light in any sense by asking this, for those who do practise this(praying and anointing with oil) how effectual has it been especially with v. 15 in view?


----------



## kevin.carroll

Given all the time spent in prayer meetings on sick people (what Derek Thomas calls "organ recitals"), I think it is worth noting the intimate, pastoral setting in which the prayer is offered. The sick calls for the elders who come to him. Very different from what most churches do.

I also think it is worth noting the link this passage makes between physical illness and sin. I think that is something we often overlook.


----------



## Bodigean

Bob, I was actually sitting in your congregation when you taught that message back in 2003!

Mark



rbcbob said:


> Mark, I taught on this passage and it can be accessed at
> SermonAudio.com - Calling the Elders to Pray
> "calling the elders to pray"
> 
> Bob Brown
> RBC Louisville


----------



## chbrooking

bug said:


> Secondly it can also be noted that oil is used on occasions with a purely medical sense, eg Luke 10:34. In Mark 6:13 we read that the disciples poured oil onto the sick and healed them, it does not say the oil was part of the act of healing. We know that Jesus did not resort to the use of oil in some in his healings, nor do we read of it being the practise of Peter or Paul in Acts. So it is a little hard to take this as being a binding command if those whom we are to emulate did not do it.



I would only dispute the notion that we are to emulate Jesus and the apostles (who were clearly in different redemptive-historical categories than those who came after) such that, because they did not use oil, we can dismiss a clear instruction. Jesus is _sui generis_. The apostles were given extraordinary gifts of the spirit, such as healing and prophecy. Those gifts passed with that generation and office. I am to emulate those elements which were not distinctive to the office. Since I don't think the gift of healing persists, but do believe God heals in response to prayer, as you've noted, I think we ought to pray as instructed. And in this case that includes oil.


----------



## rbcbob

PHP:


Bob, I was actually sitting in your congregation when you taught that message back in 2003!

Mark


Mark, small world! I guess I could wish that it had been more helpful


----------



## Bodigean

Bob, actually you were. I have thought often of your lesson that day in regards to that passage. Thanks for the link. I will listen to it again, D.v.

Sincerely,
Mark



rbcbob said:


> PHP:
> 
> 
> Bob, I was actually sitting in your congregation when you taught that message back in 2003!
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> Mark, small world! I guess I could wish that it had been more helpful


----------



## Peairtach

According to Jay Adams, the injunction to apply oil uses the Greek word _aleipho_ which points to smearing or greasing rather than pouring or sprinkling, which latter would signify the unction of the Spirit on prophet, priest or king. What would be the significance for a sick brother or sister of such an anointing? He already has the baptism in/anointing of the Spirit signified by baptism?

In this context _aleipho_ may therefore signify the application/purchase of medicine or the practical care of the sick one in general, which is a very necessary and practical and loving thing for the brothers and sisters of a sick brother or sister to do. 

Prayer and practical/medicinal help for the sick shows a living faith that works.


----------



## wendy

*more Grace*

I just went to read what Ligon Duncan had to say on this, and interestingly, he focuses on prayer without mentioning the oil. To read a transcript of that sermon, go here: 07b James 5:13-18 on November 24, 2002.

A few years ago a pastor was in the hospital, and I was a new believer, and several of us went to visit. I asked if he had asked the elders in the church to come and pray over him. He smiled and said he would think about it and knew many were praying for him. My point is just that it seemed so simple, as a baby Christian, to think like this: you are sick, the Bible says to call the elders to pray for you, and the "Lord will raise you up" so why not just do it?

I tried to get a mental picture of what this verse would look like. Can you imagine it? The steadfastness of elders who love Jesus with a passion and have seen throughout ministry life the faithfulness of God towards His people. They are called, not just one elder, not just one pastor, but a group of godly men asked to come together on behalf of one of the saints. Called to pray over, to anoint someone desperately ill, to intercede with prayers and actions. This is a person too weak to get to the church on the Lord's day, a saint who knows the "time crunch" the elders have, yet calls out for prayer with faith in God's promises. What about the elders? How would they act? Glib, flippant, "happy", perhaps troubled or feeling that their schedules were interrupted? Never! They love this saint, they have invested their lives on behalf of this person to the glory of God. They have encouraged that person to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord, here is a person once active in the congregation now bedridden. The elders are serious. And hopeful. They come to pray, to call upon the One who is The Healer...all the while mindful of the ministry they are practicing at that moment, "anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord", is one of _great hope_. It seems it would be a very loving, tender, sacred, reverent, faithful exercise. _*Anointing in the Name above all names*_. Taking seriously what we have in Christ available to us as the children of God.


----------



## Whitefield

Bodigean said:


> I am currently preaching through James’ epistle. I will be soon be arriving at chapter 5:14, “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:”
> 
> Any thoughts on what it means regarding “anointing him with oil?”
> 
> Thank you in advance.
> 
> Sincerely,



I've used olive oil. I would discourage the use of Valvoline 10-30.


----------



## bug

chbrooking said:


> bug said:
> 
> 
> 
> Secondly it can also be noted that oil is used on occasions with a purely medical sense, eg Luke 10:34. In Mark 6:13 we read that the disciples poured oil onto the sick and healed them, it does not say the oil was part of the act of healing. We know that Jesus did not resort to the use of oil in some in his healings, nor do we read of it being the practise of Peter or Paul in Acts. So it is a little hard to take this as being a binding command if those whom we are to emulate did not do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would only dispute the notion that we are to emulate Jesus and the apostles (who were clearly in different redemptive-historical categories than those who came after) such that, because they did not use oil, we can dismiss a clear instruction. Jesus is _sui generis_. The apostles were given extraordinary gifts of the spirit, such as healing and prophecy. Those gifts passed with that generation and office. I am to emulate those elements which were not distinctive to the office. Since I don't think the gift of healing persists, but do believe God heals in response to prayer, as you've noted, I think we ought to pray as instructed. And in this case that includes oil.
Click to expand...


It's a good point, and the only dispute I would have with that notion is that this is a clear command to annoint with oil as part of prayer, I would suggest that it for from established that this is the case, until the possibility of it being a reference to medicinal care is ruled out. 

How many other situations in scripture do we find that in the new covenant church instrcutions that prayer must be accompanied by certain specific actions if it is to be effective? To my mind the only other one is the casting out of demons, that needs to be accompanied with fasting upon ocacsions. Just as I think the apastolic gifts have died out, I think satan opposition to them has also ceased.

I guess the point I was really trying to make is that we see no example of this being practiced in Acts, nor do we find explanatory passges of this instruction - so it is not a clear cut as we like to think perhaps? One thing we do know for certain is that it is not the outward vestements of prayer that make for an effective prayer, rather it is 'the prayer of faith that saves the sick' it is 'the effective, fervent prayer of a rightous man that avails much.' To me, the whole direction of this passage in James tends away from the idea that the oil is a required part of the prayer that the elders are offering.


----------



## Confessor

I can tell you that it does _not_ entail Extreme Unction...


----------



## Peairtach

In an age when the gift of healing has passed away with the apostles and their disciples, it's important to emphasise that when a brother/sister is sick, the fellowship should - as well as praying - get them the best treatment possible in the circumstances. This could be more important than the oil, especially if _this is_ a reference to medicine.

The use of olive oil as medicine and as a base for medicine is anciently attested, including at Isaiah 1:6 and Luke 10:34.

There is at least one other reference to the use of oil in association with healing at Mark 6:13.


----------



## pepper

*The prayer and oil do not heal but God heals.*



Bodigean said:


> Not making light in any sense by asking this, for those who do practise this(praying and anointing with oil) how effectual has it been especially with v. 15 in view?



You could ask the same question of prayer alone. How effectual has prayer been? The point is that both prayer and oil do not heal. God heals. I would even say that modern medicine does not heal. God heals according to His will and He may use medicine or any other instrument He desires. The act of prayer and the use of oil is only our actions of faith in God as the great healer and it shows that we are trusting in Him alone for healing.


----------



## Confessor

pepper said:


> Bodigean said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not making light in any sense by asking this, for those who do practise this(praying and anointing with oil) how effectual has it been especially with v. 15 in view?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You could ask the same question of prayer alone. How effectual has prayer been? The point is that both prayer and oil do not heal. God heals. I would even say that modern medicine does not heal. God heals according to His will and He may use medicine or any other instrument He desires. The act of prayer and the use of oil is only our actions of faith in God as the great healer and it shows that we are trusting in Him alone for healing.
Click to expand...


Well, there is still quite a distinction between the two. Prayer seems to be more integrated in the process by which God brings about events: we ask for things and our Father gives them to us. Anointing people with oil has a less clear participation in the causality.

I'm not trying to say God's command to anoint oil is useless or irrelevant, just pointing out the idea from which the question arises.


----------



## Whitefield

Are reformed people worried about getting their fingers oily when a personal has read this passage and calls for the elders to come pray and anoint with oil? The oil won't do them any harm; its stated right there in the passage. Rather than theologizing all the way to the sick person's house and back, lets just be obedient and let God sort it out.


----------



## Confessor

Whitefield said:


> Are reformed people worried about getting their fingers oily when a personal has read this passage and calls for the elders to come pray and anoint with oil? The oil won't do them any harm; its stated right there in the passage. Rather than theologizing all the way to the sick person's house and back, lets just be obedient and let God sort it out.



No offense Rev. Marshall, but I don't think it's wrong to ask for the underlying theological reasons for anointing with oil. I have heard statements similar to yours that deny the importance of soteriology: "rather than theologizing about whether God chooses us or we choose Him, let's just let God sort it out" (paraphrased of course).


----------



## Whitefield

Confessor said:


> Whitefield said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are reformed people worried about getting their fingers oily when a personal has read this passage and calls for the elders to come pray and anoint with oil? The oil won't do them any harm; its stated right there in the passage. Rather than theologizing all the way to the sick person's house and back, lets just be obedient and let God sort it out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No offense Rev. Marshall, but I don't think it's wrong to ask for the underlying theological reasons for anointing with oil. I have heard statements similar to yours that deny the importance of soteriology: "rather than theologizing about whether God chooses us or we choose Him, let's just let God sort it out" (paraphrased of course).
Click to expand...


I apologize if you thought I was questioning your concern for the sick or scriptural obedience, I was not. And I would be the last one to try to squelch thelogizing on any subject. But I was starting to get the impression (not necessarily from you) that if a sick member of the church read James 5:14 and calls for the elders of the church to come and pray for him or her and anoint with oil, that maybe the elders didn't have to respond with prayer and anointing. 

What I was reading (and maybe inserting too much between the lines) was:

1. anointing was a culturally limited reference to medication and since we have better medication, oil has ceased to be used when called for - "take them an aspirin and pray for them." Maybe I'm over sensitive to dismissing biblical statements as "culturally limited," since I come out out of a liberal theological system which does that repeatedly to many biblical teachings. 

2. prayer and anointing were being separated, one still required under this passage and the other not, based on "effectiveness." Again, maybe I am over sensitive to this too, "pragmatism" is a slippery slope which replaces God's perspective on things with our own. 

I realize, instead of "reading into" comments, I should have asked questions to find out what was really being said. My comment about "theologizing on the way to the home of the sick" was a reference to "rationalizing away something that we might be uncomfortable doing because it is not something we are used to doing."


----------



## Confessor

Thank you. I understand what you were saying now.


----------



## CharlieJ

I'd like to put another interpretation on the table. I preached interpretation while preaching through James about 2 years ago. I won't say I'm 100% sure of it, but it makes good sense to me. I'm using John MacArthur's James commentary as a guide for this post, but interspersing some of my own thoughts. Basically, the point is that the elders are performing spiritual ministry to a spiritually weak or exhausted brother.

"Sick" (v. 14) ασθενεω is used 14 times in the NT to refer to emotional or spiritual weakness. This is the more common usage in the epistles. This also fits in with the previous two situations, "suffering" (v. 13), which refers to enduring hardship, and "cheerfulness" (v. 13). Notice the word "healthy" does not make the list.

Then, the action attached to the oil is not "anointing" in the ceremonial sense (which would be χριω) but simply "rubbing" (αλειφω). [MacArthur cites A.T. Robertson and Richard Trench in support.] The idea of giving one oil for one's head may be hard to grasp in our culture, but it seems to have been a friendly gesture in the NT (Luke 7:46). The idea is present in the OT, where it is part of a host's provision for his guest at a feast (Ps. 23:5). So, it would seem to refer to showing tangible kindness and hospitality to this person.

More importantly, the Bible says that "the prayer of faith *will save* the one who is sick, and the Lord *will raise* him up. Both of the verbs (σωζω and εγειρω) could refer to physical healing or emotional/metaphorical restoration. However, the word "sick" in this verse is καμνω, which can mean physical sickness, but more often means weariness from physical labor. It's only other appearance in the NT is Heb. 12:3, where it refers to discouragement.

So, the words used throughout the passage seem to be compatible with either a "physical sickness" or "spiritually weary" position. In fact, based on καμνω, one might argue that the spiritual position is a little stronger, but it's pretty even. Based on the broader context, I think the spiritual position is slightly stronger.

However, there appears to be one insurmountable difficulty with the "physical healing" position. If a group of elders ever did this for a sick person, and the person died, God would be a liar. Remember, the text says God "will raise" him up. The statement God will forgive his sins is also quite alarming. This does not seem compatible with our experience, or with the tenor of the rest of the NT, which does not promise miraculous healing or approve of ex opere operato absolution of sin. Even if you think my reading of the "physical" position is a bit ungracious, you still have to wrestle with the strong indicative future verbs. They seem to say something more than, "Well, we've done our part; maybe God will do something now."

On the other hand, who would deny that God would work through the prayer and kindness of his elders to restore a spiritually weak elect brother, even one who may be in that state because of his own sin? If I am reading this passage correctly, God is saying that this is often his method for combating sin and discouragement in his people's lives. And on that note, it fits nicely into the next part of James, which talks about bringing back a sinner from his wandering.


----------



## rbcbob

Charlie,
I came to the same interpretation when I taught on the passage several years ago. I think that you are spot on.
Bob


----------



## Whitefield

CharlieJ said:


> However, there appears to be one insurmountable difficulty with the "physical healing" position. If a group of elders ever did this for a sick person, and the person died, God would be a liar. Remember, the text says God "will raise" him up.



Your posting is very helpful and informative. The only exception I would take is in this quoted statement. Death is not a terminal point in God's promises. To be raised up may not mean to be made healthy in this life, but the ultimate healing of life after death.


----------



## CharlieJ

Whitefield said:


> Your posting is very helpful and informative. The only exception I would take is in this quoted statement. Death is not a terminal point in God's promises. To be raised up may not mean to be made healthy in this life, but the ultimate healing of life after death.



Thanks for that perspective. I hadn't thought of it in that light. My initial thought, though, is that would run contrary to the flow of the passage. A person is sick, so go rub oil on him and pray for him, so.... he will die and God will resurrect him? If the text refers to physical sickness, but the verbs don't refer to physical healing, the whole passage seems a bit strange, especially the part about the oil.


----------



## Whitefield

CharlieJ said:


> Thanks for that perspective. I hadn't thought of it in that light. My initial thought, though, is that would run contrary to the flow of the passage. A person is sick, so go rub oil on him and pray for him, so.... he will die and God will resurrect him? If the text refers to physical sickness, but the verbs don't refer to physical healing, the whole passage seems a bit strange, especially the part about the oil.



"...so go rub oil on him and pray for him, so.... he will die and God will resurrect him?" ... well, I don't think I would propose that. My point is only that healing sometimes comes not in this life. I have had too many people in the terminal stages of disease ask me why their prayers for healing weren't being answered. My reply is usually, "They will be, but it may be on God's side of death and not our side." I guess I see prayer, anointing, dying, ultimate healing as a part of a continuum, and not distinct points.


----------



## lynnie

In the last few years I have had prayer with the anointing of oil 3 times. (PCA church)

1. The first time was for my lungs and asthma, and after 20 years of having the lower lungs breathing 20% less than normal, as if I was a heavy smoker, on my next test with the specialist I was NORMAL...and I have stayed that way.

2. The second time was for an infection under my tooth down by the jawbone that had to be cleared up before they started root canal, and it was killing me, and they hoped antibiotics would reduce it. Well, it went away, all the pain, I never had the root canal.

3. The third time I asked for prayer was for my ear, after the MD made me set up a test with the audiologist as I was testing almost deaf in one ear ( I had had ear infections). By the time I sat in the little booth and got the heavy duty test, they said I had lost some frequencies but was normal enough to not need a hearing aid.


Please do your duty to the sheep and obey that command. We believe in outward symbols of an inner reality with water and communion, why not oil?


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

LawrenceU said:


> Not to be trite, but it means to anoint him with oil: smear a bit on his head and pray for God's healing on his behalf. I know that many do not do this today, but it is what it means. I have heard all types of allegories made regarding the practice; I refrain from them. But, in my ministry I've always followed the text in regard to this practice.



Elders and the Pastor at Fairmount have anointed with oil during prayer. Like you say this passage is pretty straight forward.

-----Added 5/24/2009 at 09:34:50 EST-----



Whitefield said:


> Are reformed people worried about getting their fingers oily when a personal has read this passage and calls for the elders to come pray and anoint with oil? The oil won't do them any harm; its stated right there in the passage. Rather than theologizing all the way to the sick person's house and back, lets just be obedient and let God sort it out.


----------



## CharlieJ

I'm bumping this in the hope of getting more exegetical comments.


----------

