In a posting on the thread - Biblical Facts on Divine Healing - in response to my suggestion that the words of
Job 33:19-22 were in opposition to your assertion that "God never causes illness to teach us a lesson," you discounted the relevancy of Elihu's comments, and in so doing failed to take into account that when God spoke to Job He never refuted any of the things which Elihu had stated.
Should one not take this to infer that Elihu's statements were meritorious? If not, then simply strike chapters 32-37 of the book of Job from your Bible, for apparently you believe them not to be inspired of God!
The truth be told, God, indeed, authenticated Elihu's statements to Job, for among His first words God asked for his response to the same charge that Elihu had registered (that is, Job had spoken about things without knowledge of that which he spoke of - compare
Job 34:35 and 38:2).
Your assertion that "God never causes illness to teach us a lesson" also fails to take into consideration the following:
1. In referring to the manner in which God seeks to cause the "righteous" man who is guilty of transgression to become aware of his deed, we find it written in
Job 36:6-12 that He will cause them to "be holden in cords of affliction" as a means of correction. Would one be amiss to conclude that the "affliction" here implies that God has "inflicted" some type of physical suffering? Surely this should not be discarded altogether!
2. God told Ezekiel that "When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity,
and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: ... and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered..." Are we to completely discard either disease or some type of physical suffering as being a type of "stumblingblock" which God chooses to "inflict" upon that righteous man who has committed transgression? I think not!
Threaded Mode
