It is striking that a someone with a theology doctorate could talk about Jesus healing virtually no one of diseases that could not be explained away as pyscho-somatic (this is from the samples pages). Has he read the gospels? What about the woman who had been bleeding for 12 years? The author specifically mentions leprosy and that Jesus merely "declared [them] clean" rather than healing them. How is it that the 10 lepers were healed on the way and immediately noticed and one came back? Obviously a physical change had occurred. Besides the fact that it was Jesus who told people to go to priests to declared them clean, so obviously that wasn't what He was doing! Healing a man blind from birth? (That one cannot be explained by pressing on an over-ripe cataract). The healing of the man with the withered hand? (That involves a physically visible change). The restoration of an ear that was cut off? Raising three different people from the dead (in Lazarus' case after three days in the tomb)? While there are cases where people's lives hang by a thread and their breath is scarcely discernible, I think we need to give a little more credence to the basic knowledge of life and death held by the Jewish people, who I'm sure were not in the habit of burying the living. Also, he claims that healing is not central -- perhaps forgetting that Jesus in Luke 4:18 tied the "recovery of sight to the blind" into his central statement of mission.