Another missing piece from the first Jesus book...
Before we leave the topic of the miracles Jesus did, I should mention a connection the New Testament sometimes makes between sin and sickness that may seem strange to us today. For example, in John 9 Jesus and his followers come upon a man who had been blind from birth. The disciples immediately assume that it was the result of someone's sin. "Was it him or his parents?" they instinctively ask.
In this case, Jesus denies it. The man was not blind because of anyone's sin. But the New Testament does not deny that physical sickness can result from sinfulness. We have a tendency today to "demythologize" such things. Sure, if you are promiscuous, you are bound to get some disease. Sure, if you are completely self-indulgent you are likely to get liver disease or lung cancer.
But this is scientific, normal cause-effect thinking. The biblical writers saw a potential connection between sin and sickness in a way that would not normally occur to us. For example, Paul tells the Corinthians that some of them have become sick and some actually died as a punishment for the divisive spirit and cliquish spirit they have shown when eating the Lord's meal together (1 Cor. 11:30).
James 5 makes this same connection when it talks about praying for the sick. The elders of a church are to pray for the sick. "The prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven" (Jas 5:15). James doesn't explicitly say that some sickness results from sin, but it seems implied.
The same connection may be there in Matthew 9 when Jesus first pronounces the sins of a paralyzed man forgiven and only later heals him. The nearby teachers of the law believe Jesus is blaspheming when he thinks he can pronounce the man's sins forgiven.  However, the fact that Jesus also heals the man presumably shows that Jesus does have the authority to forgive sins. After all, if the man's sins were connected to him being paralyzed, then the authority to heal presumably implied the authority to forgive sins.
There are great dangers with associating sin with sickness today. We can fully believe in healing as Christians and yet strongly affirm that it is not God's will for every sick person to be healed. If sickness were always--or even primarily associated with sin, then forgiveness would often involve healing. It just doesn't seem to work that way.
Jesus has also made it clear that it is not our place to judge the intentions of people's hearts (Matt. 7:1). There are many overt actions a person may do that are obvious enough. A person is planning to blow up something and accidentally blows up himself. But it would be very wrong indeed to presume that someone is sick because of some sin he or she had done. Indeed, such an approach to sickness would likely reveal an evil heart on our own part, a hateful spirit.
So while the connection is real in the Bible and we should not say it cannot be so, we are probably right, in the end, only to connect sin with sickness when there is a natural, cause-effect relationship. For example, anger, rage, and bitterness can indeed facilitate high blood pressure and heart disease. Gluttony and overindulgence can indeed lead to diabetes and many other sicknesses. Any other connection is best left to God.
 This is a little puzzling, since presumably priests pronounced people's sins forgiven all the time after they offered the appropriate sacrifices.