B. B. Warfield's Book "Counterfeit Miracles"

[bookslover]

B. B. Warfield's book Counterfeit Miracles

It occurred to me recently that this book was published 100 years ago this year, in 1918. I think it was his last book, too.

Just sayin'.

 

[Dachaser]

B. B. Warfield's book Counterfeit Miracles

It occurred to me recently that this book was published 100 years ago this year, in 1918. I think it was his last book, too.

Just sayin'.

Was he addressing the Charasmatic movement of his time?

 

[bookslover]

Was he addressing the Charasmatic movement of his time?

Partly. If I remember, he's addressing the various movements of "enthusiasm" (as it was called in centuries past) as well as the brand new Pentecostalism movement of the early 20th century (which began in 1906).

 

[Dachaser]

Partly. If I remember, he's addressing the various movements of "enthusiasm" (as it was called in centuries past) as well as the brand new Pentecostalism movement of the early 20th century (which began in 1906).

It interesting to me that he was adressing the problems in the modern Charasmatic Movement of his time , and we are still adressing them even today. The new teacher against the Charasmatics now being those such as Dr MacArthur himself.

 

[RamistThomist]

Was he addressing the Charasmatic movement of his time?

It was more of the Keswick stuff. And he also interacted with some Oxford Anglican claims about miracles extending up to but no later than the 5th century. While I think Warfield is in error on some parts, he's correct on that.

It is a good work against Benny Hinn. It won't work against Keener or Steve Hays.

 

[Tom Hart]

From the table of contents:

The Cessation of the Charismata
Patristic and Mediæval Marvels
Roman Catholic Miracles
Irvingite Gifts
Faith-Healing
Mind-Cure

 

[RamistThomist]

Here is a dissertation topic if anyone wants it: examine late 19th century/early 20th century cessationist indirect attacks on spiritualism, theosophy, Blavatsky, etc. That would be interesting.

 

[Taylor]

Here is a dissertation topic if anyone wants it: examine late 19th century/early 20th century cessationist indirect attacks on spiritualism, theosophy, Blavatsky, etc. That would be interesting.

Let’s just raise up another Warfield!

 

[Dachaser]

Let’s just raise up another Warfield!

God did in the area of exposing Charismatic Chaos, and his name is Dr MacArthur. They should have his book and BB Warfield book put together and sold.

 

[RamistThomist]

God did in the area of exposing Charismatic Chaos, and his name is Dr MacArthur. They should have his book and BB Warfield book put together and sold.

Not really. Warfield engaged in scholarship and Macarthur told anecdotes about charismatics who claimed God healed their flat tire or brought their chicken back from the dead. Macarthur has been worked over pretty good by continuationist scholars. Warfield not so.

 

[lynnie]

Poythress details history of gifts such as prophecy with Samuel Rutherford (yeah, the WCF guy) and several Puritans. They were not cessationists as the word is often defined. I don't think VP mentions it but there were plenty of such incidents with Spurgeon too. Not sure what BBW does with the men like Flavel, Mather, Rutherford. Anybody know? Does he attribute it to Satan or not discuss it?

Having said that, my charismatic experience has been that while God can work that way to His glory and to help His saints (including me on occasion) most of what goes on is bogus. Most of the so called words and hotlines to God today are either flesh or counterfeits in my opinion. And the modern apostolic and prophetic movements, where they claim to go to the third heaven and join in the councils of the Godhead, and come back with new revelation on authoritative par with scripture are positively Satanic. I don't doubt they are experiencing something in the spirit realm, but I think it is the fallen ones.

I hate to see people throw it (gifts) all out due to the corruption.

 

[Dachaser]

Poythress details history of gifts such as prophecy with Samuel Rutherford (yeah, the WCF guy) and several Puritans. They were not cessationists as the word is often defined. I don't think VP mentions it but there were plenty of such incidents with Spurgeon too. Not sure what BBW does with the men like Flavel, Mather, Rutherford. Anybody know? Does he attribute it to Satan or not discuss it?

Having said that, my charismatic experience has been that while God can work that way to His glory and to help His saints (including me on occasion) most of what goes on is bogus. Most of the so called words and hotlines to God today are either flesh or counterfeits in my opinion. And the modern apostolic and prophetic movements, where they claim to go to the third heaven and join in the councils of the Godhead, and come back with new revelation on authoritative par with scripture are positively Satanic. I don't doubt they are experiencing something in the spirit realm, but I think it is the fallen ones.

I hate to see people throw it (gifts) all out due to the corruption.

How many of the spiritual gifts do you still see to now be in operation?

 

[Dachaser]

Not really. Warfield engaged in scholarship and Macarthur told anecdotes about charismatics who claimed God healed their flat tire or brought their chicken back from the dead. Macarthur has been worked over pretty good by continuationist scholars. Warfield not so.

I do think that at times Dr MacArthur did seem to get to the point of almost saying all and any into that movement were not of God, and would like to see a discussion between him and Dr Grudem on this issue of spiritual gifts being in operation today or not.

 

[RamistThomist]

I do think that at times Dr MacArthur did seem to get to the point of almost saying all and any into that movement were not of God, and would like to see a discussion between him and Dr Grudem on this issue of spiritual gifts being in operation today or not.

I did a logical analysis where I showed that Macarthur was logically forced to say his hero Lloyd-Jones was the lowest of the low.
https://cocceius.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/macarthur-and-defeaters/

 

[Taylor]

Poythress details history of gifts such as prophecy with Samuel Rutherford (yeah, the WCF guy) and several Puritans. They were not cessationists as the word is often defined. I don't think VP mentions it but there were plenty of such incidents with Spurgeon too. Not sure what BBW does with the men like Flavel, Mather, Rutherford. Anybody know? Does he attribute it to Satan or not discuss it?

Having said that, my charismatic experience has been that while God can work that way to His glory and to help His saints (including me on occasion) most of what goes on is bogus. Most of the so called words and hotlines to God today are either flesh or counterfeits in my opinion. And the modern apostolic and prophetic movements, where they claim to go to the third heaven and join in the councils of the Godhead, and come back with new revelation on authoritative par with scripture are positively Satanic. I don't doubt they are experiencing something in the spirit realm, but I think it is the fallen ones.

I hate to see people throw it (gifts) all out due to the corruption.

This is a good post. Growing up in a Pentecostal church, I have struggled with this whole issue of the gifts. Exegetically, I am not really able to defend the idea that God will not ever administer any one of the more "miraculous" gifts to any of his saints under any circumstance, although certainly the prevalence we see in the New Testament is certainly not in operation today.

I am inclined to agree with Dr. Jim Boice on this matter:

"The question arises as to whether such gifts exist today, a matter on which Christians are divided. We may note, on the one hand, that some gifts (such as the gifts of apostleship and prophecy) no longer occur in their biblical sense. The gifts of healings and miracles could be like them.

Yet gifts like evangelism, teaching and faith continue to exist and clearly must continue to the end of church history. Healings and miracles could be like them.

"A third possibility exists. Healings and miracles could exist but could occur infrequently. There are several reasons for preferring this interpretation. Miracles and healings are bracketed by other gifts which continue: in the case of 1 Corinthians 12:8–10, by wisdom, knowledge and faith before, and by the discerning of spirits afterward; in the case of 1 Corinthians 12:28–30, by teaching before and the gift of helping after. The working of miracles is similar to the case of speaking in tongues, which is treated at great length two chapters later and in regard to which we receive an explicit warning: “Do not forbid speaking in tongues” (1 Cor. 14:39). Paul is not encouraging tongues-speaking, but he recognizes that God may continue to give this gift and it should therefore not be discouraged. Nowhere does Paul indicate that either healings, miracles or tongues will cease. Further, accounts of healings and other miracles exist from every period of church history. (Although it may be true that many of them are myths, mistakes or even deliberate deceptions, it would be brash indeed to declare that they all are.)

"We dare not put God in a box on this matter, saying that he cannot give the gifts of healings or miracles today. He can. On the other hand, to say that is not the same thing as saying we have a right to expect healings or that what passes for the miraculous today is authentic."

—James M. Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith: A Comprehensive & Readable Theology (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986), 614.​

 

[lynnie]

How many of the spiritual gifts do you still see to now be in operation?

David.....I appreciate you asking but this subject has gotten me a couple infractions in the past so I think I better quit while I can still post. The official PB position is cessationist and continuationism is not regarded as confessional. I happen to think Samuel Rutherford was confessional, and Poythress is OPC, so better that such reputable people influence you than my opinion.

 

[Dachaser]

I did a logical analysis where I showed that Macarthur was logically forced to say his hero Lloyd-Jones was the lowest of the low.
https://cocceius.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/macarthur-and-defeaters/

I would see a distinct differences in theology between Dr Grudem, DA Carson, and Dr Lloyd-Jones, and the bulk of the fruit cakes in the Word of faith movement, such as the Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copelands of that group.

 

[Dachaser]

This is a good post. Growing up in a Pentecostal church, I have struggled with this whole issue of the gifts. Exegetically, I am not really able to defend the idea that God will not ever administer any one of the more "miraculous" gifts to any of his saints under any circumstance, although certainly the prevalence we see in the New Testament is certainly not in operation today.

I am inclined to agree with Dr. Jim Boice on this matter:

"The question arises as to whether such gifts exist today, a matter on which Christians are divided. We may note, on the one hand, that some gifts (such as the gifts of apostleship and prophecy) no longer occur in their biblical sense. The gifts of healings and miracles could be like them.

Yet gifts like evangelism, teaching and faith continue to exist and clearly must continue to the end of church history. Healings and miracles could be like them.

"A third possibility exists. Healings and miracles could exist but could occur infrequently. There are several reasons for preferring this interpretation. Miracles and healings are bracketed by other gifts which continue: in the case of 1 Corinthians 12:8–10, by wisdom, knowledge and faith before, and by the discerning of spirits afterward; in the case of 1 Corinthians 12:28–30, by teaching before and the gift of helping after. The working of miracles is similar to the case of speaking in tongues, which is treated at great length two chapters later and in regard to which we receive an explicit warning: “Do not forbid speaking in tongues” (1 Cor. 14:39). Paul is not encouraging tongues-speaking, but he recognizes that God may continue to give this gift and it should therefore not be discouraged. Nowhere does Paul indicate that either healings, miracles or tongues will cease. Further, accounts of healings and other miracles exist from every period of church history. (Although it may be true that many of them are myths, mistakes or even deliberate deceptions, it would be brash indeed to declare that they all are.)

"We dare not put God in a box on this matter, saying that he cannot give the gifts of healings or miracles today. He can. On the other hand, to say that is not the same thing as saying we have a right to expect healings or that what passes for the miraculous today is authentic."

—James M. Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith: A Comprehensive & Readable Theology (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986), 614.​

I was a teaching Elder in the AOG, and would say that my new understanding would be that while the Lord can still do divine healings and even miracles as He deems fit to have them done, there would be none gifted to heal or do miracles as the Apostles were by God. This would not be the normal way that God operates today, as what was recorded in Acts was during the transition period between the Old and New Covenants.

 

[RamistThomist]

I would see a distinct differences in theology between Dr Grudem, DA Carson, and Dr Lloyd-Jones, and the bulk of the fruit cakes in the Word of faith movement, such as the Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copelands of that group.

That's good, but the so-called logic in Macarthur's approach precludes any such distinctions.

 

[RamistThomist]

I was a teaching Elder in the AOG, and would say that my new understanding would be that while the Lord can still do divine healings and even miracles as He deems fit to have them done, there would be none gifted to heal or do miracles as the Apostles were by God. This would not be the normal way that God operates today, as what was recorded in Acts was during the transition period between the Old and New Covenants.

I guess the easiest response to that would be "How would you know that?" The apostles weren't always able to heal with 100% accuracy, and once you grant that fact, there is little difference between their healing ministry and John Wimber's.

 

[Dachaser]

That's good, but the so-called logic in Macarthur's approach precludes any such distinctions.

He should not be lumping together all under the same Charismatic label, as there are good scholars even among them, such as the 3 that were mentioned in my list, and Dr Gordon Fee. The really bad ones are those in the Word of Faith and the Prosperity Gospel.

 

[Dachaser]

I guess the easiest response to that would be "How would you know that?" The apostles weren't always able to heal with 100% accuracy, and once you grant that fact, there is little difference between their healing ministry and John Wimber's.

The Apostles always were able to heal someone in Acts though, so where exactly were they not able to heal or do a miracle when they tried to do such?

 

[earl40]

That's good, but the so-called logic in Macarthur's approach precludes any such distinctions.

That is what cessationism is, and is the logical meaning of the word.

 

[Tom Hart]

That's good, but the so-called logic in Macarthur's approach precludes any such distinctions.

I thought this was a weak point in the book because of its embarrassing irony. MacArthur calls out continuationist teachers for giving credence to the wackos; MacArthur is a dispensationalist.

But regarding cessationism vs. continuationism, I don't think it is unfair to lump it all together. Continuationism is error whether espoused by Lloyd-Jones or Wilkerson. That doesn't mean all continuationist teachers are equally false.

 

[Tom Hart]

The apostles weren't always able to heal with 100% accuracy, and once you grant that fact, there is little difference between their healing ministry and John Wimber's.

Really?

 

[Dachaser]

That is what cessationism is, and is the logical meaning of the word.

The meaning would be more that we do not see the gifts to heal and to do miracles still in operation, but that God Himself can still choose to do them in response to prayers when He sees fit to do them. God can still fully operate as He chooses to do, but the operations of His shown in Acts was for that peculiar time, and not set up as the norm for us today.

 

[RamistThomist]

Really?

Erastus stayed in Corinth, and I left Trophimus sick in Miletus (2 Tim. 4:20). If Paul had infallible healing power, he should have healed him.

 

[RamistThomist]

That is what cessationism is, and is the logical meaning of the word.

And I am glad you are taking Mac's argument to the conclusion. He is forced to condemn his hero Lloyd-Jones. Mind you, it isn't that MLJ is wrong. He's amil, after all. Rather, as Mac stated elsewhere, he is "the lowest of the low."

 

[RamistThomist]

The Apostles always were able to heal someone in Acts though, so where exactly were they not able to heal or do a miracle when they tried to do such?

2 Tim. 4:20. Erastus stayed in Corinth, and I left Trophimus sick in Miletus.

If Paul had 100% healing power, then why didn't he heal Trophimus?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

2 Tim. 4:20. Erastus stayed in Corinth, and I left Trophimus sick in Miletus.

If Paul had 100% healing power, then why didn't he heal Trophimus?

Perhaps by the time of the Epistles the apostolic gifts were winding down. Moreover, nothing therein suggests Paul actually set about to heal Trophimus.

Worth a read:
https://answersingenesis.org/education/spurgeon-sermons/1444-the-sick-man-left-behind/