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

[Grant]

But right now I have to change my son's diaper.

The ultimate defense. I can relate!

 

[RamistThomist]

A claim is not evidence, no matter how sincere.

Methinks we will also disagree on what constitutes valid evidence. I can probably marshal evidence from guys like Keener, who wrote a book on it from the African mission field, and it will be dismissed. I can also marshal evidence from world-renowned analytic philosophers like JP Moreland (documented in Kingdom Triangle), but I can also take a wild guess on what will happen to that evidence.
http://www.jpmoreland.com/2012/11/28/on-craig-keeners-magisterial-miracles-miracles/

And as for anecdotal evidence along the lines of "I grew up in a Pentecostal church...."

Fair enough. I went to several soul-killing cessationist churches who had the same philosophy on the supernatural as David Hume. By parity of argument, the sword cuts both ways.

 

[Tom Hart]

Methinks we will also disagree on what constitutes valid evidence.

You're quite right. Too often there has been "evidence" for the supernatural that has been subsequently been discredited. With fraudsters like Benny Hinn around, you really can't fault a man for being a skeptic, can you?

I used to take these things for granted. When I was a kid, that was the environment I was in. It was not easy, to be honest, to come out of that. At times I have even considered whether my current position is a reaction against my upbringing. But then we come back to the evidence. I find none of these accounts of supernatural healings, glossalalia, etc. convincing, and I am now comfortable in my conviction that such things have ceased. The evidence demands a conclusion. For me, that meant rethinking the teaching of Scripture on these things.

You and I will differ here; our difference goes right back to the the text of Scripture.

I'll have a look at that link you provided. Even though I will admittedly approach it with doubt, I am still interested in the other side's claims.

I would like you to know that I have enjoyed this exchange. I hope I haven't come across as uncharitable or unkind. (I admit I sometimes am, but I intended nothing of the sort here.) I always enjoy your posts, and your rigorous logic. (Even though on this issue I think you are demonstrating less of your customary rigour. )

 

[RamistThomist]

With fraudsters like Benny Hinn around, you really can't fault a man for being a skeptic, can you?

Sure, but cessationists need to realize that Hinn isn't the standard of discussion, Keener is. And if we go by abuses, I can make "Pastor" Steven Anderson the standard of cessationism.

Thanks for the exchange, too. I don't recall ever practicing "the power gifts" (except for maybe one word of knowledge). So that's my story, for what it's worth.

 

[earl40]

Sure, but cessationists need to realize that Hinn isn't the standard of discussion, Keener is.

The "standard" is scripture is what cessationists should claim.

 

[RamistThomist]

The "standard" is scripture is what cessationists should claim.

Um...yeah. What I meant was that the typical representative of continuationism is Craig Keener or Michael Brown. I was not saying that the ultimate epistemic authority is Craig Keener.

 

[RamistThomist]

I don't think this has come up yet, but what exactly is a miracle? It's important to nail this down because unbelievers already have their response. The following discussion is from Grudem's book on prophecy. These are different definitions:

1. A direct intervention by God in history (Grudem 109). Whether this is true or not, it is actually irrelevant to the discussion of spiritual gifts. For what makes a spiritual gift is its origination in the Holy Spirit.
2. Something that arouses awe and wonder. This, however, is too broad to be useful.

 

[Dachaser]

And you take this to mean that the apostles' ministry, with respect to healing, was effectively the same as John Wimber's? Come on. At least the apostles' had some miraculous healings on their record.

I cannot say why the apostles did not heal in all cases. It's an interesting question. (It's certainly not mentioned anywhere in the New Testament that they visited any leper colonies.) I would only assume it is because miraculous healings and other miracles were extraordinary and served a special purpose (giving force to the apostles' preaching).

The truth is still that they were granted those gifts from Jesus for just those times, for the express purpose of confirming Jesus as Messiah and the Gospel has being from God. There were no recorded instances where any of them attempted to heal someone and it failed, unlike modern day persons claiming to have that gift to heal today.

 

[Dachaser]

No. I am saying the same charge applies to Paul that applies to Wimber, if people want to go that route.

Paul as an Apostle was gifted by God to heal, but John Wimber was not given that specific gift.

 

[Dachaser]

There is not a single argument in that post. Just a string of assertions.

What I posted there was the same way that Reformed and non continuing Baptists have seen this issue though. correct?

 

[Dachaser]

You said,



I push back against this statement because I see no scriptural warrant for holding that such a man as John Wimber (or any other faith-healer) should be placed in the same category as Paul the Apostle.

The same charge does not apply because
a) John Wimber (as no apostle) has no miracles to his name, and
b) such healing gifts have ceased.

No doubt you think that I take that second point for granted. (Probably the first as well.) Likewise, it seems to me that you take continuationism for granted if you are willing to say that a modern faith-healer's ministry can be judged as little different from an apostle's because both were seemingly unable to produce miracles 100% of the time. (And again, even less than 100% is still a better record than Wimber's 0%.)

As I mentioned above, I would think there are reasons unknown to us why Paul would not miraculously heal Trophimus or Timothy. I would certainly not say that Paul is therefore able to be judged the same way as Wimber et al.

Finally, the standard by which to judge a supposed prophet/miracle-worker is given, I think, in Deuteronomy 18:20-22.

The Apostles Of Jesus were a unique category,as they were granted by Christ the inspiration to record down to us inspired scriptures, and also had those unique gifts to validate Jesus as Lord and the Gospel message was from God.

 

[Dachaser]

I don't think any of us are in the same category as Paul.


Numerous people in the Vineyard attest otherwise.


Assertion.

Any of those persons have been able to produce documented medical records to show the healings actual happened?

 

[Dachaser]

OK... And why should I believe it? I grew up in Pentecostalism. I have enough experiences with made-up healings.

I was a teaching Elder in the AOG for a decade, and can state that there were no documented case of medical healing in my local church uring that time.

 

[Dachaser]

Um...yeah. What I meant was that the typical representative of continuationism is Craig Keener or Michael Brown. I was not saying that the ultimate epistemic authority is Craig Keener.

The claim is being made by some that God still has gifted them with those gifts to heal and perform miracles, just as He did the Apostles, and still need to see documented medical evidence to support those claims.
Acts was the inspired record from God of how He operated during the transistion between the Old and New Covenants, and so not the normal way He functions with us today.

 

[RamistThomist]

and still need to see documented medical evidence to support those claims.

And they have been provided in the literature. I no longer worry about this claim because if someone like Keener provides documentation (he wrote an authoritative two volumes on it), it will be dismissed as "not really happened.

Acts was the inspired record from God of how He operated during the transistion between the Old and New Covenants, and so not the normal way He functions with us today.

If we apply that all the way, then nothing in Acts applies today and no one wants to draw that conclusion.

 

[RamistThomist]

Any of those persons have been able to produce documented medical records to show the healings actual happened?

Yes. But HIPAA makes it hard to make those widespread. If you want to ask someone for their private medical records, good luck with that.

Edit: If you want to ask people for their private records, go for it. But that means nothing for exegesis. Ultimatley, I do theology based on exegesis, not on experience. If someone says "miracles are false because I don't see [e.g. experience] them today," then that person is ironically making the same mistake as charismatics are said to make: basing theology off of experience.

 

[RamistThomist]

What I posted there was the same way that Reformed and non continuing Baptists have seen this issue though. correct?

Yes, but posting what they believe isn't the same thing as logic. I can post a string of assertions from Pentecostals and that leaves us at a Mexican standoff.

 

[RamistThomist]

Paul as an Apostle was gifted by God to heal, but John Wimber was not given that specific gift.

Again, that's the whole issue under debate. I can just say, "No, I disagree," and that would have the same amount of logical import.

 

[Dachaser]

And they have been provided in the literature. I no longer worry about this claim because if someone like Keener provides documentation (he wrote an authoritative two volumes on it), it will be dismissed as "not really happened.


If we apply that all the way, then nothing in Acts applies today and no one wants to draw that conclusion.

Not really, as all of Acts is for us and to us for today, its just that not all of the examples given to us there would be the normal way God operates today.

 

[Dachaser]

Yes. But HIPAA makes it hard to make those widespread. If you want to ask someone for their private medical records, good luck with that.

Edit: If you want to ask people for their private records, go for it. But that means nothing for exegesis. Ultimatley, I do theology based on exegesis, not on experience. If someone says "miracles are false because I don't see [e.g. experience] them today," then that person is ironically making the same mistake as charismatics are said to make: basing theology off of experience.

I am not stating that God cannot heal nor do miracles today if He chooses to do such, but am stating that would not be the normal way He operates in this current age. No one right now has been gifted by Him to function as the Apostles were, for they were also inspired to recorde sacred scriptures. Do not see any able to do that right now.

 

[Dachaser]

Again, that's the whole issue under debate. I can just say, "No, I disagree," and that would have the same amount of logical import.

The Apostles could write sacred scriptures and speak while discusiing theology without any errors or mistakes, and doubt any able to do that for today.

 

[RamistThomist]

speak while discusiing theology without any errors or mistakes,

That's false. See Paul's rebuke of Peter.

 

[RamistThomist]

No one right now has been gifted by Him to function as the Apostles were, for they were also inspired to recorde sacred scriptures.

The logical connection between those two statements doesn't hold. Phillip's daughters prophecied, yet they didn't write Scripture.

Do not see any able to do that right now.

So what? Others do.

 

[RamistThomist]

Not really, as all of Acts is for us and to us for today, its just that not all of the examples given to us there would be the normal way God operates today.

You keep repeating that refrain. Who is to say what is "normal" anyway?

 

[Dachaser]

That's false. See Paul's rebuke of Peter.

He did not rebuke the theology of Peter, but his misapplication of what Peter knew was true.

 

[Dachaser]

The logical connection between those two statements doesn't hold. Phillip's daughters prophecied, yet they didn't write Scripture.


So what? Others do.

The gift of prophecy was not the same as the Apostles ability to write and to speak on theology with infallibility.
There are many claims made by faith healers, but why is there never any real documenttaed by medical facts true healings?

 

[Dachaser]

You keep repeating that refrain. Who is to say what is "normal" anyway?

The scriptures themselves, and how historically the Church has seen the sign gifts granted to the Apostles not happening as the norm after the Apostolic Age ceased to exist.

 

[RamistThomist]

The scriptures themselves, and how historically the Church has seen the sign gifts granted to the Apostles not happening as the norm after the Apostolic Age ceased to exist.

But that's circular reasoning. The Scriptures show miracles.

As to them ceasing in the apostolic church, read City of God. Augustine documents them all over hte place.

 

[RamistThomist]

but why is there never any real documenttaed by medical facts true healings?

How do you know there isn't? And you ignored the parts about HIPAA privacy.

 

[RamistThomist]

He did not rebuke the theology of Peter, but his misapplication of what Peter knew was true.

Peter made a theological position. Paul rebuked it. You seem to think that the apostles always spoke true theology 100% of the time, yet with Peter this is false.