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

[RamistThomist]

So the OT Prophets and the NT Apostles are under the same infallible footing, as their spoken and recorded words were inspired by God, but those with gift of prophecy were not to be used for any instruction, teaching, or doctrine, correct?

Didn't say that. Prophecy, like any spiritual gift, is to be used for edifying the church. What everyone here is objecting to is your apparent belief that every time Peter uttered a theological statement it was infallible. We know that is false because of Galatians.

 

[earl40]

I have no idea what any of that means.

Ultimately, though, I don't really care if the events in Augustine's account happened or not. I base my theology off of exegesis, not off of "what is possible today because science and David Hume" or "my experience."

I simply brought Augustine up because people have this line that "miracles ceased in the early church." I groan whenever people say that. I've read 20,000 pages of "the early church fathers" over the past decade. Most people haven't. Suffice to say--that claim is false.

I thought you would have remembered about the hemorrhoids "sit" that Augustine wrote about.

 

[RamistThomist]

I should have stated it in this fashion then, as whenever in the Bible any Apostle tried to heal or spoke on theology, was infallible and healings always happened.

That might be true. We just have no evidence concerning Trophimus. Both sides have to admit it is an argument from silence. We simply don't know if Paul tried to heal him or not. If he didn't, it would make for an interesting conversation between him and Trophimus: "Sorry, I can heal you but I choose not to."

 

[RamistThomist]

I thought you would have remembered about the hemorrhoids "sit" that Augustine wrote about.

I remember now.

 

[Tom Hart]

I should have stated it in this fashion then, as whenever in the Bible any Apostle tried to heal or spoke on theology, was infallible and healings always happened.

That really does not strike me as significantly different from your earlier statements.

Are you advocating a doctrine of ex cathedra for the apostles? The doctrine that the Scriptures are God-breathed does not come with a footnote saying that every apostle-uttered theological remark (or healing, now) was equally inspired.

 

[Tom Hart]

I do not think any are saying that miracles and healings from God ceased fully, but that the gifts to be able to do that ourselves ceased with death of John.

That is one view. I do not hold that, however. For my part, I hold that God is free. He can perform miracles if he so wishes, and I believe he does. But it is not the same as how things happened in the days of the apostles.

 

[earl40]

I base my theology off of exegesis, not off of "what is possible today because science and David Hume" or "my experience."

3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

 

[RamistThomist]

3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

Okay. I never denied that they had sign-functions. I simply dispute that they always and only had sign-functions. James 5 seems to think that elders will do healings, yet none of them are apostles and there is no discernible sign involved.

 

[Dachaser]

Didn't say that. Prophecy, like any spiritual gift, is to be used for edifying the church. What everyone here is objecting to is your apparent belief that every time Peter uttered a theological statement it was infallible. We know that is false because of Galatians.

Peter had right theology, but was under pressure applying it wrongly.

 

[Dachaser]

That might be true. We just have no evidence concerning Trophimus. Both sides have to admit it is an argument from silence. We simply don't know if Paul tried to heal him or not. If he didn't, it would make for an interesting conversation between him and Trophimus: "Sorry, I can heal you but I choose not to."

So it could very well been that the gift to heal for Paul was already ceasing at that time?

 

[Dachaser]

That really does not strike me as significantly different from your earlier statements.

Are you advocating a doctrine of ex cathedra for the apostles? The doctrine that the Scriptures are God-breathed does not come with a footnote saying that every apostle-uttered theological remark (or healing, now) was equally inspired.

While they were speaking for Jesus, the Holy Spirit would had made sure their theology being given forth to the churches was infallible, correct?

 

[Dachaser]

That is one view. I do not hold that, however. For my part, I hold that God is free. He can perform miracles if he so wishes, and I believe he does. But it is not the same as how things happened in the days of the apostles.

We would be in agreement, as neither of us would see God gifting persons today to perform sign gifts.

 

[RamistThomist]

So it could very well been that the gift to heal for Paul was already ceasing at that time?

That's what most Dispensationalists say. The problem, though, is that we have no evidence to say that. It keeps coming back to that: evidence.

 

[RamistThomist]

Peter had right theology, but was under pressure applying it wrongly.

Which is theology. We've already been over this.

 

[earl40]

Okay. I never denied that they had sign-functions. I simply dispute that they always and only had sign-functions. James 5 seems to think that elders will do healings, yet none of them are apostles and there is no discernible sign involved.

Of course when James was written I strongly suspect the Apostles were still alive and the cannon was not complete.

 

[Puritan Sailor]

Okay. I never denied that they had sign-functions. I simply dispute that they always and only had sign-functions. James 5 seems to think that elders will do healings, yet none of them are apostles and there is no discernible sign involved.

Couple thoughts on James 5:14-16. James described a healing in answer to prayer, but the apostles seemed to heal by declaration. Also, the "prayer of faith" in this case resulted in both healing and forgiveness of sins. So this, at least to me, seems to be talking about a situation where sin is involved, not just simple sickness. Whatever the case, James 5 may be grounds to continue praying for the sick, but it doesn't deal specifically with the apostolic practice of performing healings.

 

[Dachaser]

That's what most Dispensationalists say. The problem, though, is that we have no evidence to say that. It keeps coming back to that: evidence.

I think its what many Covenant Theology Christians say also thouguh.

 

[Dachaser]

Of course when James was written I strongly suspect the Apostles were still alive and the cannon was not complete.

It was one of the first books written of the NT canon, correct?

 

[Dachaser]

Couple thoughts on James 5:14-16. James described a healing in answer to prayer, but the apostles seemed to heal by declaration. Also, the "prayer of faith" in this case resulted in both healing and forgiveness of sins. So this, at least to me, seems to be talking about a situation where sin is involved, not just simple sickness. Whatever the case, James 5 may be grounds to continue praying for the sick, but it doesn't deal specifically with the apostolic practice of performing healings.

Perhaps James was addressing the situation in which a person sinning was part of the reason why now sick, as a chaistisement from God?

 

[earl40]

What is interesting is that there are promises of God in James, and to think they apply today is foolishness.

 

[Dachaser]

What is interesting is that there are promises of God in James, and to think they apply today is foolishness.

You do not have the Elders gather around the sick and pray for them if they request that to happen?

 

[earl40]

You do not have the Elders gather around the sick and pray for them if they request that to happen?

Below is a promise that does not happen today.....

14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

 

[Dachaser]

Below is a promise that does not happen today.....

14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

We should still obey God and ask for Him to heal, just no promise will always happen, correct?

 

[RamistThomist]

Of course when James was written I strongly suspect the Apostles were still alive and the cannon was not complete.

This is called circular reasoning.

 

[earl40]

We should still obey God and ask for Him to heal, just no promise will always happen, correct?

In James it is promised, and of course we may pray for others today but not guaranteed, as it was during the time when James was written.

 

[RamistThomist]

Whatever the case, James 5 may be grounds to continue praying for the sick, but it doesn't deal specifically with the apostolic practice of performing healings.

I agree with this post. I just used James to push back against the idea that the only healings in the NT were apostolic-office healings tied with sign gifts.

 

[Steve Curtis]

whenever in the Bible any Apostle tried to heal or spoke on theology, was infallible and healings always happened.

How do you reconcile the emboldened part of your post with Mk. 9:14-29 (or do you make a distinction between the healing of 1) physical ailments due to genetic/physiological issues and 2) demon-possession, which causes physical ailments, such as being deaf and dumb)?

 

[RamistThomist]

3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

Out of curiosity, do you think Hebrews was the last book written in the NT?

 

[earl40]

Out of curiosity, do you think Hebrews was the last book written in the NT?

I do not know. Makes no difference to my point.

 

[RamistThomist]

I do not know. Makes no difference to my point.

It makes all the difference in the world. Your argument implied that everything that happened before Hebrews (the words you emphasized in the past tense) cuts off all future prophecy.

Yet, every NT scholar holds that Revelation was the last written book, so that is at least one more prophecy. That means your argument from Hebrews can't prove what you want it to prove.