quantumfaith
Active Member
Well, before responding, it might be best to point out, again, that I'm not a charismatic nor pentecostal. So my perspective on these questions will be from my frame of reference theologically and not the others. However, I continue to press my point that Dr MacArthur's text and conference is a condemning proposition based on a poorly articulated understanding of these camps. He routinely condemns those who disagree with him on this for, frankly, poor reasons.
Now, my responses:
It's a parable, so I'm sure how to make it a real story. The rich man in Hell wasn't granted the "miracle" for reason found in the biblical text.
I am aware that some fringe elements in the Charimatic and Pentecostal camps believe in raising people from the dead but I've never heard a reasonable proposition that this could even be granted. Most Charismatic and Pentecostal believers and leaders don't accept the ability of anyone to raise people from the dead.
I believe Scripture is sufficient for explaining itself, its theological propositions, and the nature of God and His revealed character but it is not an exhaustive reference tool. For instance, Scripture is not sufficient to inform us on any number of medical topics, it isn't sufficient to show me how to repair my car, it isn't sufficient to teach us how to speak French. Scripture has limitations, practical and obvious limitations. Are you saying Scripture is exhaustively sufficient?
I also reject the notion that Psalm 19 is a good text for Scriptural sufficiency since, when it was written, the NT hadn't even been composed. But this is an ancillary point.
I don't insist on miracles, healings (I don't know know why hearing is a big thing), or prophecies for the proclamation of the Gospel any more than the NT evidences them as demonstrations of them as partners (or results) of the proclamation of the Gospel.
Where I have seen and experienced (and even heard of) instances I mentioned above they have followed a pattern of being unanticipated, for a specific reason (often someone's salvation), and in the midst of a place where the Gospel is not well known. We have never planned for a miracle.
Of course, this is where some of my charismatic and pentecostal brothers and sisters in Christ and I disagree. Some of them make a good case that ecstatic utterances (something I don't personally practice) are legitimate in light of the testimony of early Christian experience in the NT. Though I disagree with some of their points here, I cannot reject them as heterodox as Dr MacArthur does.
Perhaps the biggest issue for cessationists to explain is how you fit John 14:12 into your matrix.
Scripture is an accurate and inspired account of the revelation of God that is sufficient for the proclamation of the Gospel and understanding the character, nature, and will of God. It does have limitations in its application beyond these points.
The biggest frauds being perpetrated against the Gospel are the "healing" services of some fringe leaders who only go into stadiums to do this before crowds while demanding money. I will not defend it. My friends who are Charistmatic and Pentecostal do not defend it.
So we go into hospital wards and go into villages where the sick and hurting live. We pray for miracles and ask for healing. How God moves beyond that is not up to us.
Now, that said I'm going to point out something that needs to be addressed. Since I'm not a Charismatic and Pentecostal I have a limited response as to my own position and cannot state for them what they might believe.
In your posts and in Dr MacArthur's works there is an unncessary dualism of thought that believes one either accepts et al the fringe views of radicals who stand outside fellowship and accountability (ala Haggin, Copeland, Hinn, etc) of other Charismatics and Pentecostals or you are a full fledged cessationist.
This is foolishness and anti-intelllectual.
One can embrace a modified continuationist position (like mine) that embraces the truth that God continues to work in the world without having to go full tilt to the position of fringe radicals. Just because I've seen miracles occur doesn't mean I buy wholesale the radical views of a slender few that get most of the attention. It is erroneous to say it does. This is where Dr MacArthur goes off the rails too. He seems to believe that all Charismatics and Pentecostals believe x,y,z and details this out. He offers no accomodation to respective disagreement. He maligns and chastizes unnecessarily and condemns automatically.
My own position is that, though I'm not a Charismatic or Pentecostal, that God uses miraculous gifts and occurences to advance His Gospel in rare but important ways. If you want more evidence of this go read Keener's two volume work on Miracles. Then come back and explain how these things haven't happened.
What else?
:applause::applause::applause:
