Of the following spiritual gifts, which ones are still available and which ones have ceased?

[John Mullally]

Verse 14 is describing what will happen after maturity has been reached:

"THEN we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming."​

If that occurs at the 2nd coming then we are all still infants, tossed by the waves by crafty people.

I hope this helps.

I think you are inferring this from the Ephesians 4 text and say my stance that Ephesians 4:13 has not been achieved means that no one is walking in Ephesians 4:14-15.

IF (Some do not walk in Ephesians 4:13)
THEN

No one walks in Ephesians 4:14-15​

I certainly do not agree with that. For an individual attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ in v13 is a higher standard than what is in verse 14 & 15.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are saying the following, I agree:

IF (an individual walks in Ephesians 4:13)
THEN

That individual walks in Ephesians 4:14-15​

There is no "all" in v14.

I was quoting you using cut and paste.

The "all" in v13 simply means that we all need to reach that goal.

We all need to reach that goal. But the all in v13 is also tied to the till condition in v13.

 

[swordsman1]

I hope this helps.

I think you are inferring this from the Ephesians 4 text and say my stance that Ephesians 4:13 has not been achieved means that no one is walking in Ephesians 4:14-15.

IF (Some do not walk in Ephesians 4:13)
THEN
No one walks in Ephesians 4:14-15
I certainly do not agree with that. For an individual attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ in v13 is a higher standard than what is in verse 14 & 15.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are saying the following, I agree:

IF (an individual walks in Ephesians 4:13)
THEN
That individual walks in Ephesians 4:14-15

I am saying:

We are equipped until we attain maturity,
THEN we shall no longer be infants.

We all need to reach that goal. But the all in v13 is also tied to the till condition in v13.

That doesn't mean we all reach the goal at the same time.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I quote from Ephesians 4 because Gifts of the Spirit and Ministry Offices given by God to assist in maturing the saints are automatically being tossed out as irrelevant by entire denominations.

My view is that Ephesians 4 can apply only to a unified Christian church, rather than the present church which is divided into many factions (denominations). Paul was quite clear in 1 Corinthians that those who preferred their own faction over the others ("we are of Apollos, we are of Peter, etc,) are baby believers, still carnal and only able to cope with "milk". Paul also said that the ministry of elders, who are, as church leaders, are sufficiently mature and capable to have the five-fold ministry role, rather than novices, as Paul said to Timothy, who would be lifted up in pride, falling into the condemnation of the devil. Therefore, those who hold to their own faction, being only carnal-minded, baby milk Christians, are effectively novices in the faith, not qualified for having any five-fold ministry role.

It is sad that many church ministers with academic degrees, even doctors of theology and divinity are effectively novices in he faith because they are more committed to their own denomination faction than having regard for the whole body of Christ.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

@swordsman1, I'm still waiting for a response to post #310. Here it goes again:

The hard scientific evidence that Paul didn't need. (You said, "But Paul didn't need hard scientific evidence to believe in miracles either (the scientific method didn't even exist at that time), so why should I?")

This doesn't answer my question. There was no hard scientific evidence that the Apostle Paul rejected. You can only reject X if there is an X to reject. If there is no hard scientific evidence X to reject in the first place, how could I or the apostle Paul be rejecting something that doesn't exist? We are not rejecting anything.

If I'm rejecting hard scientific evidence, then please show a concrete example of hard scientific evidence I'm rejecting. Otherwise, I'm not rejecting anything.

As I just said, if you don't want to accept scientific proofs because such techniques were not around in Jesus's time then feel free to reject such evidence.

Again, show me a concrete example of a scientific proof I'm not accepting.

Anyways, I'm not rejecting the scientific method in the contexts it is valuable and useful. But belief in miracles is NOT one of those contexts. The Bible never teaches that you need to go through a process of scientific verification in order to believe that miracles can happen. In fact, it's the other way around: faith precedes miracles. You have to have faith FIRST and THEN miracles will come.

Matthew 13:58
58 And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.

John 4:39
Many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, “He told me all that I ever did.”

Matthew 14:31
31 Jesus immediately reached out his hand and took hold of him, saying to him, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?”

John 20:26-29
26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Matthew 17:14-21
14 And when they came to the crowd, a man came up to him and, kneeling before him, 15 said, “Lord, have mercy on my son, for he has seizures and he suffers terribly. For often he falls into the fire, and often into the water. 16 And I brought him to your disciples, and they could not heal him.” 17 And Jesus answered, “O faithless and twisted generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you? Bring him here to me.” 18 And Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of him, and the boy was healed instantly. 19 Then the disciples came to Jesus privately and said, “Why could we not cast it out?” 20 He said to them, “Because of your little faith. For truly, I say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you."

Mark 16:14-18
14 Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. 15 And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

1 Corinthians 13:2
2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.​

No mention of the scientific method in any of these passages ...

Nowhere ...

At all ...

But I, the courts, and the vast majority of right thinking humans welcome scientific methods.

So basically you are saying that Jesus, the Apostles and pretty much the whole early church were dumb for believing in miracles without the scientific method?

Were Christians in Acts 4:29-31 dumb?

29 And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness, 30 while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” 31 And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness.​

Why did they pray for miracles in Acts 4:29-31? Shouldn't they have prayed for peer-reviewed journal articles first?

What other explanation is there for all Christian inherently knowing that the Bible is God's word? Something supernatural is obviously going on. Unless you want to attribute it to the Flying Spaghetti Monster then it must be the Holy Spirit.

Again, how do you know that all Christians inherently know that the Bible is God's word? You are essentially begging the question there. You are assuming the conclusion you want to prove as part of your premises. How do you know that Christians inherently know the Bible is God's word in the first place? It's much more likely that people simply believe in the Bible because of their parents telling them so, upbringing, culture, tradition, religious education, psychological bias, etc.

I could also quote 1 Cor 2:12-14

What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.​

Miracles are works of the Holy Spirit too (see 1 Corinthians 12), so the same argument can be used to defend miracles. It's the Holy Spirit who has to give you the discernment to acknowledge the authenticity of a miracle, not the scientific method.

...but you don't believe the Bible is God's word do you? Despite the fact that you often quote scripture yourself as an authority to try and prove your point. And you accuse ME of hypocrisy?

I don't need to believe that the Bible is God's word in order to use it against your own worldview. That's how proofs by contradiction and reductio ad absurdum arguments work. You concede (some of) your opponent's premises in order to show how his position is inconsistent or self contradictory. For the sake of argument I can take advantage of the authority you attribute to the Bible to show how the Bible itself does not support your epistemology on miracles.

Moreover, unlike you, I do appreciate the value of testimonial and historial evidence. Therefore, I can appreciate the Bible as a valuable source of historical and testimonial evidence (along with the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, etc.) and assign credibility to it on that basis.


There is an easy way to prove me wrong though. Just show one example where the Bible teaches that we should be skeptical of miracles and only believe they are possible after a process of scientific verification. Waiting for the passage ...

 

[Guojing]

Anyways, I'm not rejecting the scientific method in the contexts it is valuable and useful. But belief in miracles is NOT one of those contexts. The Bible never teaches that you need to go through a process of scientific verification in order to believe that miracles can happen. I[B]n fact, it's the other way around: [U]faith precedes miracles[/U]. You have to have faith FIRST and THEN miracles will come.[/B]
[INDENT][/INDENT]

Your last sentence cannot be true, given what went down in Exodus 4 and Judges 6.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

Your last sentence cannot be true, given what went down in Exodus 4 and Judges 6.

These aren't exactly "counterexamples".

In Exodus 4, Moses had faith that God would perform the miracles He promised He would do through him. So Moses' faith preceded the miracles that followed.

In Judges 6, Gideon certainly believed that miracles were possible (he had faith first). In fact, Gideon truly believed that God was more than capable of performing a sign to confirm His call on his (Gideon's) life, and in fact, He did.

In both cases, belief in the possibility of miracles and the expectancy of miracles preceded the actual miracles.

The early church also believed that miracles were possible:

29 And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness, 30 while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” 31 And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness. (Acts 4:29-31 ESV)


No need for Nobel Prizes, peer-reviewed journal articles or overwhelming amounts of peer-reviewed scientific evidence in order to believe that miracles are possible.

 

[swordsman1]

This doesn't answer my question. There was no hard scientific evidence that the Apostle Paul rejected. You can only reject X if there is an X to reject. If there is no hard scientific evidence X to reject in the first place, how could I or the apostle Paul be rejecting something that doesn't exist? We are not rejecting anything.

If I'm rejecting hard scientific evidence, then please show a concrete example of hard scientific evidence I'm rejecting. Otherwise, I'm not rejecting anything.

You were the one who said Paul didn't need hard scientific evidence in order to believe miracles because the scientific method didn't exist at the time. If you wish to do likewise and believe stories of miracles without scientific evidence (even though scientific methods now exists) then go ahead, that is your prerogative. That's what you have been doing anyway.

Anyways, I'm not rejecting the scientific method in the contexts it is valuable and useful. But belief in miracles is NOT one of those contexts. The Bible never teaches that you need to go through a process of scientific verification in order to believe that miracles can happen. In fact, it's the other way around: faith precedes miracles. You have to have faith FIRST and THEN miracles will come.

Matthew 13:58
58 And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.

John 4:39
Many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, “He told me all that I ever did.”

Matthew 14:31
31 Jesus immediately reached out his hand and took hold of him, saying to him, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?”

John 20:26-29
26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Matthew 17:14-21
14 And when they came to the crowd, a man came up to him and, kneeling before him, 15 said, “Lord, have mercy on my son, for he has seizures and he suffers terribly. For often he falls into the fire, and often into the water. 16 And I brought him to your disciples, and they could not heal him.” 17 And Jesus answered, “O faithless and twisted generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you? Bring him here to me.” 18 And Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of him, and the boy was healed instantly. 19 Then the disciples came to Jesus privately and said, “Why could we not cast it out?” 20 He said to them, “Because of your little faith. For truly, I say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you."

Mark 16:14-18
14 Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. 15 And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

1 Corinthians 13:2
2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

No mention of the scientific method in any of these passages ...

Nowhere ...

At all ...

None of those verses refer to believing a person's hearsay testimony, except John 4:39. And that verse doesn't praise the Samaritans for doing so. It just states it as a matter of fact.

So basically you are saying that Jesus, the Apostles and pretty much the whole early church were dumb for believing in miracles without the scientific method?

No, because it didn't exist at the time.

Why did they pray for miracles in Acts 4:29-31? Shouldn't they have prayed for peer-reviewed journal articles first?

Because miracles were a powerful sign to the person witnessing the miracle first hand.

Again, how do you know that all Christians inherently know that the Bible is God's word?

Because that is what all Christians inherently believe. If you don't believe me start a poll here asking 'Do you believe the Bible is God's word? Yes or No.'

It's the Holy Spirit who has to give you the discernment to acknowledge the authenticity of a miracle, not the scientific method.

Where is that in scripture?

I don't need to believe that the Bible is God's word in order to use it against your own worldview. That's how proofs by contradiction and reductio ad absurdum arguments work. You concede (some of) your opponent's premises in order to show how his position is inconsistent or self contradictory. For the sake of argument I can take advantage of the authority you attribute to the Bible to show how the Bible itself does not support your epistemology on miracles.

But it is not just here in reply to me that you have quoted scripture. You quote it throughout your other posts on this forum as an authority source of absolute truth to prove your points. And yet you don't really believe scripture is God's word. That is hypocrisy.

Moreover, unlike you, I do appreciate the value of testimonial and historial evidence. Therefore, I can appreciate the Bible as a valuable source of historical and testimonial evidence (along with the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, etc.) and assign credibility to it on that basis.

If you believe the church fathers as being equivalent to scripture then more fool you. I presume you also believe Joseph Smith's testimonies in the book of Mormon as being equivalent to scripture? Or the stories of UFO abductions as being equivalent to scripture?

There is an easy way to prove me wrong though. Just show one example where the Bible teaches that we should be skeptical of miracles and only believe they are possible after a process of scientific verification. Waiting for the passage ...

Why would there be a passage on scientific verification in the bible, when it didn't exist in those days?

 

[Guojing]

These aren't exactly "counterexamples".

In Exodus 4, Moses had faith that God would perform the miracles He promised He would do through him. So Moses' faith preceded the miracles that followed.

You must have been reading a different bible than me for Exodus 4,

And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.

Does this first verse indicated Moses had faith?

3 And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it.

Does this indicate Moses had faith?

10 And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.

Does this verse indicated Moses had faith?

 

[Guojing]

These aren't exactly "counterexamples".

Gideon certainly believed that miracles were possible (he had faith first). In fact, Gideon truly believed that God was more than capable of performing a sign to confirm His call on his (Gideon's) life, and in fact, He did.

In both cases, belief in the possibility of miracles and the expectancy of miracles preceded the actual miracles.

You must have been reading a different bible than me for in Judges 6 as well

Judges 6

15 And he said unto him, Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? behold, my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house.

17 And he said unto him, If now I have found grace in thy sight, then shew me a sign that thou talkest with me.

Gideon consider himself unworthy and dare to ask for a sign before he would believe what the angel of the Lord is indeed talking to him

36 And Gideon said unto God, If thou wilt save Israel by mine hand, as thou hast said,

37 Behold, I will put a fleece of wool in the floor; and if the dew be on the fleece only, and it be dry upon all the earth beside, then shall I know that thou wilt save Israel by mine hand, as thou hast said.

38 And it was so: for he rose up early on the morrow, and thrust the fleece together, and wringed the dew out of the fleece, a bowl full of water.

39 And Gideon said unto God, Let not thine anger be hot against me, and I will speak but this once: let me prove, I pray thee, but this once with the fleece; let it now be dry only upon the fleece, and upon all the ground let there be dew.

40 And God did so that night: for it was dry upon the fleece only, and there was dew on all the ground.

Notice, even after the 1st sign, Gideon ask for 2 more signs, with the last one, he even added Let not thine anger be hot against me, and I will speak but this once: when he asked for the final sign, indicating he is aware that his repeated request for signs can anger the Lord

Does that indicate faith in Gideon BEFORE he saw the signs?

 

[TruthSeek3r]

You were the one who said Paul didn't need hard scientific evidence in order to believe miracles because the scientific method didn't exist at the time.

To be more precise, nowhere in the Bible it is taught that Nobel Prize winning peer-reviewed journal publications are required or recommended for Christians to believe in the miraculous power of God.

The consistent teaching for Christians is always to have faith, and to appreciate the value of testimonies.

The ones who are extremely skeptical and keep on constantly demanding more and more evidence are either unconverted unbelievers or immature believers, and this behavior is never praised. The best example is doubting Thomas:

26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:26-29 ESV)

If you wish to do likewise and believe stories of miracles without scientific evidence (even though scientific methods now exists) then go ahead, that is your prerogative. That's what you have been doing anyway.

Which is exactly what you are doing. You believe the stories of miracles in the Bible without scientific evidence too.

None of those verses refer to believing a person's hearsay testimony, except John 4:39. And that verse doesn't praise the Samaritans for doing so. It just states it as a matter of fact.

What about these passages?

14 Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. (Mark 16:14 ESV)

11 Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. (John 3:11 ESV)

24 This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true. (John 21:24 ESV)

8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Acts 1:8 ESV)

11 The following night the Lord stood by him and said, “Take courage, for as you have testified to the facts about me in Jerusalem, so you must testify also in Rome.” (Acts 23:11 ESV)

38 The man from whom the demons had gone begged that he might be with him, but Jesus sent him away, saying, 39 “Return to your home, and declare how much God has done for you.” And he went away, proclaiming throughout the whole city how much Jesus had done for him. (Luke 8:38-39 ESV)

14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14 ESV)

This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. (2 Corinthians 13:1 ESV)

39 Many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman's testimony, “He told me all that I ever did.” 40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them, and he stayed there two days. 41 And many more believed because of his word. 42 They said to the woman, “It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world.” (John 4:39-42 ESV)

10 And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God. 11 And they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death. (Revelation 12:10-11 ESV)

No, because it didn't exist at the time.

And if you are to follow the teachings of the Bible, the scientific method shouldn't be relevant to believe that miracles can happen today either. Science cannot prove miracles, so you will never be able to believe that a miracle truly happened based on science. Even in the face of a genuine miracle, a scientist can only say "I don't know the explanation" and remain agnostic. Scientific verificationism as an epistemology on miracles is never taught in the Bible.

Moreover, even scientists can believe that miracles happen today for non-scientific reasons. See this article: Can a Scientist Believe in Miracles? | ORBITER | Culture & Belief

Because miracles were a powerful sign to the person witnessing the miracle first hand.

Sure, just like they are to first-hand witnesses today. And the ripple effects of the subsequent testimonies coming from those first-hand witnesses (aka testimonial evidence) is very important as well. That's the Biblical pattern: a few first-hand witnesses and lots of testimonial evidence.

Nobel Prizes and peer-reviewed scientific journal publications do not enter the Biblical equation.

Because that is what all Christians inherently believe. If you don't believe me start a poll here asking 'Do you believe the Bible is God's word? Yes or No.'

I'm not talking about whether Christians believe the Bible is God's word or not. Of course the overwhelming majority does (keep in mind though that not everyone agrees on the canon or accepts axioms such as Biblical inerrancy, sola scriptura, etc.). That's NOT the question.

The question is why do they believe. And you claimed that they believe because they had a supernatural experience of the "inner witness" of the Holy Spirit that revealed to them that some specific canon is God's word (are you including the deuterocanonical books in this inner witness experience?).

So I repeat my question: how do you know that all Christians experience the "inner witness" of the Holy Spirit? Do you have hard scientific evidence of this supernatural experience?

Where is that in scripture?

One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. (Acts 16:14 ESV)

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44 ESV)

36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” 37 Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:36-37 ESV)

But it is not just here in reply to me that you have quoted scripture. You quote it throughout your other posts on this forum as an authority source of absolute truth to prove your points. And yet you don't really believe scripture is God's word. That is hypocrisy.

I never claimed it is absolute truth. I've never claimed anything to be absolute truth. You are putting words in my mouth I never said.

If you believe the church fathers as being equivalent to scripture then more fool you. I presume you also believe Joseph Smith's testimonies in the book of Mormon as being equivalent to scripture? Or the stories of UFO abductions as being equivalent to scripture?

They are different kinds of testimonial evidence. They are all pieces of evidence of this big puzzle known as life. The universe is a mysterious place, and as a truth seeker, I try to pay attention to all the evidence available, and that includes testimonial evidence, historical evidence, scientific evidence, etc.

It's interesting that you brought up Joseph Smith and Mormons into the discussion.

You believe the Bible is God's word because you allegedly had a supernatural experience with the inner witness of the Holy Spirit. Lost of Mormons use the same argument. They claim that they believe the Book of Mormon is God's word because they received an inner witness experience from the Holy Ghost, also known as a "burning in the bosom". Take a look at this question: Has any Latter-day Saint published a very detailed description of how the Holy Spirit confirmed to them the truth of the BofM, as per Moroni 10:3-7?

Why would there be a passage on scientific verification in the bible, when it didn't exist in those days?

It was a rhetorical question. Of course there isn't. And that's the point. The Bible doesn't teach scientific verificationism as the standard epistemology on miracles for Christians. The Bible teaches faith, the importance of testimonial evidence and the importance of witnessing to others. Convincing immature believers and skeptics through peer-reviewed journal publications and Nobel Prizes is never taught.

To your point though, God may grant you a miracle so you may become a first-hand witness as well (e.g. see doubting Thomas), but peer-reviewed journal publications and Nobel Prizes are never promised nor to be expected.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

You must have been reading a different bible than me for Exodus 4,

And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.

Does this first verse indicated Moses had faith?

3 And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it.

Does this indicate Moses had faith?

10 And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.

Does this verse indicated Moses had faith?

Fair enough, I overlooked those verses (I skimmed quickly), but then Jesus' words of advice for doubting Thomas apply:

26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:26-29 ESV)

God may mercifully grant miracles to increment the little faith that is already there in a believer, but as the believer matures his/her faith should increase, leading to more miracles. It's a virtuous circle between faith and miracles.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

You must have been reading a different bible than me for in Judges 6 as well

Judges 6

15 And he said unto him, Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? behold, my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house.

17 And he said unto him, If now I have found grace in thy sight, then shew me a sign that thou talkest with me.

Gideon consider himself unworthy and dare to ask for a sign before he would believe what the angel of the Lord is indeed talking to him

36 And Gideon said unto God, If thou wilt save Israel by mine hand, as thou hast said,

37 Behold, I will put a fleece of wool in the floor; and if the dew be on the fleece only, and it be dry upon all the earth beside, then shall I know that thou wilt save Israel by mine hand, as thou hast said.

38 And it was so: for he rose up early on the morrow, and thrust the fleece together, and wringed the dew out of the fleece, a bowl full of water.

39 And Gideon said unto God, Let not thine anger be hot against me, and I will speak but this once: let me prove, I pray thee, but this once with the fleece; let it now be dry only upon the fleece, and upon all the ground let there be dew.

40 And God did so that night: for it was dry upon the fleece only, and there was dew on all the ground.

Notice, even after the 1st sign, Gideon ask for 2 more signs, with the last one, he even added Let not thine anger be hot against me, and I will speak but this once: when he asked for the final sign, indicating he is aware that his repeated request for signs can anger the Lord

Does that indicate faith in Gideon BEFORE he saw the signs?

Fair enough, I overlooked those verses (I skimmed quickly), but then Jesus' words of advice for doubting Thomas apply:

26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:26-29 ESV)

God may mercifully grant miracles to increment the little faith that is already there in a believer, but as the believer matures his/her faith should increase, leading to more miracles. It's a virtuous circle between faith and miracles.

 

[Guojing]

Fair enough, I overlooked those verses (I skimmed quickly), but then Jesus' words of advice for doubting Thomas apply:

26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:26-29 ESV)

God may mercifully grant miracles to increment the little faith that is already there in a believer, but as the believer matures his/her faith should increase, leading to more miracles. It's a virtuous circle between faith and miracles.

I am saying that you don't need faith to see any signs.

Signs are meant for one to see with their physical eyes.

 

[swordsman1]

The ones who are extremely skeptical and keep on constantly demanding more and more evidence are either unconverted unbelievers or immature believers, and this behavior is never praised. The best example is doubting Thomas:

26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:26-29 ESV)

Jesus said Thomas could now believe because He was now standing physically right in front on him and could put his hands in his wounds. Notice Jesus did not rebuke Thomas for not believing the disciples testimony.

People are now can believe in the resurrection without physically seeing Christ because it is recorded in scripture.

Which is exactly what you are doing. You believe the stories of miracles in the Bible without scientific evidence too.

I believe the miracles in scripture because the Bible is absolute truth.

14 Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. (Mark 16:14 ESV)

That is from the disputed long ending of Mark which most scholars reject as being Mark's words, but rather a later addition by a scribe.

Should Mark 16:9-20 be in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

11 Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. (John 3:11 ESV)

That verse is not referring to believing a human testimony of miracles.

24 This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true. (John 21:24 ESV)

This is John stating that what has been written in his gospel is true. But Christians already know that.

8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Acts 1:8 ESV)

And more often that not the Jews did not believe the witness of the apostles. Those who did believe their witness did so by virtue of the fact they were apostles. I would have no problem believing the testimony of an apostle because they are authoritative spokesmen for Christ and spoke God's word.

11 The following night the Lord stood by him and said, “Take courage, for as you have testified to the facts about me in Jerusalem, so you must testify also in Rome.” (Acts 23:11 ESV)

That is referring to testifying in a court of law.

38 The man from whom the demons had gone begged that he might be with him, but Jesus sent him away, saying, 39 “Return to your home, and declare how much God has done for you.” And he went away, proclaiming throughout the whole city how much Jesus had done for him. (Luke 8:38-39 ESV)

The man was told to evangelise about Christ. And, as we know, even that does not guarantee the listeners will believe in Him. More often than not they don't.

14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14 ESV)

"this gospel"

This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. (2 Corinthians 13:1 ESV)

That is referring to charges brought in a court of law.

39 Many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman's testimony, “He told me all that I ever did.” 40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them, and he stayed there two days. 41 And many more believed because of his word. 42 They said to the woman, “It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world.” (John 4:39-42 ESV)

Your first underlined part I addressed in my previous post. The second underlined part (a different event) is referring to Jesus himself speaking.

10 And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God. 11 And they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death. (Revelation 12:10-11 ESV)

That verse is not referring to believing a human testimony of miracles.

And if you are to follow the teachings of the Bible, the scientific method shouldn't be relevant to believe that miracles can happen today either.

I see nowhere in scripture that says we should blindly believe the hearsay stories of other normal humans.

Science cannot prove miracles, so you will never be able to believe that a miracle truly happened based on science. Even in the face of a genuine miracle, a scientist can only say "I don't know the explanation" and remain agnostic. Scientific verificationism as an epistemology on miracles is never taught in the Bible.

Moreover, even scientists can believe that miracles happen today for non-scientific reasons. See this article: Can a Scientist Believe in Miracles? | ORBITER | Culture & Belief

Scientists might say that don't know the explanation, but they cannot deny a miracle occurred if presented with sufficient evidence.

Sure, just like they are to first-hand witnesses today. And the ripple effects of the subsequent testimonies coming from those first-hand witnesses (aka testimonial evidence) is very important as well. That's the Biblical pattern: a few first-hand witnesses and lots of testimonial evidence.

Subsequent testimonies are hearsay.

So I repeat my question: how do you know that all Christians experience the "inner witness" of the Holy Spirit? Do you have hard scientific evidence of this supernatural experience?

I am not sure what you keep driving at here.

You accept that all Christians are convinced the bible is God's word. Do you want to know how I can be sure it the Holy Spirit who produces that conviction, rather than some other force? If so I've already answered that question in post #255.

One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. (Acts 16:14 ESV)

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44 ESV)

36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” 37 Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:36-37 ESV)

None of those verses say "It's the Holy Spirit who has to give you the discernment to acknowledge the authenticity of a miracle, not the scientific method."

I never claimed it is absolute truth. I've never claimed anything to be absolute truth. You are putting words in my mouth I never said.

But you quote scripture as an authority which you expect other people to accept as absolute truth and thus proof of your arguments. It hypocritical of you to do so, while you yourself do not believe that scripture is God's word nor an absolute source of truth.

Otherwise when you quote scripture as proof, we can just as easily say to you "How do you know that is truth?", as you say when scripture is presented to you as proof.

You believe the Bible is God's word because you allegedly had a supernatural experience with the inner witness of the Holy Spirit. Lost of Mormons use the same argument. They claim that they believe the Book of Mormon is God's word because they received an inner witness experience from the Holy Ghost, also known as a "burning in the bosom". Take a look at this question: Has any Latter-day Saint published a very detailed description of how the Holy Spirit confirmed to them the truth of the BofM, as per Moroni 10:3-7?

The inner witness of the Holy Spirit is not a "burning in the bosom". There is no physical sensation whatsoever. It is just a conviction that the Bible is God's word.

It was a rhetorical question. Of course there isn't. And that's the point. The Bible doesn't teach scientific verificationism as the standard epistemology on miracles for Christians. The Bible teaches faith, the importance of testimonial evidence and the importance of witnessing to others. Convincing immature believers and skeptics through peer-reviewed journal publications and Nobel Prizes is never taught.

The bible does NOT teach we should blindly accept the hearsay testimonies of miracles from other people.

 

[John Mullally]

People are now can believe in the resurrection without physically seeing Christ because it is recorded in scripture.

Is the reason you believe in scripture based upon pure logic? I am sure it was mainly based upon a gut level conviction, from which you later made logical connections. I believe that extends even further to some believing in the active operation of the Gifts of the Spirit which are promised in scripture. Its starts with a gut level conviction.

F.F. Bosley who wrote "Christ the Healer" about 80 years ago - appended several letters testifying of healing. This pattern has been repeated. Although, Christ said to his critics: no sign will be given thee.

I had a stomach operation about 25 years ago that did not resolve as expected and had several revisits to doctors for about 5 years. I am a private person and was in a service where there was a guest preacher from a foreign country. At the end of the service, he opted to lay hands on people's heads as they passed and declare a blessing on them. There was about 200 people in line ahead of me and I was basking in the Lord's presence barely aware of myself when I stepped up, he slapped me in the stomach and said "You shall live and not die". My issue largely resolved although the doctors never did find its cause.

 

[Guojing]

People are now can believe in the resurrection without physically seeing Christ because it is recorded in scripture.

To be more precise, we can believe the resurrection because of the way the apostle Paul wrote 1 Corinthians 15, which we discussed at length in the other thread about whether apostles are for today

1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

When Paul wrote this, it was around AD 55

The fact that there were more than 500 people who saw Christ alive, and they are available to authenticate that, when Paul wrote 1 Cor around AD 55, shows that the resurrection of Christ was already accepted as factual in Jerusalem.

Here, Andy Stanley explains this much clearer than me here, where I learn this from. It will start directly at the relevant part.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

@swordsman1 @Guojing - this thread may be of interest: Can scientists believe in modern miracles? (I'll post a rebuttal to post #354 in a few days, I'm a bit busy at the moment)

 

[swordsman1]

Is the reason you believe in scripture based upon pure logic? I am sure it was mainly based upon a gut level conviction, from which you later made logical connections. I believe that extends even further to some believing in the active operation of the Gifts of the Spirit which are promised in scripture. Its starts with a gut level conviction.

Sure I get a "gut level conviction" that scripture is true, as all Christians do (the Reformers termed it the Inward Witness of the Holy Spirit). But I can't say I get a gut feeling that all the gifts are in operation today. Quite the opposite.

F.F. Bosley who wrote "Christ the Healer" about 80 years ago - appended several letters testifying of healing. This pattern has been repeated. Although, Christ said to his critics: no sign will be given thee.

Presumably that would just be unsubstantiated testimonies? ie hearsay.

I had a stomach operation about 25 years ago that did not resolve as expected and had several revisits to doctors for about 5 years. I am a private person and was in a service where there was a guest preacher from a foreign country. At the end of the service, he opted to lay hands on people's heads as they passed and declare a blessing on them. There was about 200 people in line ahead of me and I was basking in the Lord's presence barely aware of myself when I stepped up, he slapped me in the stomach and said "You shall live and not die". My issue largely resolved although the doctors never did find its cause.

It's a bit hard to prove that was a miracle when it only "largely resolved" the problem, and the doctors couldn't even identify the cause of the problem in the first place. And from my perspective it is hearsay - I only have your word and no other proof.

 

[John Mullally]

Sure I get a "gut level conviction" that scripture is true, as all Christians do (the Reformers termed it the Inward Witness of the Holy Spirit). But I can't say I get a gut feeling that all the gifts are in operation today. Quite the opposite.



Presumably that would just be unsubstantiated testimonies? ie hearsay.



It's a bit hard to prove that was a miracle when it only "largely resolved" the problem, and the doctors couldn't even identify the cause of the problem in the first place. And from my perspective it is hearsay - I only have your word and no other proof.

I like your avatar. Reminds me of Ephesians 6 where the sword of the spirit is wielded against our non-flesh and blood adversaries. Paul is the prime example of a Swordsman in the NT. And he argued for the continuation of the Gifts of the Spirit in 1 Cor 13 as long as they were necessary and he argued for the continuation of the 5-fold ministry (which includes the Apostle & Prophet ministry) in Ephesians 4 as long as they are necessary. You would have to be blind to say that those gifts and ministries would not be of great benefit today - given the number of sick, immature, and divisions in the church.

You take up the Sword of the spirit as an avatar, but take an agnostic stance towards the continuation of the gifts of the spirit - odd to me based upon reading scripture. Jesus was all for the continuation of power gifts from the Holy Spirit (read Mark 16 and observe how many times he told people in response to their request, that it would be done for them in accordance to their faith).

 

[TruthSeek3r]

@swordsman1 - this question and the answers that have been posted so far may be of interest: Are there any Christians who are scientists and believe in modern miracles?

Some quotes:



Many other examples could be cited. Some of them are accomplished but not
particularly famous. I personally know multiple scientists who have worked for/with NASA, computer scientists at the leading edge of the self-driving car industry, a physicist in atomic research, etc. who believe in God and in the ongoing reality of His miraculous intervention in human lives.



Examples of Christian scientists who witnessed / confirm healing miracles

I consider a medical doctor as a scientist as well because their field is often called "medical science." Below are 3 examples taken from Craig Keener's massive 928-page book Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Account (published in 2011) containing many documented miracles. These names are in Chapter 11 (Supernatural Claims in the Recent West) — Samples of Individual Healing Reports — Scientists, Journalists, and Doctors:

1. John Polkinghorne, scientist-theologian, reported a healing of a woman's paralyzed left leg witnessed by her orthopaedic charge nurse husband in his book Science and Providence page 55.
2. Rex Gardner, physician, wrote a 1986 book Healing miracles: A doctor investigates whose back cover identified him as "a Fellow of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and of the Association of Surgeons in East Africa", examining several healing reports at the hospital via X-ray, eye exam, etc.
3. John White, MD, attesting miraculous healing of a woman with confirmed tuberculosis of the cervical spine and unable to stand, who later becomes his wife. Quote from Craig Keener's book:

her doctor, who had been trying to secure her a place in the sanatorium, “was bewildered to find there was no evidence of disease in her body.” Her illness was certain, her cure permanent, and the witness virtually incontrovertible. White could attest this incident and its permanence because he was not only the person who prayed for her, and an MD himself, but he later married this woman and spent the rest of his life with her.​