A Question About Signs and Wonders

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I have been reading about the resurrectionfd of Dorcas by Peter in Acts 9:32. What happened was the Dorcas died and the disciples who were with her sent for Peter who was living at another town. He came and raised her from the dead.

Now if signs and wonders were available for ordinary believers, why didn't they raise Dorcas from the dead instead of having to send for Peter? When Peter arrived, why did he not reprimand the disciples for not having the faith to raise her from the dead themselves.

I wonder if the answer is that because Peter was an Apostle, he was the one who had the ministry of signs and wonders. I looked through all the other examples of signs and wonders through the book of acts, and I found that all of them were performed by either Peter or Paul, and in some cases by Stephen and Philip. No recorded signs and wonders were performed by the ordinary believers in the book of Acts.

So, is the teaching that ordinary believers are able to perform signs and wonders in today's church true or false? If we go by the book of Acts, we may have to decide that the teaching is false. We also have to remember that Acts is descriptive church history and not doctrinally prescriptive.

Of course some in the NAR are saying that there are apostles in today's church, but there is a problem - Apostles are witnesses of the resurrection of Christ, personally appointed by Christ, and given the ministry of signs and wonders. Modern "apostles" are not direct witnesses of the resurrection of Christ, and have been appointed by their church and not personally by Christ; therefore they cannot be the specially chosen Apostles of Christ who can perform the same signs and wonders we see performed by the Apostles in the Book of Acts.

 

[Laodicean60]

Then you have to wonder about this:
Mat 7-22
22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’

Nothing about raising the dead but mighty works?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Then you have to wonder about this:
Mat 7-22
22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’

Nothing about raising the dead but mighty works?

What has this to do with the OP? However, one thing about these people saying, "Lord, Lord..." is missing from what they said, making all the difference whether the Lord would accept or reject them. They didn't say, "You died for me on the Cross, and I trust your Word that whoever comes to You, You will not cast out." If they had said that instead of trying to impress the Lord with their accomplishment, the Lord would have known them and not rejected them.

 

[Laodicean60]

What has this to do with the OP? However, one thing about these people saying, "Lord, Lord..." is missing from what they said, making all the difference whether the Lord would accept or reject them. They didn't say, "You died for me on the Cross, and I trust your Word that whoever comes to You, You will not cast out." If they had said that instead of trying to impress the Lord with their accomplishment, the Lord would have known them and not rejected them.

Weren't you asking about other people not performing miracles or were you just talking about Apostles.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Weren't you asking about other people not performing miracles or were you just talking about Apostles.

What I see in the book of Acts is that none outside of the Apostles, Stephen and Philip performed signs and wonders. So, if there is no Scriptural support for those trying to perform sign and wonders, is that why they all fail?

 

[Laodicean60]

i SEE

So, is the teaching that ordinary believers are able to perform signs and wonders in today's church true or false? If we go by the book of Acts, we may have to decide that the teaching is false. We also have to remember that Acts is descriptive church history and not doctrinally prescriptive.

Raising the dead is one thing and I've heard it happen before. But if you mean healing as a sign, my brother in law was healed by a priest. As far as Luke and the book of Acts, do you think he wrote everything that everyone did? I don't think so, because the gospel writer didn't write everything Jesus did.

Jhn 21:25
Jesus also did many other things. If they were all written down, I suppose the whole world could not contain the books that would be written.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

i SEE

Raising the dead is one thing and I've heard it happen before. But if you mean healing as a sign, my brother in law was healed by a priest. As far as Luke and the book of Acts, do you think he wrote everything that everyone did? I don't think so, because the gospel writer didn't write everything Jesus did.

Jhn 21:25
Jesus also did many other things. If they were all written down, I suppose the whole world could not contain the books that would be written.

God is sovereign. He decided when and how to answer prayer. Anyone can pray and ask God to heal a sick person, and there are times where God actually does heal. But God is not a push button healing vending machine. If He heals or doesn't heal, He has a good reason for it, and we need to trust Him.

But there is no Scriptural support for someone setting themselves up as a healing ministry. Peter and Paul preached the Gospel, not as healing ministries but as Gospel evangelists; and because they were Apostles of Christ signs and wonders did accompany their ministries. All the modern healing ministries have failed to produced their promised results because they have changed the emphasis from preaching the Gospel to save souls to preaching healing to heal bodies.

 

[Laodicean60]

But God is not a push button healing vending machine.

What is this all about? I was using that as a example for your healing signs and wonders thread. sheesh

Scriptural support for someone setting themselves up as a healing ministry.

Are you saying a Christan can't try to minister to someone by praying for healing?

As far as Luke and the book of Acts, do you think he wrote everything that everyone did? I don't think so, because the gospel writer didn't write everything Jesus did.

Jhn 21:25
Jesus also did many other things. If they were all written down, I suppose the whole world could not contain the books that would be written.

Now, instead of ranting about healing. What about this?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

What is this all about? I was using that as a example for your healing signs and wonders thread. sheesh

Are you saying a Christan can't try to minister to someone by praying for healing?

Now, instead of ranting about healing. What about this?

There is an example of a church elder praying for a sick person (as taught in James), and someone setting themselves up as a healing ministry and saying that they possess a healing gift.

As far as signs and wonders are concerned, they are not happening today, because there are no Apostles of Christ to perform them. So those who say they are performing signs and wonders today are lying.

 

[Laodicean60]

As far as signs and wonders are concerned,

Your only talking about raising the dead then as the only sign?

possess a healing gift.

You do believe what Paul said about gifts don't you?

 

[Laodicean60]

I looked up the definition on an Apostle and here's what came up. From this definition I would say yes, a church can call on f their members an Apostle. I guess you'll have to do the research in the Greek if it's true. Maybe an Emissary?

"An apostle is a person who is sent on a mission by God or by a leader, such as Christ’s 12 original disciples or Paul 1. The word also means a person who initiates a great moral reform or who supports an important belief or system"

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Your only talking about raising the dead then as the only sign?

You do believe what Paul said about gifts don't you?

Why are you questioning me about raising the dead? It is just one sign and wonder. The point I was making about Dorcas was that the disciples with her could not raise her because none of them were Apostles of Christ, so they sent for Peter who was an Apostle whom they knew could resurrect her.

I believe what Paul said about gifts, but we don't see examples in our modern churches of what Paul about them. Most prominent proponents of the gifts cannot get past the talking and speech making about them. Most tongues we see is just meaningless babbling, prophecies and interpretations of tongues are just word salads which say nothing, and non of the predictive ones don't come to pass, no one seem to be able to perform miracles, and discerning of spirits is just witch-hunting and seeing demons under every bush.

 

[Laodicean60]

Why are you questioning me about raising the dead? It is just one sign and wonder. The point I was making about Dorcas was that the disciples with her could not raise her because none of them were Apostles of Christ, so they sent for Peter who was an Apostle whom they knew could resurrect her.

Because the title of your thread: A Question About Signs and Wonders.
Even the disciple couldn't cast out a demon for a little boy and what did Jesus say. Maybe the people in Joppa didn't have the faith Peter did. Just because Peter was an Apostle doesn't make Apostles the only ones. to do signs and wonders. Just because it was recorded once doesn't mean other weren't doing it.

but we don't see examples in our modern churches

This is what your carnal mind shows you. I haven't seen so I don't believe. Most churches in the west believe the way you do. I was where you were several years ago, and I didn't see my first sign until age 50 and now I'm 63 and had a healing event in September.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Because the title of your thread: A Question About Signs and Wonders.
Even the disciple couldn't cast out a demon for a little boy and what did Jesus say. Maybe the people in Joppa didn't have the faith Peter did. Just because Peter was an Apostle doesn't make Apostles the only ones. to do signs and wonders. Just because it was recorded once doesn't mean other weren't doing it.

This is what your carnal mind shows you. I haven't seen so I don't believe. Most churches in the west believe the way you do. I was where you were several years ago, and I didn't see my first sign until age 50 and now I'm 63 and had a healing event in September.

Every recorded sign and wonder recorded in the book of Acts was performed by an Apostle and non were performed by ordinary disciples. I choose to believe God's Word that no one today can perform signs and wonders when they want to. God does heal people because He chooses to, and not because anyone demands it.

I see that you are not prepared to listen to the evidence that I am presenting from God's Word, so I don't see the point in further discussing it with you. You are convinced that ordinary Christians can perform signs and wonders when they choose to in spite of the Biblical evidence and the actual modern evidence that it is not happening.

 

[ARBITER01]

I wonder if the answer is that because Peter was an Apostle, he was the one who had the ministry of signs and wonders. I looked through all the other examples of signs and wonders through the book of acts, and I found that all of them were performed by either Peter or Paul, and in some cases by Stephen and Philip. No recorded signs and wonders were performed by the ordinary believers in the book of Acts.

Steven was not an apostle, nor was Phillip who was mentioned in chapter 8 of Acts. Ordinary Christians with an anointing for the greater gifts to operate.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Steven was not an apostle, nor was Phillip who was mentioned in chapter 8 of Acts. Ordinary Christians with an anointing for the greater gifts to operate.

Stephen and Philip were deacons appointed by the Apostles, so they weren't ordinary Christians. I repeat, if ordinary disciples could routinely perform signs and wonders why could they not raise Dorcas from the dead, and why did Peter not rebuke them for their lack of faith when he arrived? This event is compelling evidence that ordinary disciples cannot perform signs and wonders on demand.

 

[ARBITER01]

Stephen and Philip were deacons appointed by the Apostles, so they weren't ordinary Christians. I repeat, if ordinary disciples could routinely perform signs and wonders why could they not raise Dorcas from the dead, and why did Peter not rebuke them for their lack of faith when he arrived? This event is compelling evidence that ordinary disciples cannot perform signs and wonders on demand.

Sorry, but both stephen and phillip were ordinary people in the body of Christ at that time, they were not apostles.

I think you are trying to see things in scripture that aren't there. Paul never taught that any of us had to be an apostle for the greater gifts to operate.

 

[Bobber]

Now if signs and wonders were available for ordinary believers, why didn't they raise Dorcas from the dead instead of having to send for Peter? When Peter arrived, why did he not reprimand the disciples for not having the faith to raise her from the dead themselves.

What the Bible is revealing is what took place. It doesn't necessarily y mean the disciples you're speaking of couldn't have did what Peter did. Really it's no different then today. Christians know and are aware of others in their width that do live close to God who have a reputation for getting their prayers heard. Of course they normally will gravitate towards seeking out that induvial to pray. Doesn't mean though that their spirits couldn't have been walking in the strength or empowerment of God to do the same.

I wonder if the answer is that because Peter was an Apostle, he was the one who had the ministry of signs and wonders.

Sure and that's what I mean in my last quote. One seeks the help of one who has a reputation for getting results.

I looked through all the other examples of signs and wonders through the book of acts, and I found that all of them were performed by either Peter or Paul, and in some cases by Stephen and Philip.

Stephen though was an ordinary type of believer. He wasn't an Apostle.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Sorry, but both stephen and phillip were ordinary people in the body of Christ at that time, they were not apostles.

I think you are trying to see things in scripture that aren't there. Paul never taught that any of us had to be an apostle for the greater gifts to operate.

But what we do see in Scripture was that only the Apostles actually performed signs and wonders, especially in the record of Paul's missionary journeys where all of the signs and wonders were performed by Paul and no one else.

On the evidence in Scripture and our modern churches, the case for signs and wonders by ordinary believers would not stand up in any court of law where the strict rules of evidence is applied. Subjective evidence where people just believe that signs and wonders are possible by ordinary Christians will not stand up. What is needed is hard objective evidence, which is serious lacking. There is the testimony of a woman who had three of her toes shot off by her abusive husband, had them restored by a miracle. The problem is that she would not take her shoes and socks off to actually demonstrate that the toes had regrown, and yet she continued to say that the miracle had actually occurred. If she was prepared to take off her socks to show that the toes had regrown, that would settle it on the basis of evidence. But while she continues to refuse, then she opens herself up to lying about it. All of the ministries that claimed words of knowledge have been exposed as frauds, from Popoff who had his wife give information over a wireless system, and others who gave so called words of knowledge by view social media over their iPads and iPhones. There is no evidence that any preacher had any genuine words of knowledge about anyone who was stood up in a meeting. The prominent healing ministries cannot provide conclusive medical evidence that anyone had been healed, and those with really serious medical conditions don't make it to the platform because the preacher knows he can't get them healed. Any competent lawyer could bring this objective evidence to any court of law to prove that signs and wonders cannot be performed in our conferences and crusades.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

What the Bible is revealing is what took place. It doesn't necessarily y mean the disciples you're speaking of couldn't have did what Peter did. Really it's no different then today. Christians know and are aware of others in their width that do live close to God who have a reputation for getting their prayers heard. Of course they normally will gravitate towards seeking out that induvial to pray. Doesn't mean though that their spirits couldn't have been walking in the strength or empowerment of God to do the same.

Sure and that's what I mean in my last quote. One seeks the help of one who has a reputation for getting results.

Stephen though was an ordinary type of believer. He wasn't an Apostle.

Stephen was a deacon, appointed by the Apostles. He and Philip would have been witnesses of the resurrected Christ, and appointed to their role by the glorified Jesus through the laying on of hands by the Apostles. That would have made them very different from other ordinary disciples who had not been appointed as deacons and having had hands laid on them by the Apostles.

Because we don't have any Apostles of Christ in our present day, there is no one who has personally witnessed the resurrection of Christ and who has been personally appointed by Christ Himself, available to lay hands on anyone to enable them to have a signs and wonders ministry.

We can talk about this for ever amen, but that won't cause signs and wonders to happen. If those who are trained in the Supernatural School of Ministry cannot perform signs, wonders and miracles, us lesser mortals would have no hope.