Short version: is the testimonial evidence for modern miracles compelling?
Longer version:
In post #86 of another thread I said the following:
Is it rational to believe in Biblical miracles on the basis of 1st century testimonies?
Is it rational to believe in modern miracles on the basis of modern testimonies?
Longer version:
In post #86 of another thread I said the following:
Talking about Swordsman1, I just revived an old thread where I had an intense back-and-forth exchange of arguments with him on continuationism vs cessationism. You can read my latest post here.
Instead of debating exegesis of passages, you will notice that I intentionally narrowed the discussion to epistemology. My impression is that Cessationists tend to have a very inconsistent way of processing and interpreting testimonial evidence. When you present modern accounts of miracles to them, their response is pretty much indistinguishable from that of an atheist. Yet when you point to the miracle accounts in the Bible, they immediately take off their atheist hat and put on their believer hat. That's inconsistency at its finest. At least atheists are consistent and remain skeptical in front of all miracles without making exceptions or special pleadings.
To which @lismore responded with some good points in post #95. Quote:Instead of debating exegesis of passages, you will notice that I intentionally narrowed the discussion to epistemology. My impression is that Cessationists tend to have a very inconsistent way of processing and interpreting testimonial evidence. When you present modern accounts of miracles to them, their response is pretty much indistinguishable from that of an atheist. Yet when you point to the miracle accounts in the Bible, they immediately take off their atheist hat and put on their believer hat. That's inconsistency at its finest. At least atheists are consistent and remain skeptical in front of all miracles without making exceptions or special pleadings.
There's a principle in the bible:
"by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established” (Deuteronomy 19:15)
“that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established” (Matthew 18:16)
2 Corinthians 13:1 "Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses."
In my experience much of what is presented as 'testimonial evidence' of many things in Charismatic/ Pentecostal circles does not meet this standard. Sometimes it is vague, ambiguous or contradictory, unverifiable, lacking detail, presented by un-accountable, self promoting persons. Salesmen presenting rumours as fact.
The corporate reaction too is often suspect, material of ambiguous authenticity is not weighed or tested, it's promoted, even sold. Those revealed, even jailed, as con-men can continue, no questions asked.
[...]
Comparing this to the biblical standard:
1 Corinthians 15 The Resurrection of Christ
1 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
There were many appearances of the risen Lord, one to over 500 witnesses and all involving persons who could be contacted and asked.
In other words, lismore seems to suggest that the testimonial evidence for modern miracles is weak, whereas the testimonial evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is strong. Do you agree?"by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established” (Deuteronomy 19:15)
“that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established” (Matthew 18:16)
2 Corinthians 13:1 "Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses."
In my experience much of what is presented as 'testimonial evidence' of many things in Charismatic/ Pentecostal circles does not meet this standard. Sometimes it is vague, ambiguous or contradictory, unverifiable, lacking detail, presented by un-accountable, self promoting persons. Salesmen presenting rumours as fact.
The corporate reaction too is often suspect, material of ambiguous authenticity is not weighed or tested, it's promoted, even sold. Those revealed, even jailed, as con-men can continue, no questions asked.
[...]
Comparing this to the biblical standard:
1 Corinthians 15 The Resurrection of Christ
1 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
There were many appearances of the risen Lord, one to over 500 witnesses and all involving persons who could be contacted and asked.
Is it rational to believe in Biblical miracles on the basis of 1st century testimonies?
Is it rational to believe in modern miracles on the basis of modern testimonies?