What criteria should we use to identify genuine miracles in modern times?

[bbbbbbb]

Not relevant at all. Cessationists will accept no evidence as conclusive, continuationists do not need it.

Quite true. In both cases, their faith is rock solid and immovable so that no irresistible force could possibly affect it.

 

[Saint Steven]

I think it is very relevant to the cessation vs. continuation debate that we know how to recognize genuine miracles when they actually occur, and to be able to tell them apart from fake miracles and demonic counterfeits.

Yes.
And I would like to see us go one step further, and accept a miracle as genuine (based on the testimony of a believer) rather than assume they are fake until we have undeniable evidence. (which will be denied anyway)

Otherwise we are creating a situation where secular doctors are more trustworthy than Christian believers. What does that say about us?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Yes.
And I would like to see us go one step further, and accept a miracle as genuine (based on the testimony of a believer) rather than assume they are fake until we have undeniable evidence. (which will be denied anyway)

Otherwise we are creating a situation where secular doctors are more trustworthy than Christian believers. What does that say about us?

One of the difficulties with this scenario is the temptation to conclude that because God performed this miracle for someone, then another person, who we see as being more worthy or more in need of the same miracle, will naturally receive the same treatment by God. When, as it very frequently does, this fails to happen, one's faith is disturbed, to say the least.

 

[RDKirk]

One of the difficulties with this scenario is the temptation to conclude that because God performed this miracle for someone, then another person, who we see as being more worthy or more in need of the same miracle, will naturally receive the same treatment by God. When, as it very frequently does, this fails to happen, one's faith is disturbed, to say the least.

Not when we look at the actions of Jesus Himself as the example.

Do you remember the man who had born lame that Peter healed? Scripture says that man had laid at the gate of the temple for decades...which means Jesus had earlier passed him by.

Or why didn't Jesus heal everyone at the pool of Bethesda? They were all hoping for healing from God. If that man was somehow more worthy, scripture doesn't give us a clue as to how that was.

Scripture itself denies "...that because God performed this miracle for someone, then another person, who we see as being more worthy or more in need of the same miracle, will naturally receive the same treatment by God."

 

[Saint Steven]

One of the difficulties with this scenario is the temptation to conclude that because God performed this miracle for someone, then another person, who we see as being more worthy or more in need of the same miracle, will naturally receive the same treatment by God. When, as it very frequently does, this fails to happen, one's faith is disturbed, to say the least.

I agree.
Like most things, some balance is in order.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I agree.
Like most things, some balance is in order.

Thanks. It really does require a keen sense of balance.