A recent guestbook visitor (see entries # 139, 143, 144) has conversed with me regarding miraculous abilities, and whether to not believe in such things today constitutes a belief that parts of God's word are not true. I am confident that the confusion with regard to these matters is substantial enough, that my reply to him could be best used, not only as a guestbook entry reply, but also as a bulletin article. I pray that it benefits you.
William

First, let me refer to your original question on this subject. You wrote: "Have you ever tried drinking deadly poison or handled venomous snakes? Do you recommend we try it in our church? It's in the Bible so it must be true mustn't it?" Let me ask, have you ever tried drinking deadly poison or handled venomous snakes? In your last message, you made it abundantly clear that you believe the Bible to be true, and you express your shock that anyone would say that any part of it is not true. So, have you drank deadly poison or handled venomous snakes? If not, why not?

Also, it seems that you are a walking contradiction. At the end of your last post, you wrote, "As someone who reads the Bible every day I am shocked that you can say that any portion has ceased to be true..." You attempt to come across as one who believes the Bible entirely. However, in the post immediately preceeding this one, you wrote, "I was brought up to believe in the inerrancy of the bible, but become suspicious that there is contradiction within it..." Which is it sir? Do you believe the Bible to be truthful or not? You've said both. Incidentally, I did not say in my previous response that any portion of the Bible has ceased to be true. That is your misconstrued manipulation of what I said.

By saying that there are statements, commandments or actions in the Bible which are not for us today is not the same as saying that it is not true. I believe that Noah built an ark, and that he, his family, and the animals which went into the ark with him were saved from a worldwide flood. However, I am not about to begin construction of an ark in my backyard. The commandment to build an ark was specifically for Noah. I believe every detail which is recorded with regard to the ark and the flood, however, I acknowledge that the commandments and details surrounding it are not for me to act upon. They are written that I might know those events, and that I might see the power and grace of God in them. If we use your reasoning, we must all build arks, for if we don't, then we are saying that Genesis 6-9 is not true. Not so.

Again, the law of Moses is in the Bible, but I am not subject to it. It was a law given to the Jews, not for Christians. It has been preserved for us, and we can benefit by looking back into it, for it demonstrates the purity which God requires of His people, the seriousness of sin, and many other wonderful lessons. However, I wear clothing which is made of mixed materials (Deut 22:11), I do not bring animals for sacrifice, nor do I keep any other portion of the law of Moses. Does the fact that the law of Moses is not for us mean that we do not believe it to be true? Absolutely not. It is true, but it is not a law that I am subject to.

To say these things in no way "contradicts the value and relevance of the Bible which we all believe in", as you have suggested. To say these things, is to rightly divide the word of God, and not apply upon us things which God did not intend for us. These are for our admonition, they are for our learning, but they are not for us - they were for Noah, and for the nation Israel. Incidentally, I might mention that your insistance that the Bible contradicts itself (as you mentioned in your previous post) DOES "contradict the value and relevance of the Bible which we all believe in." How can you claim to believe in the "value and relevance of the Bible" and at the same time say that it is a contradictory book?

Again, I want to emphasize, I have not suggested that any part of the Bible is not true. That is your misconstrued interpretation of what I have said. What I have said is that not everything which is recorded in the Bible is for us. That does not make it untrue. I believe every word of the Bible, however, I acknowledge that not all things which are recorded were meant for me, and that some of the things which are in the Bible have expired. The law of Moses is a prime example. It is no longer the valid law for God's people. That doesn't make it untrue. It is still as true as it was before, but it is not applicable for us, we are not subject to it.

Another example, this time from the gospel. In John 14:26, Jesus said, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." And again, in John 16:13, Jesus said, "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." I have heard folks quote these texts, and apply them to themselves. No. Jesus was speaking with His apostles, and telling THEM that the Spirit would bring to THEIR remembrance the things Jesus taught THEM. The Spirit would guide THEM into all truth, and reveal to THEM things to come. For us to apply this text to ourselves today is to pull it from it's context and make it say something that Jesus was not saying. Does that mean I don't believe the texts? Sure I do. I wholly believe that the Spirit brought to the mind of the apostles all the things which Jesus had said, and that the Spirit guided them into all truth, and that the Spirit revealed to them things to come. But these promises were not made to you or I, and for either of us (or anyone else) to claim them as our own is a misapplicaton of the text.

I do not suggest that accepting the things spoken of in Mark 16:17-18 as truth is unreasonable. You are correct, you read too much into my reply if that is what you got from it. I believe that the apostles and many of the saints in the first century did the very things which are spoken of in Mark 16:17-18. It is not a falsehood, it is true. However, does that mean it is applicable to us? Let's look at the verses which I mentioned previously, which you had difficulty with...

Hebrews 2:1-4 speaks of God's use of signs and wonders to confirm the word. That was the purpose of the miracles, to confirm the word. Surely God does not require thousands of years to confirm His word? When the Law of Moses was given, all that was necessary for God to confirm His word was the smoke, thundering and lightning of His presence on top mount Sinai. The people understood the power of God, and that the word which was given by Him was to be obeyed. When Jesus came proclaiming the gospel, He performed miracles, which confirmed the word which He spoke. The apostles came preaching, and the word which they spoke was confirmed by God with miracles as well. However, the word has been confirmed. It has been established that God has given His word through Jesus Christ.

Recall, as Jesus spoke about the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man, being in torments in hades asked that Lazarus be raised from the dead, that he might return to the rich man's brothers. Abraham responded, "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them." The rich man then said, "Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent." And Abraham settled the issue, saying, "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." You had said of the confirming miracles, "Their purpose has not been served as, in this present day many people still need such things to confirm the word of God." No they don't. I say along with faithful Abraham, "If they hear not Jesus and the apostles, neither will they be persuaded, though manifest miracles be performed." God's word was confirmed in the first century by the miracles which accompanied the preaching of the apostles. The people then had no difficulty acknowledging that it was God's word that was spoken and written down. If people today refuse to believe, it is not because the word has not been confirmed.

You say that I have misinterpreted 1 Cor 13:8-10. How so? Yes, love is part of the context, but these verses fall in the midst of a greater context, a discussion of miracles in the church (ch 12-14). Chapter 12 reveals the gifts, chapter 13 speaks of the timeframe for them, and chapter 14 speaks of the use of the gifts in the assembly. Paul tells us that a time would come when prophecies, tongues and knowledge would cease. These were all means whereby God revealed His word. When would such things cease? "...when that which is perfect is come..." What is the perfect? It is the complete revelation of God's will. When all scripture had been revealed, then the need for these miraculous gifts would cease. Now you are correct, there is no mention of demons being cast out, healings or other such miracles in this text. It would help then for us to know how these gifts of the Spirit were given to the saints. Note in Acts 8, Philip had gone to Samaria to preach, and on account of his word and the miracles which were confirming it, a great many believed. As we drop down to verse 14-17, we find that these new Christians had not yet received the Holy Spirit. That is, the brethren had not yet received the miraculous measure of the Spirit. So, the apostles laid hands on them, and they received the Spirit. Now, notice verse 18, "And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered money, saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost." How were the miraculous gifts of the Spirit given? It was by the laying on of the apostles' hands. Had Philip had the ability to impart the miraculous gifts, then surely he would have, but it was not until the apostles came that the brethren received these, for it was by the laying on of the apostles' hands that the miraculous measure of the Spirit was given.

Now, what does that mean for us? Unless there is an apostle of Christ still alive and laying hands on people, the miraculous measure of the Spirit has ceased. It was not imparted by the laying on of the preacher's (Philip's) hands. It was not imparted directly from God. It was imparted by the laying on of the apostles' hands. There are several today who claim miraculous ability. Ever noticed that they claim to heal ailments which are not visible? Take a man with a withered hand to one of these faith healing services, and you will find him turned away for some reason. I was at one such service, where a man with cerebal palsy and a woman who was deaf sat directly infront of the healer, and he did absolutely nothing. Why? Because he does not have the powers he claims to have. For more on this, visit here.

Now, do I limit God by saying such things? Absolutely not. God is able to work miracles if He so chooses. He is able to intervene in the affairs of man in whatever way He chooses to do. However, he does not do so through in miraculous measure through the hands of man. He may work miracles in other ways, but the testimony of His word is that the miraculous measure given amongst men would and has ceased. Does that mean I don't believe the Bible? Absolutely not. I believe every page. I believe that God worked miracles through the apostles and through the early church, but I will not extend such things out of the realm in which God designed them to be used. His word is confirmed, the apostles are dead and gone. To affirm the presence of miracles in our midst today is to contradict what the Bible reveals.

You asked whether there was a particular date when miracles ceased, or if some occurrence caused them to cease. The death of the apostles is key. If the working of miracles was passed on through their hands, then once they all passed on, the ability of passing on the miraculous measure of the Spirit would also cease. Did the working of miracles cease immediately upon the death of the last apostle? I don't know. It may have lasted until the death of the last person on whom the apostles had laid hands. Which it is, I do not know. But what I do know is that God's word plainly says that only the apostles had the ability to pass on this power, and thus, it has ceased.