Morality vs. Miracles: Looking at Machen’s “Christianity and Liberalism” Today

It’s been almost a century since J. Gresham Machen’s landmark work, Christianity and Liberalism, was released. What prompted Machen’s book was the descent of many mainline churches into liberal theology and teaching. Higher critical approaches to the Bible were a factor in this development, as well as scientific discoveries that made the Christian’s affirmation of miraculous, supernatural interventions seem embarrassing.

Keeping Morality, Ditching the Miracles

The trajectory of liberalism one hundred years ago went something like this:

• We are living in a scientific age of discovery.
• The miracles we read about in the Bible were written from another cultural vantage point.
• It is important to maintain the ethical and moral teaching of Christianity.
• Belief in the literal occurrence of biblical miracles is not needed to maintain the moral center of Christianity.
• If belief in miracles is embarrassing to modern people, we should deemphasize them in order to extend Christianity into the next generation.   Continue at Trevin Wax
  

The Miracle-Working Second Adam

If you put together all the maladies  of those whom Jesus miraculously healed during His earthly ministry (i.e. those having to do with eyes, ears, tongues, arms, hands, legs, skin and blood) you would have a perfectly deformed man or woman–both internally and externally. Isaiah used the figure of a person entirely deformed from head to toe to describe our spiritual condition of depravity by nature (Isaiah 1: 5-6). The apostle Paul likened our spiritual condition by nature to that of a physically dead man (Ephesians 2:1-5). This should come as no surprise to us if we understand that the healing miracles–historical though they were–are really spiritual parables for us. They are parables that carry our minds back to Eden and the awful effects of Adam’s sin; and, they are parables that carry our minds forward to see the glory of Jesus, the second Adam, and the King of God’s Kingdom who came to heal the souls and bodies of His people. This is most fully symbolized in the resurrection miracles of Jesus in the Gospels. Here are five observations, drawn from Herman Ridderbos’ outstanding book The Coming of the Kingdom, about what the healing miracles of Jesus teach us:   Continue at Nicholas T. Batzig

4 Myths About Cessationism

Nathan Busenitz has an excellent article at The Criplegate titled, “What Cessationism is Not.” Here are 4 myths about cessationism he discusses:

Myth #1: Cessationism is anti-supernatural, denying the possibility of miracles.

When it comes to understanding the cessationist position, the question is not: Can God still do miracles in the world today? Cessationists would be quick to acknowledge that God can act at any time in any way He chooses (Psalms 115:3). . . So, the question is not: Can God still do miracles?

Rather, the definitive question is this: Are the miraculous gifts of the New Testament still in operation in the church today–such that what was the norm in the days of Christ and the apostles ought to be expected today?

Myth #2: Cessationism is founded on one’s interpretation of “the perfect” in 1 Corinthians 13:10.

(1) Some (such as F.F. Bruce) argue that love itself is the perfect.

(2) Some (such as B.B. Warfield) contend that the completed canon of Scripture is the perfect.

(3) Some (such as Robert Thomas) contend that the mature church is the perfect.

(4) Some (such as Thomas Edgar) see the believer’s entrance into the presence of Christ (at the moment of death) as the perfect.

(5) Some (such as Richard Gaffin) see the return of Christ (and the end of this age) as the perfect.

(6) Some (such as John MacArthur) view the eternal state (in a general sense) as the perfect.

In any case, my point here is simply this: The interpreter can take any of the above positions, and still remain a cessationist. In fact, there are cessationists who hold to each of the positions listed above (as the names I’ve listed indicate).   Continue at Jared Moore

The Cessation of the Miraculous

In Joshua chapters 3-4, the children of Israel cross the Jordan into the Promised Land due to the wondrous power of God. In chapter 5, the children of Israel celebrate by the sacramental signs: circumcision and Passover. During the Passover celebration, the author emphasizes that the children of Israel “ate of the produce of the land” (Josh 5:11, two other references in v.12). This emphasis highlights an important point: the God who promised the gift of the land with all of its attendant grain, was now fulfilling that promise and His covenant people were reaping the benefits of His faithfulness.

In Josh 5:12, we read “Then the manna ceased on the day after they had eaten the produce of the land; and the children of Israel no longer had manna, but they ate the food of the land of Canaan that year.” This highlights an important principle: the cessation of the miraculous (God’s provision of manna) does not imply the cessation of God’s active power in sustaining His covenant people. Whether through the extraordinary manna or the ordinary produce of the land, God is faithful. It is a curious fact that we are inclined to see God’s power displayed when He spares a young man’s life in an automobile accident, but less likely to see God’s power in keeping most of us from automobile accidents each and every day.   Continue at Jim Butler 

See also:

 Expect a Miracle?

 Phonity

If We Reject Paul’s Adam, Why Not Reject His Christ?

Daniel Kirk, associate professor of New Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary, recently wrote an article titled, “Does Paul’s Christ Require a Historical Adam?” (It Would be helpful if you followed the link and read the entire article). To date, the article has been shared over 1700 times through social media. Kirk is coming against the notion that a person must affirm a historical Adam before he can affirm 

1) the authority and trustworthiness of Scripture, 

2) a good world gone wrong, 

3) the sinfulness of all humanity, and 

4) a historical Christ. 

Kirk agrees that the Apostle Paul assumed there was a historical Adam (In Rom. 5 and 1 Cor. 15), but he argues that the Apostle was reimagining the Genesis creation account in light of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection.

Kirk argues, “the gospel does not, in fact, depend on a historical Adam or historical Fall in large part because what Paul says about Adam stems from his prior conviction about the saving work of Christ.” Kirk believes Paul’s account in Romans 5 leaves room, “for a person who was chosen by God from a developing or, at any rate, numerically numerous, human race to play the role of representative in obedience and disobedience.” Make no mistake, Kirk affirms Paul’s main point in Romans 5, “that God’s grace, righteousness, and life abound to the many because of Christ.” Yet, he rejects the assumptions with which Paul “illustrated these things to be true” [a historical Adam]. Paul’s emphasis is that God has one worldwide people in Christ. Thus, according to Kirk, Paul does not ask or answer the question of whether an evolutionary account of human origins might stand within the story of God’s new creation work in Christ.

I Disagree with Kirk’s Conclusions for Several Reasons:   Continue at SBC Voices

Addressing the Charismatic Question

The following is adapted from seminars given at The Shepherds’ Conference with help from Voice magazine. Used by permission.

Historically speaking, evangelical Christians (from Martin Luther to Jonathan Edwards to Charles Spurgeon) have held to a cessationist position. They believed the miraculous spiritual gifts of the New Testament era ceased shortly after the first century. Contemporary cessationists include names like John MacArthur, R. C. Sproul, Sam Waldron, and Richard Gaffin.

It is important to note, at the outset, that cessationists do not deny the possibility of miracles in the general sense of special acts of divine providence. Rather, cessationism limits its focus to the miraculous and revelatory gifts of the Holy Spirit, contending that those specific gifts did not continue after the apostolic era came to an end.

With the birth of Pentecostalism in 1901, followed by the Charismatic Renewal in the 1960s and especially the Third Wave in the 1980s, the evangelical camp found itself divided in its view regarding charismatic gifts. A number of widely-read evangelical pastors and theologians (like Wayne Grudem, Sam Storms, and C. J. Mahaney) have been outspoken about their continuationist views. As evangelical charismatics, they believe the miraculous gifts of the Spirit did not cease and are still in operation today. Other well-known leaders (such as John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and James MacDonald) have also expressed openness toward the idea that the miraculous gifts are still operational.

In assessing any theological position, it is vital to begin with the Word of God. If we are to rightly understand the gifts of the Spirit we must start by going to the Scriptures which He inspired.

Addressing every aspect of this complex and controversial issue would be impossible in a short article. However, at its essence, there are three essential questions that must be answered.

• Essential Question #1: The What Question. What were the gifts in the New Testament, and how does that biblical description compare to what is happening in contemporary charismatic circles?
• Essential Question #2: The When Question. If the miraculous gifts (biblically defined) are not occurring in the church today, then does the Bible provide indications to when those gifts ceased?
• Essential Question #3: The Why Question. Why were these gifts given, such that they are no longer necessary after the foundation age ended?   Continue at Nathan Busenitz

A Lesson From the Lakeland Revival - Todd Bentley

A couple of weeks ago I invested an hour and a half in watching Lakeland: The Movie, a documentary about Todd Bentley and the Lakeland “Revival.” You may remember that in April of 2008, a preacher and revivalist named Todd Bentley was invited to Ignited Church in Lakeland, Florida. The plan was to have Bentley there for five days of revival services. In the end he stayed for four months. What was meant to be a small, local event soon saw hundreds of thousands of people from 65 countries travel to Florida. Millions more participated through the Internet. Night after night Bentley would hold wild services full of singing, preaching, speaking in tongues, prayer for healing and miracles and, of course, the inevitable collection of money. 

The revival was marked by what were said to be great manifestations of the work of the Holy Spirit—speaking in tongues, ecstatic prophecies, miraculous healings and even the claim that somewhere around thirty people had been raised from the dead. Just about every major media outlet covered it at one time or another. Most of them went looking for evidence that miracles had actually happened; not surprisingly, not a single miracle was ever verified.

By August the revival was beginning to slow down a little bit and Bentley decided to leave Lakeland and to take the revival on the road. Teaching that the Holy Spirit could be passed from him to others by the laying on of hands, he would tour the country and take this outpouring of the Spirit with him. But no sooner did he leave Lakeland than the media exploded with reports that Bentley and his wife would be separating. Apparently he had been carrying on an inappropriate relationship with one of the women connected to his ministry. He and his wife soon divorced and shortly afterward he had married this other woman. The revivals and his ministry came to a screeching halt, at least for a time.   Continue at Tim Challies

A Case for Cessationism: A Response to Dave Miller

Dave Miller recently wrote an article titled “God told me that the Bible does NOT teach Cessationism.”  Cessationism is the belief that the miraculous spiritual gifts detailed in Scripture have ceased, and are no longer present in the church.  I disagree with Miller’s article for many reasons:

1) He’s overly simplistic and dismissive. It’s undeniable that for over 1600 years of church history, the miraculous spiritual gifts were inactive in the church.  They were only present among heretics.  In spite of this fact, Miller believes cessationism is “hermeneutical wishful thinking.”  There must be a lot of wishful thinkers in church history!  You cannot dismiss hundreds of years of church history as hermeneutical wishful thinking.

2) The reason I’m a cessationist is because I believe the purpose of the miraculous gifts has ceased.  It’s not because of wishful thinking. I was raised a charismatic!  The reason I’m a cessationist is because I asked what Scripture identified as the purpose of the miraculous spiritual gifts.  The answer is that the miraculous gifts were given for the building up of the church so that early Christians could trust the truth being presented as coming from God (See where Christ healed one person out of a multitude in John 5:2-9 to validate His identity: Acts 2:22-23 ; Paul speaks of the signs of an apostle as proof for his apostleship in 2 Cor. 12:12; miracles were random in Scripture; and spiritual gifts were given to individual Christians to encourage and build up other Christians/the church: 1 Cor. 12:7 and the context of the chapter; Rom. 12:1-8; 1 Pet. 4:10-11).  Thus, the question is if this purpose is still needed today.  Does the message of Christ and the apostles need to be revalidated with each generation?  No.  The gospel spread without repeated validation for over 1600 years.  Furthermore, it’s a wicked generation who seeks a sign beyond the signs that have already been provided (Matt. 12:39). The person who says, “I’ll only believe the gospel if God . . .” reveals his or her unrepentant heart.  If he or she will not hear Scripture, he or she will not hear the message accompanied by miracles either (Luke 16:31).   Continue at Jared Moore

Another Gospel

Introduction

 

SATAN IS NOT AN INITIATOR but an imitator. God has an only begotten Son – the Lord Jesus, and so has Satan - “the son of Perdition” (2 Thess. 2:3). There is a Holy Trinity, and there is likewise a Trinity of Evil (Rev. 20: 10). Do we read of the “children of God,”so also we read of “the children of the wicked one”(Matt. 13:38).

Does God work in the former both to will and to do of His good pleasure, then we are told that Satan is “the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2). Is there a “mystery of godliness” (1 Tim. 3:16), so also is there a “mystery of iniquity” (2 Thess. 2:7). Are we told that God by His angels “seals” His servants in their foreheads (Rev. 7:3), so also, we learn that Satan by his agents sets a mark in the foreheads of his devotees (Rev. 13:16). Are we told that “the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God” (1 Cor.2:10), then Satan also provides his “deep things.” (See Greek of Rev. 2:24.) Did Christ perform miracles, so also can Satan (2 Thess. 2:9). Is Christ seated upon a throne, so is Satan (Rev.2:13 - Gr.). Has Christ a Church, then Satan has his“synagogue”(Rev. 2:9). Is Christ the Light of the world, then so is Satan himself “transformed into an angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:14). Did Christ appoint “apostles,”then Satan has his apostles, too (2 Cor. 11:13). And this leads us to consider “The Gospel of Satan.”   Continue at A. W. Pink

The Virgin Birth and the Immaculate Conception

During Christmas season each year, we read the accounts of Jesus’ birth in the Gospels (Matt 1:18–25; Luke 1:26–38), and we are reminded once more of our Savior’s Virgin Birth. What exactly do we mean by the Virgin Birth of Christ? Maybe that’s obvious, but let’s start with a definition. By the Virgin Birth we understand that Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother Mary by a miraculous work of the Holy Spirit without a human father.

We must not confuse the Virgin Birth of Christ with the so-called Immaculate Conception. Many Christians incorrectly believe that the Immaculate Conception has reference to Christ. Instead, the Immaculate Conception is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was herself conceived in her own mother’s womb free from sin. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that Mary was not only free from inherited sin by the Immaculate Conception, but neither did she commit any personal sins in her lifetime. Thus, she was in fact as sinless as her son Jesus. It’s important to remember that this idea of the Immaculate Conception of Mary did not become an official doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church until 1854.

But this doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary is in reality nowhere taught in Scripture. Nevertheless, the Roman Catholic Church does point to a verse in Luke they claim teaches it—Luke 1:28: “And coming in, he [Gabriel] said to her, ‘Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you’” (NASB). You may be saying, “I don’t see where this verse teaches that Mary was conceived without sin or lived a sinless life.” And you would be right; it teaches no such thing.  Keep Reading >>>

The Simple Announcement

If you didn’t pay careful attention, you might pass right over one of the most important announcements in the New Testament: the miraculous birth of Jesus Christ. Matthew took only one verse to announce it. Such a concise statement, though it doesn’t all by itself prove the point, strongly suggests that our Lord and Savior’s virgin birth was not simply a man-made story.

A human author, writing strictly on his own initiative, would tend to describe such an amazing event in an expansive, detailed, and elaborate manner. But not the apostle Matthew. He does relate additional circumstances surrounding the virgin birth, but the basic fact is stated in one simple sentence: “After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit.”

Matthew devotes the previous seventeen verses to Jesus’ human genealogy but just this part of one verse to His divine genealogy. As the Son of God, Jesus “descended” from His heavenly Father by a miraculous and never-repeated act of the Holy Spirit; even so, the Holy Spirit chose to announce that astounding truth by just one brief, declarative sentence. As all God’s Word does, Matthew’s simple statement contains the solemn tone of authenticity. By contrast, a human fabrication would tend to have that false ring of exaggeration to it, being filled out with much more “convincing” material than what this inspired version needed.

Scripture gives us little information about Mary and even less about Joseph. Mary was undoubtedly a godly young woman, probably a native of Nazareth who came from a relatively poor family. Joseph was the son of Jacob (Matt. 1:16) and was a craftsman, probably a carpenter (13:55). Most significant, he was a “just man” (1:19), one who placed saving trust in the coming Messiah.  Keep Reading >>>

IMAGE

Tebow, Calvin, and the Hand of God in Sports

Two days ago on NBC's "Sunday Night Football" telecast, announcer Bob Costas spent two minutes weighing in on the most exciting---and polarizing---phenomenon in sports right now: the Tim Tebow Magical Fourth-Quarter Show, accompanied by the Denver Broncos players and staff.

Costas, one of the most eloquent and thoughtful voices in sports, suggested that Tebow's recent string of performances was "approaching, okay we'll say it, the miraculous." Many have made similar comments in recent weeks. Costas switched to a more controversial track, however, when he went on to suggest that the God Tebow worships has no interest in influencing the outcome of games. I quote at length from the full transcript:

Again today, Tebow did next to nothing until the waning moments, and then, down 10-0 with two minutes left, he throws a touchdown pass, and the Broncos tie it at the gun on a 59-yard field goal. And then win it in overtime on a 51-yarder. The combination of Denver's continuing late heroics, and today, the Bears' otherwise unexplainable errors, is enough to have some at least suspect divine intervention. Except that Tebow, whose sincere faith cannot be questioned, and should be respected, also has the good sense, and good grace, to make it clear he does not believe God takes a hand in the outcome of games.   Keep Reading >>>

The Mystery and Miracle of Christmas

It is only 17 days until Christmas.

Thanksgiving, Black Friday, and Cyber Monday are all behind us—which means that, at least as far as retailers are concerned, the Christmas season is now in full swing. Visit your local coffee shop, take a trip to the mall, or just drive through your neighborhood at night, and it’s easy to see that the so-called “Christmas spirit” is alive and well in American culture.

Some of the ironies of our culture’s fascination with Christmas are especially evident where I live in Southern California.

• It hasn’t snowed here in years, but snowflake decorations are everywhere.

• Reindeer don’t live anywhere near us, yet my neighbors have several in their front yard (of the plastic variety).

• For that matter, we don’t exactly live in an evergreen forest. (The desert tends to be more “ever-brown.”) But, thankfully, local warehouse stores ship in Christmas trees by the truckload.

• All of this, so that for one month out of the year Southern Californians can pretend that we are walking in a winter wonderland.

Now, don’t get me wrong, there is something very fun about all of the excitement and buzz that whirls around Christmas. A leisurely stroll past festive storefronts while holding a warm cup of coffee, or a nighttime car ride to go look at Christmas lights, these are some of my favorite things about Christmastime. Add in the joys of time spent with family and friends and Christmas becomes one of my favorite seasons of the year.

But there is also a danger in all of this: distraction. It is the danger of being so caught up in the celebration that we forget why we are celebrating . . . or more importantly, whom we are celebrating.  Keep Reading >>>

Christ’s Undeniable Miracles

In the course of His earthly ministry, Jesus

• healed diseases
• cast out demons
• calmed storms
• raised the dead
• fed thousands at one time
• walked on water
• turned water into wine
• and even controlled the whereabouts of fish (e.g. Matt. 17:23–27; Luke 5: 1–11).

Because His miracles were so well-known, Jesus Himself pointed to them as verification that He came from God. As He told His critics, “For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me” (John 5:36; cf. Matthew 11:5; John 10:38).

Significantly, Jesus’ opponents never denied His miracles. Though they questioned the divine origin of His power (Matthew 12:24), they were never able to deny that the works He and His apostles performed were supernatural (John 11:47–48; Acts 4:16). Even today, “the fact that miracle working belongs to the historical Jesus is no longer disputed.” [1]    Keep Reading...

What Cessationism Is Not

Much ado has been made (both on this blog and elsewhere) about the recent “anti-cessationist” comments of a popular Seattle-based pastor. I don’t desire to enter a war of words, or become embroiled in an online controversy. But I do hope to make a helpful contribution to the conversation.

Over the last few years, I’ve enjoyed investigating the historical record regarding the charismatic gifts, especially the gift of tongues. And I can only hope that the above pastor, and his co-author, will treat the material responsibly in their upcoming work on the subject. (Who knows, maybe they’d be open to a two-views book?)


I would also hope that, in the process of critiquing the cessationist position, the authors do not create a straw man version of cessationism. (I’ll admit that, based on what I’ve read so far, I’m afraid the straw man is already under construction.)

Nonetheless, in an effort to dismantle a fallacious misrepresentation before it is built, I offer the following four clarifications about what cessationism is not:  Read them HERE

Lloyd-Jones Saw It Coming

Here's an audio clip well worth listening to—especially in light of our recent posts about BioLogos and the growing pressure to abandon the biblical account of creation in favor of an evolutionary narrative:

"The Narrow Way" (1st 10 minutes)

The sermon is from a series delivered by the Doctor in Pensacola in 1969. The whole series is downloadable for free, courtesy of The Martyn-Lloyd-Jones Recordings Trust (a ministry worthy of your prayers and financial support).

In the above excerpt, Lloyd-Jones is decrying the church's inordinate fear of being called "narrow." This anxiety is exacerbated in our generation, he says, because modernity has tainted our worldview. We are too easily intimidated by the feigned authority of so-called men of knowledge. The result, Lloyd-Jones says, is an unwarranted capitulation to the authority of science (falsely so called). Here's a partial transcript to whet your appetite:

The Christian church in her utter folly during this present century has been recognizing a new authority. And the new authority of course is the man of knowledge, the man of culture, and particularly the man of scientific knowledge. And the church has been at great pains to do everything she can to please this new authority.

This man of learning must never be offended. And in order to please him and duplicate him, the church has been ready to take things out of the Bible. She rejects and throws out the whole of the first three chapters of Genesis, much of the other history, throws out all the miracles . . . She'll throw out anything in order to make her message pleasing and acceptable to this new authority—the man of knowledge, the man of learning, the man of science.

—D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones

HT: Pyromaniac

Beautiful Pro-Life Video: “I’m Holding a Miracle” by Jason French

HT: Fundamentally Reformed

A Course in Miracles – The Doctrine of Demons