Are Miraclulous Gifts For Today?

Are
Miraculous Gifts For Today?

By Ron Smith

Wayne Grudem edited a book titled, “Are Miraculous Gifts For Today?” He shows that among Christian scholars there are five views on the subject. They are (1) the cessationist view, (2) the open but cautious view, (3) the Third Wave view, (4) the Pentecostal view, and (5) the charismatic view.
Grudem gathered scholars from each of the positions and they all wrote and defended each of their stands on the issue. The Pentecostals believe the baptism of the Holy Spirit is subsequent to salvation and is accompanied by speaking in tongues. The Charismatics do not all agree on “whether baptism in the Holy Spirit is subsequent to conversion and whether speaking in tongues is a sign of the baptism in the Spirit. The Third Wave people, like Peter Wagner at Fuller Seminary, “teach, however, that baptism in the Holy Spirit happens to all Christians at conversion and that subsequent experiences are better called ‘fillings.’”
The open but cautious people “are open to the possibility of miraculous gifts today, but they are concerned about the possibility of abuses that they have seen in groups that practice these gifts…. They think churches should emphasize evangelism, Bible study, and faithful obedience as keys to personal and church growth, rather than miraculous gifts. Yet they appreciate some of the benefits that Pentecostal, charismatic, and Third Wave churches have brought to the evangelical world, especially a refreshing contemporary tone in worship and a challenge to a renewal in faith and prayer.”
Signs and wonders have always been one of God’s tools, “God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit” (Heb 2:4 NKJV). To say that signs and wonders passed away when the Canon was completed is to insert into the text something not found there.
Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away (1 Cor 13:8-10 NKJV).

Did knowledge pass away when the Bible was completed? Do we know even as we are known now? Obviously, that which is perfect is the resurrection. Then, and then only will knowledge, tongues, and prophecies pass away because perfection shall have arrived. To say otherwise is to deny the miracles of Columba and many other saints of history. How about the prophesies of John Knox? (This, however, is no endorsement of the “Elmer Gantry” approach of many “Charismatics” today.)
Some Cessationists say, “If prophecy has not ceased, why not add your prophesies to the Bible?” The answer to this question is because:
1. Many prophecies were made in Bible days that never made it in the Bible or were never written down. Saul met a band of prophets who were prophesying and the Spirit of God came on him and he also did it. Phillip had four daughters that prophesied, but not one of their prophecies is found in Scripture. These are just a couple examples out of thousands of possible instances.
2. The way one can tell a false prophet is if his words contradict the other prophets (Scripture).
3. Many times God reveals things to come that are current. Savonarola prophesied the fall of the Medici power in Florence, the invasion of France, and other events that he promised would happen soon; and they all did. John Knox made many prophecies. John Welch (Knox’s son-in-law) said, “Observe what God is going to do to this young man” (a Catholic guard who was mocking his words with facial expressions). The young man immediately dropped dead. Columba's life by Adamnán records about 100 miracles and visions.
Don Richardson, in his book, Eternity In Their Hearts, tells about the ancient prophecy in the tradition of the Karen tribe of Burma. The oracle went something like this: they had left God and lost His book; but one day a white man would bring God’s book back to them and God would receive them again. One day one of their “prophets” told two men to saddle a pony and follow it wherever it led them; he said it would take them to the white man with God’s book. They followed the pony for 200 miles through jungle and mountains until it walked through the gates of a mission compound. It walked up to the well where they found a white missionary digging below. They asked, “Do you have the book?” 75,000 tribesmen were soon baptized by Baptists. Ten different tribes in the same area had the same tradition.
Bruce Olson tells a similar story about the Motilone Indians. They had an ancient tradition of a prophecy that said a white man would come and God would come out of a banana leaf. Olsen asked, “A banana leaf?” Then one of the Indians cut a banana leaf and it unfolded like the pages of a book. He then pulled his Bible out of his back pocket and began to preach the gospel. The entire tribe was converted. God has not left Himself without a witness.
If the gift of prophecy did not pass away with the completion of the Canon, should not those prophecies be included in the Bible? Of course not. Should the ancient prophecies of the Karen tribe be included in the Bible? Should the prophecies of Columba, St. Francis, St. Benedict, Antony of the Desert, and countless others be included in the Bible? When God infuses light saving conversion, should his revelation be included in the Bible. The answer is obvious.
Those who say the day of miracles is gone or that God does not work through the gifts of the Spirit must deny the miracles of Columba, St. Benedict, Francis of Assisi, the record of the Venerable Bede, and others. On what basis is this denial made? Is it on the basis of one passage in 1 Corinthians 13 that is of debatable interpretation? Is it on the basis of contradictory witnesses? Who were they? On that basis we could deny that Christ arose. Or is it really on the basis of enlightenment thinking? Let us be honest. This is the real reason: humanist presuppositions. The enlightenment has influenced moderns more than we know. It permeates the air. But “Love believes all things” (1 Cor 13).
Why is it that the Scottish Presbyterians before 1700 believed in miracles and after 1800 some say the gifts ceased? Could it be that the humanist Enlightenment had an effect? Are moderns really smarter and more enlightened than the ancients?
On the other hand, there are carloads of charismatic charlatans and plenty of suckers to follow them. Would someone like Columba, Francis of Asisi, or Jesus go on television and merchandise the gifts of God? Unthinkable! Jesus said they should “tell no one.” Let them do like the prophets of the Middle Ages such as Antony of the Desert and Francis of Assisi and take vows of poverty. The modern charlatons, too, are influenced by the Enlightenment.

Jesus commanded them not to tell anyone. But the more he did so, the more they kept talking about it (Mark 7:36 NIV).

A good example of a modern day prophet with medieval values was Padre Pio of Italy (1887-1968). When he was a young man he fell into a trance and saw a mysterious man hanging on a cross. It frightened him. When he awoke, his hands, feet, and side were bleeding profusely and he suffered with this for fifty years. He cried out to God to take away the embarrassment, but not the pain.
The Catholic Church tested him to make sure this was not of the devil. He was not allowed to minister for ten years. Then they hid him away in a remote Italian village where he stayed the rest of his life. (This is how real integrity responds as opposed to the merchandising arrogance of today's T.V. celebrities. How ironic that so called Protestants should be put to shame by the Roman Church that was so famous for its corruptions in the days of Luther!)
There were many miracles done through Padre Pio’s prayers including multiple healings, exorcisms, and other manifestations of the gifts of the Spirit. A little girl with no pupils in her eyes was instantly made to see. Though he only knew Italian and Latin, he carried on a conversation with an American in fluent English. Once one confessed his sins and Padre Pio asked, “Is that all?' The man said, “Yes, father.” Padre Pio said there was more; “Remember that time under the tree in London in 1942 with that girl?” It scared the man so badly he got converted right then.
Are we to simply dismiss this because the man was a Catholic and believed false doctrines? What man is there that has 100% of his thinking correct? Prophets were never infallible. They had the treasure in earthen vessels (clay bodies). Only the word of God spoken through them is infallible.
Padre Pio was a contemporary of some of those who wanted to “demythologize” the miracles of the Bible; men like Rudolf Bultmann, Paul Tilllich, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Albert Schweitzer, and Karl Barth.
How different was Padre Pio – in style and in results. Without publishing a book or delivering a single lecture in a university, he convinced thousands, even in the age of “historical criticism” of the Bible and the “Death of God” theologians, that miracles are not mythology but reality. Through his life and ministry, thousands came to accept the Bible and all the historical doctrines of Christianity as true.

Through the ministry of Padre Pio (and the Bible) we learn that, contrary to Pentecostal teaching, it is not always God's will to heal. Directions must come from God in each case. Sometimes Padre Pio would heal people miraculously and other times he would tell them only their souls could be healed. In some cases he told them they could be healed through an operation.
The fact remains that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. The supernatural methods God used in the past will be used in the future. Padre Pio was born poor and died poor. He suffered with much pain his whole life. These are the ideals of Scripture as opposed to the “hot shot” demonstrations of today's charlatans.
Don Codling presented a thesis for Master of Theology to Westminster Theological seminary arguing against the cessation of the spiritual gifts. He says, “Prior to Hume [i.e. prior to the Enlightenment] it was generally held that miracles and other revelatory gifts were evidence showing that a messenger was from God.” This demonstrates that the real reason for denying the gifts is that Hume’s humanism has unconsciously infected modern Christians and their seminaries.




Churchofthekingmcallen.com