chapter 11.1 the biblical attributes of miracle...

11.1: Biblical Attributes of Miracle Working 1

Chapter 11.1

The Biblical Attributes of Miracle Working

Table of Topics

A) Introduction: Faith, Healing, & Miracle Working

B) Miracle Working Gifts Always Worked with a

Command, Not a Prayer: Miracles vs. Miracle Working

C) Miracle Working Gifts Always Required Miracle Faith

from God

D) Miracle Working Gifts Always Worked Powerfully, Not

Partially

E) Miracle Working Gifts Always Worked Convincingly,

Not Suspiciously

F) A Biblical “Healing Ministry” Always Worked to

Authenticate a Divine “Revealing Ministry”

Extras & Endnotes


Primary Points

“Gifts of healing,” and “miraculous powers” were abilities

granted to Prophets and Apostles enabling them to perform

miracles on command.

The difference between praying for a cure and commanding a

cure is the difference between the direct miracles all

Christians can request God to do today, and the human

miracle working only those with the real gift of healing could

do.

Those with gifts of healing in Scripture healed perfectly,

completely, instantly, and powerfully on command 100% of

the time. None of those claiming such gifts today can, which

is why it is fraud to do so.

Biblical miracle workers convinced their enemies of their

divine power. Modern “miracle” workers cannot even

convince most Christians.

The conspicuous absence of miracles over Nature is best

explained by the fact that “healings” of humans is much

easier to fake, or procure through natural means such as the

power of suggestion.

If modern “miracle workers” want any biblical support for

their claims today, they must admit to one of the following:

1) they are a source of new extra-biblical divine revelation

that has the authority of Scripture, or 2) they really do not

perform miracles at all, or 3) their miracles are demonically

empowered.


A) Introduction: Faith, Healing, & Miracle Working

The Apostle Paul mentions the miracle working gifts in 1

Corinthians 12 when he writes:

To one there is given through the Spirit . . . [miracle]

faith . . . to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to

another miraculous powers. (1 Cor 12:7, 9-10)

There are three supernatural gifts or abilities listed here that are

especially related to one another: miracle “faith,” “healing,” and

“miraculous powers.” We will briefly state our understanding of

these gifts here, and defend our perspective in the remainder of the

chapter.

“Gifts of healing,” and “miraculous powers” were

supernatural abilities granted to Prophets and Apostles enabling

them to perform miracles on command. The Apostle’s distinction

between “healing” and “miraculous powers” is best understood

as the latter referring specifically to miracles over Nature as well,

such as Christ’s multiplication of bread and fish (cf. Matt 8:24-26;

15:36-37), or Elisha’s ability to make an iron axe head float on

water (cf. 2 Kings 6:5-7). “Healing,” of course, always involved

people. 1

As noted, the Apostle Paul also mentions “faith” among these

miraculous gifts. We will demonstrate below that this is miracle

faith which is given by God to miracle workers or recipients of

miracles so that there is complete confidence a miracle will occur.

Accordingly, Jesus said if a person has just a “mustard seed”

amount of miracle faith, they can literally command a “mountain,

'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be

impossible for you” (Matt 17:20). Therefore the miracle faith is

as miraculous as the miracle working itself. It was the miracle faith

that accompanied the gifts of healing and miracle working that

enabled the miracle worker to command a miracle that

immediately, and without fail occurred. This is in contrast to the

right of all Christians to pray for healing or a miracle which may or

may not occur.

Obviously there is a great deal of controversy on the miracle

working gifts today due to the teachings and claims of super-

supernaturalism. 2 Throughout this section of Knowing Our God

(KOG) we have made the claim that God is no longer granting the

miracle working gifts to His Church because their purpose of

authenticating messengers of new extra-biblical divine revelation

has ceased. Here we wish to support that claim by taking a closer

look at the biblical attributes of these gifts and comparing them


with how they operate in modern super-supernaturalism. Our

conclusion is that no one today has the right to claim these gifts

because they cannot demonstrate their biblical attributes. 3

In order to illustrate the biblical attributes of miracle working

gifts, we will use the Apostle Peter’s healing of the paralytic in Acts

chapter three as it would seem to involve all of these

characteristics. Luke writes:

Now a man crippled from birth was being carried to

the temple gate called Beautiful, where he was put

every day to beg from those going into the temple

courts. When he saw Peter and John about to enter, he

asked them for money.

Peter looked straight at him, as did John. Then Peter

said, "Look at us!" So the man gave them his attention,

expecting to get something from them. Then Peter said,

"Silver or gold I do not have, but what I have I give

you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk."

Taking him by the right hand, he helped him up, and

instantly the man's feet and ankles became strong. He

jumped to his feet and began to walk. Then he went

with them into the temple courts, walking and jumping,

and praising God. (Acts 3:2-8)

B) Miracle Working Gifts Always Worked with a

Command, Not Merely a Prayer: Miracles vs. Miracle Working

The paralytic in Acts 3 was healed by the Apostle Peter, not a

prayer, and on his command to “walk.” This healing did not simply

involve a request to God to heal, but God worked through the gift of

healing he had given to the Apostle. This difference between

praying for a cure and commanding a cure is the difference between

what all Christians can do today and what only those with the real

gift of healing can do. The method of healing performed by Christ

and the Apostles was by command or touch, never merely prayer. 4

Some might also object to our claim that those with miracle

working gifts never healed merely by prayer by citing the example

of the Apostle Paul on the island of Malta. There Luke records that

a man “was sick in bed, suffering from fever and dysentery,”

and “Paul went in to see him and, after prayer, placed his

hands on him and healed him” (Acts 28:7-8). Obviously here

the healing involved prayer, but not merely prayer, as the Apostle

then healed with a touch. Our point here is that there is an

important difference between the ability to heal by command or


touch which the gift of healing invariably provided, and the kind of

healing occurring today by prayer, but rather rarely. 5

This fact reflects the important distinction between direct

miracles performed by God and delegated miracle working

performed by human miracle workers. Accordingly, the Apostle

Paul refers to the latter as workers of miracles” (1 Cor 12:28

NASB). 6 More specifically, we have written:

In general, we can say that direct miracles can occur in

response to the simple prayer of anyone, but such requests

are often not granted. On the other hand, delegated miracles

occur by the command or touch of a person and never fail, as

we have no record in Scripture of a God-appointed miracle

worker commanding or attempting to perform a miracle that

did not occur. Accordingly, direct miracles authenticate and

glorify God alone. Delegated miracle working intentionally

authenticates and unavoidably glorifies the human as well.

The distinction between direct miracles and delegated

miracle working is not merely a theological one, but important

in the modern debate regarding miracles. Super-

supernaturalism, which is the belief that divine miracles of all

kinds are quite common today and that God-ordained miracle

workers abound, often fails to make the biblical distinction

between direct miracles of God and delegated human miracle

working, with some unfortunate consequences.

For example, because many Christians deny that delegated

human miracle working is operating today according to its

biblical attributes and purposes, super-supernaturalism

routinely insinuates that they are also denying God is doing

miracles today. On the contrary, of course God is still doing

miracles! But this is far different from saying that God is still

empowering human miracle workers as super-supernaturalism

claims, but which we demonstrate elsewhere is a false claim.

We believe in miracles, not miracle workers, and by not

distinguishing between them, super-supernaturalism has

falsely accused others of believing in miracles less than they

do.

In addition, super-supernaturalism bolsters its claims to

miracle working gifts by suggesting that miracles or healings

occurring in response to prayer are examples of these gifts

operating. On the contrary, as we demonstrate elsewhere, no

biblical character with miracle working gifts ever healed people

with merely a prayer. Biblical Prophets and Apostles, and

Christ healed without fail through their command and/or touch

of a person.

This is the important difference between the direct divine


miracles God may, but not always do in response to the

prayers of any Christian, and the delegated human miracle

working through miraculous sign gifts that, in Scripture, were

only given to those who were also sources of new divine

revelation from God. 7

We distinguish human miracle working through God-given gifts

from the direct kind in that the former occurred in the context of a

man commanding a miracle that occurred immediately. This is

significantly different from miracles we may pray for and ask God to

do directly. “Be healed!” is the common language of a biblical

miracle worker, and may or may not include any request to God for

the miracle.

Such is illustrated when we read of Philip: “The crowds with

one accord were giving attention to what was said by Philip,

as they heard and saw the signs which he was performing”

(Acts 8:6). Likewise, we note that those truly with such gifts could

even pronounce miraculous judgment and have it immediately

executed (cf. Acts 5:3-11; 13:10, 1 Cor.5:3-5; 1 Tim.1:20). Our

distinction between miracles and miracle working gifts was also

recognized by ancient Jewish rabbis of which David Garland notes,

“the difference between rabbinic miracles and Jesus’ miracles: Jesus

heals by a word, at a distance; Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa only prays

for healing and waits for God to grant fluency to his requests.” 8

Along these lines, the respected Evangelical theologian E. J.

Carnell (1919–1967) writes:

Lest an unnecessary confusion result, it is vastly important

that one comprehend the true meaning of the gift of miracle

working. When one is endowed with the power to work

miracles (such as in raising the dead), he performs these

wonders according to his own personal discretion and by a

power which, through God, is resident within him. His working

of miracles is systematic, nonchalant, and sure. When Paul

healed Eutychus (Acts 20:9ff.), he prefaced it with no

extravagant emotional ritual; by powers residing within him he

leaned over and brought life back. 9

A good illustration of the difference between a direct miracle of

God and a delegated miracle working through the miracle working

gifts is the difference between how Hezekiah and Tabitha were

healed. The former “became ill and was at the point of death”

but prayed to God Who responded, “I have heard your prayer

and seen your tears; I will add fifteen years to your life” (Isa

38:1, 5). There was no human intermediary performing the


miracle, but rather, God performed it directly, and on this occasion,

in response to a prayer.

On the other hand, Tabitha’s life was restored at the discretion

of the Apostle Peter who simply commanded, “Tabitha, get up”

(Acts 9:40), and she did. 10 In fact, we have no record in Scripture

of a person with God-given miracle working gifts, commanding or

attempting to perform a miracle that did not occur. This is how the

real gifts of miracle working work.

The commanding nature, as opposed to the praying nature, of

the miracle working gifts is clearly illustrated in the ministry of

Christ. He did not pray for miracles, but commanded them or

performed them by touch. For example in Matthew chapters 8-9 we

read that because Jesus was “willing,” He “reached out His hand

and touched” a “man” with “leprosy” and “said, ‘Be clean!’” and

“immediately he was cured” (Matt 8:3).

“When Jesus came into Peter’s house, He saw Peter’s

mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever. He touched her

hand and the fever left her” (Matt 8:14-15). Then, “When

evening came” He “healed all the sick” “with [only] a word”

(Matt 8:16). When a severe storm occurred, Jesus “got up and

rebuked the winds and the waves, and it was completely

calm” (Matt 8:26). When He met a “paralytic” He simply

commanded “’Get up, take your mat and go home.’ And the

man got up and went home” (Matt 9:6).

Without any fanfare, He simply “took [a dead] girl by the

hand, and she got up” (Matt 9:25). A “woman who had been

subject to bleeding for twelve years came up behind Him and

touched the edge of His cloak. . . . And the woman was

healed from that moment” (Matt 9:20-22). The “sight” of two

blind men “was restored” when “He touched their eyes” (Matt

9:29). This is not how Jesus healed in just these two chapters, but

this is the way He always healed—by command or touch, not

prayer.

And this is the way the Apostles healed. Accordingly, Jesus tells

them, “Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have

leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely

give” (Matt 10:8). Therefore, we are not surprised to see that

every recorded healing of the Apostles in the NT was by command

or touch, not prayer. Why? Because as Christ said, they had

“received” the spiritual gifts of healing and miracle working which

gave men the ability to command miracles, not just ask for them.

Accordingly, we read that when the Apostle Peter “found a man

named Aeneas, a paralytic who had been bedridden for eight

years . . . Peter said to him, ‘Jesus Christ heals you. Get up


and take care of your mat.’ [and] immediately Aeneas got up”

(Acts 9:33-4).

The reason that those with gifts of healing or miracle working

could command miracles, instead of merely pray for them, is that

miracle faith, which provided a supernatural knowledge of God’s will

to heal, was present. This will be discussed further below.

Nonetheless, miracle faith accompanied the miracle working gifts so

that the miracle worker could command the miracles.

Therefore, when the Apostle Paul encountered, “a man

crippled in his feet, who was lame from birth and had never

walked . . . Paul looked directly at him . . . and called out,

‘Stand up on your feet!’ [and] at that, the man jumped up and

began to walk” (Acts 14:8-10). And when a “young man” died

from falling asleep during one of the Apostle’s sermons, Luke

records Paul merely laid on him and brought him back to life (Acts

20:9-10). 11 Finally, because he had the gift of miracle working,

the Apostle “looked straight at Elymas and said, ‘You are . . .

an enemy of everything that is right! . . . Now . . . you are

going to be blind” and he immediately was (Acts 13:9-11).

Clearly, then, a biblical attribute of the miracle working gifts was

that they enabled a person to command a miracle, not merely pray

for one. 12

It is therefore unbiblical and misleading for super-

supernaturalism to commonly claim that effectively praying for the

healing of someone once in a while is the spiritual gift of healing.

Of course God has answered some of our prayers to miraculously

heal someone, but this is not the gift of healing which gave those

who possessed it the ability to command a healing. Let someone

today command healing after healing and never have that

command denied, and then they can claim the biblical gift of

healing.

A primary difficulty with interpreting super-supernaturalistic

literature is its failure to make the important distinction between

the direct miracles that God may do simply in answer to prayer, and

those that He would do through the spiritual gifts of healing or

miracle working through the command or touch of a person. The

popular super-supernaturalistic author Jack Deere is especially

guilty of such a distortion throughout his book, Surprised by the

Power of the Spirit.

For example, in the introduction to the book he is relating a

phone conversation that he had before his conversion to super-

supernaturalism. At the time he was speaking with a leader of the

movement and trying to argue that the gift of healing does not

operate today. Mr. Deere tells the man, “Surely you know that

God’s not healing any more and that all the miraculous gifts of the


Spirit passed away.” 13 Even then, it would appear that Mr. Deere

completely misunderstood, or chose to ignore, the difference

between the fact that God still heals people today in response to

prayer (and even without it), but the “miraculous gifts” enabling

people to heal on command are not operating.

Likewise, consider the title of Chapter 8 of Mr. Deere’s book:

“Were Miracles Meant to be Temporary?” How many Christians

would argue that miracles were meant to be temporary?! What we

are claiming is that human miracle-workers were meant to be

temporary. Even in the last paragraph of the book Mr. Deere says,

“Healing gifts are given to the whole church, and the elders of the

church are to have a regular healing ministry (James 5:14-16).” 14

Again, such a statement confuses the difference between what Mr.

Deere claims is the restoration of the NT gift of healing on

command, and the ability for any Christian to pray for someone’s

healing. We will address the proper interpretation of James 5:14-

16 in the next chapter. 15

Likewise, Dr. Wayne Grudem, Research Professor of Bible and

Theology at Phoenix Seminary, does not distinguish between these

methods of healing in his discussion of the NT gift of healing. 16 The

majority of his thoughts throughout his seven page section on the

gift of healing in his Systematic Theology have nothing to do with

the miraculous gifts of healing and miracle working, but rather,

praying for healing. This error, whether intentional or

unintentional, only serves to unfortunately obscure the issue, and

would seem to further expose the shortage of real biblical evidence

that the NT gift of healing is operating today.

Dr. Grudem’s attempt to actually redefine the NT gift of healing

is evident in the following remarks:

Those with “gifts of healing” will be those people who find that

their prayers [not commands or touch?] for healing are

answered more frequently and more thoroughly than others.

When that becomes evident, a church would be wise to

encourage them in this ministry and give them more

opportunity to pray for others who are ill. We should realize

that gifts of healing could include ministry not only in terms of

physical healing, but also in terms of emotional healing. . . .

Perhaps the gifts of being able to pray effectively in different

kinds of situations and for different kinds of needs are what

Paul referred to when he used the plural expression, “gifts of

healings.” 17

We would ask again, were “prayers for healing” characteristic of

the gift of healing that operated in Scripture? No, healings occurred

with a command or touch. Always. Dr. Grudem’s attempt here to


define a person with the NT gift of healing as someone who’s

“prayers for healing are answered more frequently and more

thoroughly than others” is completely without biblical support.

Also, there was no need to hope that the authentic NT gift of

healing would work “more frequently and more thoroughly” than it

did at other times. It worked perfectly and completely every time,

as demonstrated below.

Dr. Grudem’s appeal to “emotional healing” would seem to be

an effort to lend support to the majority of healing claims that

involve very subjective, psychosomatic symptoms, things that are

difficult to verify. Did Jesus or the Apostles ever use their gift of

healing to only heal someone emotionally? The reason they didn’t

is that such a healing is too subjective to be a convincing,

authenticating miracle.

It would seem that there is a consistent attempt to present

instances of people being healed directly by God through the

prayers of Christians, and then to use these instances as proof that

the gift of healing has been restored to the Church. It is obvious

that such healings have nothing to do with these gifts. No right-

minded Christian would deny that God heals today in answer to

prayer, or that we should be praying for people’s physical illnesses.

And it is this proper conviction that super-supernaturalism attempts

to appeal to. However, it is both reasonable and biblical to insist

that the spiritual gifts of healing and miracle working no longer

operate.

The apparently deliberate confusion in super-supernaturalism

between miracles and miracle working has some unfortunate

results. Surely there are healings that God has performed through

the faithful and secret prayers of humble Christians that some

egotistical “faith healer” has publicly taken the credit for. In fact, if

this distinction between miracles that are prayed for, and the gift of

miracle working on command, were applied to the claims of

healings today in super-supernaturalism, those thought to be a

result of the operation of the gift of healing would be virtually

eliminated. No one today is healing on command, because no one

has the biblical gift of healing and miracle working.

This is even true of those places where the Gospel is being

newly introduced and we would expect more miracles, as noted

elsewhere. 18 Brother Yun’s ministry in underground China, for

example, is certainly miraculous, but does not reflect the biblical

attribute of the gifts of healing or miracle working which operated

on command.

Accordingly, in one imprisonment, a fellow prisoner who was

spying on the Christians became very ill. Yun and another Christian

leader prayed for the man and Yun says, “the Lord totally healed


that man.” 19 In another time of imprisonment, Yun met an old

man who had suffered a stroke and half his body was paralyzed.

Yun shared the Gospel with him and he and his wife asked Christ

into their hearts. Yun writes:

The next morning before dawn, the old man suddenly felt

someone strike him on his neck and back. For the first time in

months he could easily move his head. He exclaimed, "It feels

as if a rope around me has snapped!" . . . . The old man's

health recovered and soon he was able to walk up and down

the stairs. This was remarkable for a man who'd been

paralyzed by a stroke! He witnessed to all his old friends and

sought forgiveness from people he'd wronged in the past. 20

Remarkable? Yes! The biblical gift of healing? No. Such a

miracle is probably explained by the potentially powerful physical

effects of conversion discussed elsewhere. 21 And those attempting

to use such examples to claim the gift of healing has been restored

to the Church should repent and cease to distort the Word of God

and mislead God’s people in that manner.

The biblical balance then is this: Let us embrace miracles as

blessings of God, but evaluate miracle workers with the word of

God. We have stated from the beginning that our critique of

modern miracle workers is not a disparagement of miracles that

God is clearly still doing. Accordingly, the Princeton theologian B.

B. Warfield (1851-1921) summed up his masterful study of physical

miracle working, Counterfeit Miracles, by saying that, “We believe in

a wonderworking God, but not in a wonder-working church.” 22

Likewise, John MacArthur, in his book, Charismatic Chaos,

rightly recognizes the difference between miracles and miracle

working and sums up our own view of them when he writes:

Does God heal? I believe He does. I do not automatically

discount all claims of supernatural healings just because some

are false. But I am convinced that dramatic, miraculous,

immediate intervention by God is quite rare—never dependent

on some supposedly gifted person who acts as an agent of

healing.

Genuine healings may come as a result of prayer and most

often involve simple natural processes. Other times, God

speeds up the recovery mechanisms and restores a sick

person to health in a way that medicine cannot explain.

Sometimes he overrules a medical prognosis and allows

someone to recover from a normally debilitating disease.

Healings like that come in response to prayer and the

sovereign will of God and can happen at any time. But the gift

of healing, the ability to heal others, special annointings for


healing ministry, healings that can be “claimed,” and other

typical faith-healing techniques have no biblical sanction in the

post-apostolic era. 23

C) Miracle Working Gifts Always Required Miracle

Faith from God

Because the miracle working gifts operated on the confident

command or touch of those possessing them, miracle faith was

always present as well to provide such confidence. Below we

explain the biblical topic of miracle faith further, but as we noted

above, “[M]iracle faith . . . is given by God to miracle workers or

recipients of miracles so that there is complete confidence a miracle

will occur.” When miracle working occurs through the miracle

working gifts there are no doubts that the miracle will occur

because a supernatural miracle faith always accompanies either the

commanding or the claiming of the miracle.

This is why we have no record in Scripture of a God-appointed

miracle worker commanding or attempting to perform a miracle

that did not occur. It was because God revealed His will to heal in a

particular instance through the miracle faith He granted, that the

miracle working gifts worked perfectly every time.

Not only was miracle faith granted to enable the unfailing

commanding or claiming of a miracle, but it was as God-given and

supernatural as the miraculous deed itself. It is not a type of faith

that can be produced by humans through positive thinking or any

other human exercise, but rather, must be graciously and

supernaturally given by God.

The “gift” nature of miracle faith is certainly demonstrated in the

Apostle Peter’s healing of the paralytic, as he is careful to explain:

By faith in the name of Jesus, this man whom you see

and know was made strong. It is Jesus' name and the

faith that comes through Him that has given this

complete healing to him, as you can all see” (v. 16).

Yes, it was “By faith in the name of Jesus” that the man was

healed, but it was a miracle faith that was granted to the Apostle by

God to command his healing. As we point out elsewhere, some

kinds of biblical faith are dependent on us, and others are

completely a gift of God. 24 Miracle faith is the kind of faith that

humans are not at all capable of because it requires belief in a

miracle without any doubt at all (cf. Matt 21:21). Therefore, the

kind of faith that must accompany miracle working has to come

from God just as much as the miracle itself.


Understanding the nature of miracle faith is very helpful in

properly understanding the relationship between faith and miracles

and correcting several errors particularly in super-supernaturalism,

which we discuss in the next chapter. 25

D) Miracle Working Gifts Always Worked

Powerfully, Not Partially

Another obvious attribute of the biblical gifts of miracle working

was that they worked powerfully. This is demonstrated in several

ways. First, the miracles worked by those possessing these gifts

were 100% effective 100% of the time. As we’ve already noted, we

have no record in Scripture of a God-appointed miracle worker

commanding or attempting to perform a miracle that did not occur.

Such was the case of the Apostle Peter’s healing of the paralytic in

Acts 3. Neither the nature of the man’s illness, nor the lack of his

faith hindered his healing in any way.

In every instance where the gift of healing is recorded as

operating, every single person ministered to was healed. If you

were there and wanted and needed healing, you were healed,

completely, immediately, and convincingly. This was certainly true

of Christ as Matthew records, “great multitudes followed Him,

and He healed them all” (12:15). Luke likewise records that at

another time:

He went down with them and stood on a level place. A

large crowd of His disciples was there and a great

number of people from all over Judea, from Jerusalem,

and from the coast of Tyre and Sidon, who had come to

hear Him and to be healed of their diseases. Those

troubled by evil spirits were cured, and the people all

tried to touch Him, because power was coming from him

and healing them all. (Luke 6:17-19; cf. Acts 10:38)

The Apostles experienced nothing less. We read in Acts 5:

People brought the sick into the streets and laid them

on beds and mats so that at least Peter's shadow might

fall on some of them as he passed by. Crowds gathered

also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their

sick and those tormented by evil spirits, and all of them

were healed. (Acts 5:15-16)

The gift of healing always operated at this very level of power

and consistency and there is not a single verse of Scripture that

would indicate otherwise. We read of the gift operating through the


Apostle Paul on the island of Malta. After healing the father of the

chief official Publius, “the rest of the sick on the [whole] island

came and were cured” (Acts 28:7-9), indicating that there wasn’t

a single sick person on the island that wasn’t cured in the three

months the Apostle spent there.

The power of the real gifts of healing and miracle working are

also demonstrated in the complete nature of the miracles

commanded. The Apostle Peter describes the paralytic’s healing as

follows, “It is Jesus’ name and the faith that comes through

Him that has given this complete healing to him, as you can

all see” (Acts 3:16). When someone was ministered to with the

gift of healing, they did not leave the experience with a cure in one

leg and a limp in the other.

Likewise, we read of the King:

On another Sabbath He went into the synagogue and

was teaching, and a man was there whose right hand

was shriveled. . . . He looked around at them all, and

then said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He did

so, and his hand was completely restored. (Luke 6:6, 10)

The power of the real gifts of healing and miracle working are

also demonstrated in the immediate nature of the miracles

commanded. Accordingly, in the above instance of healing recorded

in Acts 3, the gift of healing worked “instantly” (v. 7) on the

paralytic and there are no exceptions to this in the Scriptures.

Likewise, the King touched a man and commanded, “Be clean!”

and “Immediately he was cured of his leprosy” (Matt 8:3), and

when He touched two blind men, it is recorded that, “Immediately

they received their sight” (Matt 20:34).

Finally, the power of these God-given miracle working gifts is

demonstrated in the nature of their effect. They deny natural

explanations. The paralytic in Acts 3 was a “man crippled from

birth” (v. 2). When the Apostle commanded his healing,

“instantly the man's feet and ankles became strong. He

jumped to his feet and began to walk” (vs. 7-8). Actual

structural changes, not merely psychological manipulations, had

occurred in the bone structure of the man’s “feet and ankles” such

that the results astounded all who witnessed it.

Scripture clearly portrays the God-given miracle working gifts as

working perfectly, completely, and instantly. Therefore, the

reasonable and necessary conclusion is that anyone claiming these

same gifts should have the same abilities. It is right here that

super-supernaturalism most clearly fails in its unique claims to the

biblical gifts of healing and miracle working. Their “miracle

workers” simply do not heal perfectly, completely, instantly, and


powerfully on command. Never. Accordingly, it is agreed even

within super-supernaturalism that the power of those claiming these

gifts today is rather dismal compared to how they are recorded to

have worked in Scripture. Nevertheless, super-supernaturalism

would still have us believe that God has given them these biblical

gifts.

For example, former Associate Professor of Theology at

Wheaton, C. Samuel Storms, writes:

It is repeatedly argued that the extent and intensity of

apostolic signs, wonders and miracles has not continued

unchanged throughout church history. I agree. But this

would only prove that the Apostles operated at a level of

supernatural power unknown to other Christians, something

virtually everyone concedes. It has no bearing, however, on

the question of whether the miraculous gifts of I Corinthians

12:7-10 are designed by God for the church in every age. 26

On the contrary, the relatively pathetic power of those claiming the

biblical gifts of miracle working today has significant bearing on

whether they are operating today, or at any time since the

Apostles.

Likewise, Dr. Grudem, in another unfortunate attempt to

degrade the authentic biblical gift of healing in order to legitimize

present day “faith healing,” claims that Christ’s “two-step” healing

of a blind man in Mark 8:22-25 suggests that “it may also be his

intention to heal people in two stages today—or in three or four or

more stages.” 27 This very able and gifted brother is scraping the

bottom of the barrel to find biblical precedence for the merely

temporary psychological healing that occurs at the hands of faith

“healers” today.

Along the same lines, the super-supernaturalist Evangelical Free

Pastor Bannister writes:

Healing ministries are often set back by the false demand

[how about biblical?] that they be exactly like the healing

ministry of Jesus and the Apostles. Healings that are partial or

gradual in nature are dismissed as false because "that's not

like they did it in the book of Acts." I am not aware of any

healing ministry in the history of the church that rivals in

power and drama the healing ministry of the Apostles. There

was something unique and foundational about their ministry

(Eph. 2:20). The often-heard charge is true: Nobody does

healing today like the Apostle Paul. But must we conclude

from that that God is done with his healing ministry? . . .

There does seem to be a distinction between the apostolic

gift of healing and the gifts of healing mentioned in I


Corinthians 12:8-10. These gifts of healing may be of lesser

intensity, which would account for the difference between

apostolic and modern miracles. 28

Several misunderstandings would seem to be evident here.

Again, like many super-supernaturalist teachers, Pastor Bannister

has confused the denial of the operation of the gift of healing with a

denial “that God is done with his healing ministry.” We have

already demonstrated that they are not the same thing. God has,

of course, continued His healing ministry, but not through the

biblical gift of healing that worked perfectly, powerfully, and on

command.

Accordingly, we read in Brother Yun’s biography that he lead

one of the prison wardens to Christ. This warden had “a terrible

throat infection that made him cough day and night.” Upon

receiving Christ, Yun prayed for the warden and “he was gradually

restored to full health.” 29 We praise God for what may have been a

miracle, but it is not an instance of the biblical gift of healing that

always worked instantly in Scripture.

The second mistake that Pastor Bannister makes is expecting us

to believe people possess the biblical versions of the miracle

working gifts even when they cannot produce the same attributes.

Actually, if modern miracle workers cannot claim the power of

biblical miracle workers then it is both arrogant and absurd for them

to claim these biblical gifts.

While Pastor Bannister says, “I am not aware of any healing

ministry in the history of the church that rivals in power and drama

the healing ministry of the Apostles,” we are. As we document

elsewhere, Bishop Irenaeus (c. 180), almost a hundred years after

the Apostles, wrote that in his day those with the gift of healing had

raised people from the dead. 30 He did not call them Apostles.

Contrary to Pastor Bannister then, there is historical evidence that

we can indeed hold those who claim the gift of healing to the

standard set by those who possessed it in Scripture.

Thirdly, Pastor Bannister falls into reading his experience into

his exegesis of Scripture when he conveniently claims there is a

difference, “between the apostolic gift of healing and the gifts of

healing mentioned in I Corinthians 12:8-10.” While such an

interpretation fits the experience and claims of super-

supernaturalism it does not reflect a face value interpretation of

Scripture. Here we have encountered yet one more significant

doctrine and practice of this movement that is simply unbiblical.

Finally, super-supernaturalism cannot even claim partial

healings on command, let alone complete ones as demonstrated in

Scripture. In other words, their effort to define the gift of healing


as working haltingly, incompletely, and in a much delayed fashion is

evidently based on a claim that this is how it is operating among

them. But even these kinds of real physical healings among them

are rather non-existent. They cannot even authenticate the instant

but partial healing of any organic 31 disease, let alone the complete

healing of such a thing. Which leads us to our next topic.

E) Miracle Working Gifts Always Worked

Convincingly, Not Suspiciously

The gift of healing worked convincingly, partly because it

worked perfectly, immediately, and completely, but also because it

worked undeniably miraculously. The paralytic in Acts 3 was a

“man crippled from birth” and many others knew it because for

many years they had carried him around. This man’s condition was

not recent or known only to him. It was not just a pain, or

temporary limp, or some other ailment that can either be faked,

simply imagined, or produced psychologically. 32 All could verify

that this man had never walked in his entire life.

Accordingly, the miraculous nature of the Apostle’s healing of

the paralytic was undeniable, even for the enemies of the Christian

faith. Luke records:

The next day [after the healing] the rulers, elders and

teachers of the law met in Jerusalem. Annas the high

priest was there, and so were Caiaphas, John,

Alexander and the other men of the high priest’s family.

They had Peter and John brought before them and

began to question them: “By what power or what name

did you do this?” (Acts 4:5-7)

The men evaluating the authenticity of this miracle were among

the most public and devout enemies of Christianity. And yet, they

admitted that the healing of the paralytic was a demonstration of

miraculous “power.” Luke adds, “They could see the man who

had been healed standing there with them, there was

nothing they could say” (v. 14). Accordingly, they remarked

amongst themselves “What are we going to do with these

men? . . . Everybody living in Jerusalem knows they have

done an outstanding miracle, and we cannot deny it” (v. 16),

even though they would have greatly desired to do so.

Healings today that occur through supposed healing ministries

are quite often very subjective in nature, have not been diagnosed

by a medical professional, and are difficult to independently verify.

The paralytic in Acts 3 did not have a subjective or self-diagnosed


condition, his physical defect was plain for all to see. If this one

criteria for real miracle working were applied to modern faith

healing, it would eliminate a vast majority of the claims to a miracle

working gift.

Elsewhere we have written that one biblical attribute of miracles

in general is their awe-inspiring effect. 33 Of course, for them to

have this effect, they must be convincing. This was never a

problem with the biblical characters who possessed the miracle

working gifts. It is a big problem for “faith healers” today.

Accordingly, we have written:

It is because of our confidence that God will supply what is

needed in order for a miracle to be recognized among

regenerated believers, that we are not impressed with the

claims particularly in super-supernaturalism to an abundance

of miraculous deeds and communication. “Healed” headaches

and “prophetic” declarations by people who cannot foretell the

future inspire little of the wonder and awe that biblical

miracles did. Simply put, such claims only serve to remind us

just how far we are removed from “the good ole days” in the

early Church when a miracle really was a miracle! 34

Those possessing the miracle working gifts in Scripture

convinced even their enemies, while those claiming them today

cannot even convince their friends and brothers in Christ.

Accordingly, Max Turner, a respected theologian who

enthusiastically supports super-supernaturalist doctrine and

practice, nonetheless admits that:

While the claims [of John Wimber (1934-1997), founder of

Vineyard] are many, the substantiating evidence is somewhat

thinner on the ground. As Andrew Walker [himself

sympathetic to the super-supernaturalist movement] warns:

“It is precisely at the level of rigorous investigation into the

miraculous that the Pentecostal movements, since their

earliest days, have let themselves down. In the euphoria and

excitement of [supposed] revival, miracles have been testified

to in abundance, but rarely verified. Testimonies are [a]

direct, successful, and personal means of communication, but

they are by definition prone to exaggeration or capable of

incorrect assessment. Congregations awash with the emotion

of enthusiasm feed off rumor, conjecture, and hearsay. . . .

For those at an inspiring healing service, some change of

feeling in the part of the body affected, combined with a

conviction that God is healing, may be enough. For the

investigating doctor with a professional reputation to maintain

[or the discerning and sincere Christian!], however, there


needs to be a competent and documented medical history of

the condition before the healing, and clear evidence of change

that cannot simply be accounted for in terms of temporary or

spontaneous remission. Though we could wish otherwise, it

needs to be said, in all honesty, that there are relatively very

few occasions that stand up to such rigorous medical analysis.

35

Referring again specifically to what the founders of the Vineyard

Churches have claimed as miracles, Professor Thomas R. Edgar of

Capital Seminary has written:

[John] Wimber refers to a man who fell, hit his head, was

apparently unconscious for three minutes, and “came to” with

a bump on his head. After Wimber and others prayed the

bump eventually went away. This is incredible, not as a

miracle, but that anyone would consider this as a possible

raising of the dead. Would anyone have been convinced by

such a “miracle” that Jesus was the Son of God or that the

Apostles represented God? 36

Accordingly, we discuss elsewhere, the great deal of fraud in

super-supernaturalism and its claims to miracles. 37 It is because

modern miracle workers cannot be miraculous enough to produce

convincing medical evidence for their claims that they suggest they

shouldn’t be held to such a standard. Accordingly, Dr. Ronald Kydd,

Research Professor of Church History at Tyndale Seminary writes,

“The question is, How much weight ought one to place on scientific

observation as a means of validating the miraculous?” 38 To the

contrary, there is no question at all.

What Dr. Kydd seems to disparagingly refer to as “scientific

observation” is nothing more than using our God-given reason to

wisely assess someone’s very significant claim that they possess a

divine gift of heal people. “Scientific observation” is precisely what

every human does to even recognize the miracle of Creation. It

seems to us that the only reason that such a question is even being

asked is that “scientific observation” of past and present claims

regarding the return of miracle working gifts exposes Dr. Kydd’s

super-supernaturalist doctrine as a fraud.

Likewise, the super-supernaturalist Christian apologist J. P.

Moreland writes in his effort to insist that the biblical gifts of miracle

working are operating today:

Limiting our focus to assessing the credibility of contemporary

miracles, I have two things to say. First, it is simply not true

that there is no medical evidence for miracles. . . . But second

and more importantly, this standard of evidence is too high to


guide the belief selection of a rational person because it would

justify rejecting beliefs that have enough rational support to

make them intellectually obligatory to believe. 39

First, notice again the apparent confusion between divine

miracles and human miracle working. Of course there is scientific

evidence that God has done miracles, but this does nothing to prove

He is empowering humans to perform them which is the effect of

the miracle working gifts Dr. Moreland thinks still operate.

Nonetheless, Dr. Moreland wishes to claim that “medical evidence”

should not be a part of “the belief selection of a rational person” on

whether or not a miracle has occurred. An apologist of Dr.

Moreland’s stature should know better. Why would claims to the

biblical gift of healing be “intellectually obligatory to believe”

without medical evidence?

Several suggestions are necessary at this point. First of all, if

someone wants to believe that God did a miracle for them, one that

exceeds the abilities He has placed within Nature or humanity, it

would usually seem both unwise and unnecessary to deny them

their right to believe such a thing. Whatever evidence they believe

they have “may be enough” as Dr. Turner says, not only in their

own mind, but God’s as well. In fact, it is suggested that God may

perform a private miracle intended only for the private experience

and belief of an individual, and will, therefore, only provide

evidence sufficient to convince that individual. Others may call

such evidence too subjective, but again, the possibility of such a

miracle must be kept in mind.

A problem occurs however when others are also expected to

believe that a miracle has occurred and is being used as proof that

the biblical miracle working gifts are operating. In this case it must

be said that if that is God’s intention, then He will provide sufficient

evidence to convince others as well. While an anti-supernaturalist

attitude is unbiblical, so is the undiscerning acceptance of any and

all claims to miracles. Not even God expects His people to believe

He has miraculously intervened without sufficient evidence.

What is sufficient? The miracles and miracle working recorded

in the Bible set a standard by which all modern claims to miracles

and miracle working must be judged. If a modern claim does not

match the magnitude, certainty, consistency, and durability under

prolonged scrutiny of biblical miracles and miracle working, than no

one is obligated by God to believe such a miracle has occurred.

The miracles and miracle working recorded in Scripture were

intended by God to be recognized by any reasonable human being,

and He provided sufficient evidence to accomplish that purpose.

God used the gifts of healing and miracle working to fulfill His desire


to undeniably authenticate His new divine revelation of nothing less

than how humanity was to escape eternal Hell. The message was

critical enough that God designed these gifts to leave no possible

excuses for rejecting it except outright rebellion and hatred for

everything Christian. God knew that the burden of proof lay with

Him to convince people of the authenticity of His messengers and

these gifts worked in such a way that it completely fulfilled that

responsibility. Therefore, if and when He desires to do the same

today, the evidence will be the same kind as well. Unfortunately,

what suffices for many today for a miracle or miracle working, pales

in comparison to the biblical and real kind.

This is precisely why modern “miracles” are more open to

alternative explanations than biblical miracles. The magnitude,

character, and effect of biblical miracles make it unreasonable to

accept anti-supernaturalists explanations for them. The same

cannot be said for the claims of the modern “miracle” movement.

In fact, elsewhere we demonstrate that many other explanations

account for such claims including lying, exaggeration, faking, and

the power of suggestion. 40

Accordingly, if super-supernaturalists’ claims are to be believed,

why isn’t there any miracles over Nature claimed among them?

When is the last time you heard of someone claiming the biblical

miracle working gifts to have instantly withered a tree or calmed a

storm on command? The conspicuous absence of such miracles

over Nature is best explained by the fact that “healings” of humans

is much easier to fake, or procure through natural means such as

the power of suggestion, as we demonstrate elsewhere. 41

Modern “faith healers,” (the ministries of which are often not

worthy of the biblical meaning of either “faith” or “healing”), are in

a constant struggle to defend the authenticity of their own “miracle

working.” Instead of admitting the fact that their ministries simply

are not that miraculous, they have reverted to several dishonest

tactics.

For example, in an effort to give biblical precedent for the

pathetic record of those claiming miracle working gifts today, Dr.

Grudem claims such gifts may fail at times because they “vary in

strength or degree of intensity.” 42 Dr. Grudem bases such a

statement on the obvious fact that gifts that we might categorize as

serving gifts, such as teaching or leading, may vary in strength

depending on its use and development. But he and anyone else is

sadly mistaken to apply this to gifts that God gives for the

miraculous reception, recording, and authentication of His perfect

revelation.

As we discuss further below, the purpose of the sign gifts was to

miraculously prove that a person was speaking for God.


Accordingly, we can readily see the difficulties with the super-

supernaturalist attempt to downgrade these biblical gifts in order to

justify modern claims to these gifts. How convincing is an

authenticating gift that “may vary in strength and intensity” and

even fail? This is precisely why supposed faith healers today are

not convincing, because their healing efforts do not match the

100% effectiveness of the authentic biblical gifts. The fact remains

that the miraculous Scripture and Sign gifts always accomplished

precisely what they were intended to, and by definition they could

not “vary in strength or degree of intensity.”

Another tactic used in super-supernaturalism to divert attention

from the unmiraculous nature of their ministries is to blame their

critics for some sort of spiritual problem on their part. The constant

mantra within the super-supernaturalist camp is that the rest of us

need to be more “open-minded” and “believing,” and if we were

then their pathetic ministries would be recognized as more

miraculous. We have given examples of such accusations

elsewhere. 43

On the contrary, it should be noticed that at no time did the

King or the Apostles ever have to encourage even their enemies to

be more “open” to their claims of miracle working. The credibility of

those who possessed the gift of healing never depended one iota on

the amount of “openness,” gullibility, or even the attitude toward

Christianity of those who witnessed their miracle working.

Along these lines, one thinks of Simon the Sorcerer of whom we

read:

Now for some time a man named Simon had practiced

sorcery in the city and amazed all the people of

Samaria. He boasted that he was someone great, and

all the people, both high and low, gave him their

attention and exclaimed, “This man is the divine power

known as the Great Power.” They followed him because

he had amazed them for a long time with his magic.

But when they believed Philip as he preached the good

news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus

Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Simon . . . followed Philip everywhere, astonished by

the great signs and miracles he saw. (Acts 8:9-13)

We demonstrate elsewhere that Simon was not a true believer, 44 and here we see that he was a powerful magician, probably

knowledgeable of all sorts of tricks and illusions, and he stood to

lose a lot of popularity by accepting the fact that the Apostles were

performing real miracles in his territory. Yet neither his knowledge


of magic, nor his desire to protect his reputation could move him to

offer another explanation.

The reason so many godly people are suspicious of the claims of

modern faith “healers” is not because we have a natural aversion to

miracles. In fact, we like miracles just as much as any human

being. But rather, our suspicions regarding modern faith “healers”

arise because their “healings” are often through the faithful prayers

of others, not the “healers” touch or command. The “healings” are

not in the context of a Scripture-quality “revealing” ministry as all

miracle workers in the Bible were. And faith “healers” today do not

heal instantly, completely, and convincingly like those with these

gifts did in the Bible. If we are not convinced of the abilities of

supposed “miracle” workers today, it is their fault, not ours, and it

can be suggested that if they want the recognition they seek, then

the burden is upon them to be more miraculous and biblical.

Instead, modern “miracle workers” and their supporters are

increasingly tiring of the struggle to convince their fellow Christians

that God is uniquely working among them. Instead, they now most

often resort to laying the burden of proof on those who would

question the effects of their supposed “miracles” and “miracle

working.” They no longer feel they have to prove anything, but

rather, expect the rest of us to prove that a miracle didn’t happen.

As we’ve said elsewhere, such a response only serves to remind us

just how far we are removed from “the good ole days” in the early

Church when a miracle really was a miracle!

F) Biblical “Healing Ministries” Always Worked to

Authenticate a Divine “Revealing Ministry”

The Apostle Peter, like every other God-empowered miracle

worker in Scripture, was a messenger of new extra-biblical divine

revelation to be believed and obeyed by all. Therefore, immediately

after the healing in Acts 3 is performed (cf. vs. 2-8), the Apostle

communicates nothing less than the changing of the covenant

between God and humans. Imagine the revolutionary nature of the

Apostle’s words when he proclaims:

Men of Israel . . . the God of our fathers has glorified

His servant Jesus. . . . You killed the author of life, but

God raised Him from the dead. We are witnesses of

this. . . . Now, brothers, I know that you acted in

ignorance, as did your leaders. But this is how God

fulfilled what He had foretold through all the Prophets,

saying that His Christ would suffer.


Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may

be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from

the Lord, and that He may send the Christ, who has

been appointed for you—even Jesus. He must remain in

Heaven until the time comes for God to restore

everything, as He promised long ago through His holy

Prophets. For Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise

up for you a Prophet like me from among your own

people; you must listen to everything he tells you.

Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely

cut off from among His people.’ (vs. 12-13, 15, 17-23).

Clearly, the Apostle is speaking new, extra-biblical divine

revelation from God that must be believed and obeyed by all.

Accordingly, as we have discussed at length elsewhere, such

supernatural revelation needs to be miraculously authenticated. 45

Along these lines we have written elsewhere:

The purpose of such direct, divine communication through

Scripture gifts and miraculous authentication through sign

gifts becomes obvious when we recognize that during these

unique periods of human history God was radically and forever

changing the answer to the most critical question for any

human being: How can I be accepted by the holy God and

escape His eternal judgment? Such a monumental purpose

calls for extraordinary divine revelation accompanied by

extraordinary supernatural authentication. . . .

When Christ’s ministry was completed, the source of these

New Covenant truths passed to the Apostles and Prophets in

the early Church. This is why Paul tells us that the New

Covenant Church was “built on the foundation of the

Apostles and [NT] Prophets (i.e. Agabus, cf. Acts 13:1-3),

with Christ Jesus Himself as the chief cornerstone” (Eph

2:20; see also 3:5). Because the message of the NT Apostles

and Prophets with Scripture gifts was both unprecedented and

revolutionary, God provided undeniably miraculous sign gifts

such as healing, in order that the revolutionary New Covenant

revelation might be divinely authenticated. 46

Equally clear in Acts 3 is that the purpose of the Apostle Peter’s

ability to heal was God’s desire to authenticate him as a divine

messenger. Accordingly, we have written elsewhere:

In Scripture, you will not find a single divine miracle worker

who was not also a messenger of new extra-biblical divine

revelation from God that must be believed and obeyed by all.

You will find men who prayed for miracles and received them


(e.g. Joshua, Gideon, Hezekiah). You will find divine

messengers who were apparently not authenticated with

miracles (e.g. John the Baptist). But you will not find a divine

miracle worker in Scripture who did not also receive and

communicate extra biblical direct revelation from God that had

to be unconditionally believed and obeyed like Scripture. 47

These supernatural abilities possessed by messengers of

authoritative extra-biblical divine revelation were God’s signature

on such revelation. How else could the people of God recognize and

properly respond to a person claiming to be an Apostle or Prophet

of God? Just because they said so? Accordingly, God has ordained

that God-like deeds are the required authentication of anyone or

anything claiming God-like authority. While this is denied or

ignored by super-supernaturalists today in order that they too may

claim “miracle workers,” it is one of the clearest teachings of

Scripture. Even the super-supernatural apologist J. P. Moreland

writes:

In Scripture, God does not call people to trust in him or some

truth he reveals without first revealing himself to those people

or providing tests for the truth he reveals (e.g., fulfilled

prophecy, a public manifestation of his power, or a

manifestation of his presence in New Testament times and

subsequently up to the present). In this way, God provides

knowledge of himself and attesting credentials for revealed

truth. 48

For example, in the OT God told Moses to perform miracles “so

that they may believe that the LORD, the God of their fathers

. . . has appeared to you” (Exod 4:5). Moses’ miraculous abilities

obviously authenticated him as a messenger of extra-biblical divine

revelation. Likewise, when Elijah raised a boy from the dead, the

mother’s response was: “Now I know that you are a man of

God and that the word of the LORD from your mouth is the

truth” (1 Kgs 17:24). 49 God’s people knew that if someone truly

spoke for Him, that God would authenticate that person with

miraculous abilities.

Long ago, when God instituted human spokesmen for Himself,

He clearly instructed the Israelites in one important way they would

know that such a man spoke for God, and therefore possessed God-

like authority. After telling the Israelites that He would speak and

exercise His authority through Prophets, God said:

[A] Prophet who presumes to speak in My name

anything I have not commanded him to say . . . must be

put to death. You may say to yourselves, "How can we


know when a message has not been spoken by the

LORD?" If [a prediction] a Prophet proclaims in the name

of the LORD does not [miraculously] take place or come

true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That

Prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid

of him [or give him authority]. (Deut 18:20-22)

Again, it is clear that God ordained that the gift of miracle

working would specifically authenticate those who were His

messengers. In the case of His Prophets, they were given the

ability to predict the future with perfect accuracy in ways that

normally only God could do. This was not only true of OT Prophets,

but NT Prophets as well, such as Agabus, who is recorded twice as

having miraculously predicted the future in order to authenticate

himself as a God-sent Prophet (cf. Acts 11:28; 21:10-11, 27ff).

Accordingly, Christ plainly described His God-like credentials

when He said:

Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the

Father is in Me? The words I say to you are not just My

own. Rather, it is the Father, living in Me, Who is doing

His work. Believe Me when I say that I am in the Father

and the Father is in Me [and that He possessed the Father’s

authority]; or at least believe on the evidence of the

miracles themselves. . . .

Do not believe Me unless I do what My Father does.

But if I do it, even though you do not believe Me,

believe the miracles, that you may know and

understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.

(John 14:10-11, 37-38).

The first Christians believed that Christ’s God-like deeds

authenticated His God-like authority, as demonstrated when the

Apostle Peter says, “Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited

by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did

among you through Him, as you yourselves know” (Acts

2:22).

This passage reveals several things about the gifts of miracle

working. First of all, as we noted above, the gifts of miracle

working worked through a person, like Christ or an Apostle. It did

not involve the occurrence of a miracle apart from the specific

ministry of a person. This distinguishes it from other miracles that

God may do. A miracle occurring through these gifts could always

be identified with the supernatural ability of a specific person.

We also notice in Acts 2:22 that the purpose of Christ’s miracle

working was to authenticate His words as having divine authority.


Christ claimed to be speaking for the Creator and Judge of all

humanity and to ignore, disbelieve, or disobey what He said could

cost you an eternity in Hell. God knows that such authority needs

to be authenticated and He therefore provides it.

Christ’s miraculous abilities were specifically to authenticate His

divine authority to God’s people. Nicodemus told Christ, “Rabbi,

we know You are a teacher who has come from God. For no

one could perform the miraculous signs You are doing if God

were not with him” (John 3:2). When Jesus was asked if He was

the Christ, and worthy of God-like authority, He said, “The

miracles I do in My Father's name speak for Me” (John 10:25).

When the Pharisees questioned the magnitude and source of

Christ’s authority He replied, “so that you may know that the

Son of Man has [God-like] authority on earth to forgive sins . .

." Then He said to the paralytic, "Get up, take your mat and

go home” (Matt 9:6). When John the Baptist began to question

Christ’s identity, Christ responded: “Go back and report to John

what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the

lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear,

the dead are raised” (Luke 7:22).

The Apostle John especially focuses on the fact that Christ’s

miracle working was for the purpose of authenticating Him as a

messenger of new extra-biblical divine revelation (cf. John 2:11, 18,

23, 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 30, 5:20-27,30-47; 7:27-31; 8:28f.; 9:30-

33; 10:25; 11:41-45; 14:10f.; 15:24; 17:2-4, 21). Accordingly,

the Apostle concludes his Gospel with:

Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence

of His disciples, which are not recorded in this book.

But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is

the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you

may have life in His name. (John 20:30-31)

Accordingly, the NT scholar Leon Morris writes concerning John’s

conspicuous use of the word “sign”:

A sign is more and means more than a miracle, for it does

not stand alone [like the “miracles” being claimed today], but

is a token and indication of something else. Thus John’s word

shows that our Lord’s works had a definite purpose. They

were not wrought at random, but were intended for a special

object. . . .

What is said above is enough to explain the reason why John

so constantly used the term [simeion: “sign”] to express our

Lord’s miracles. The water changed into wine at Cana he calls

“the beginning of signs” (John 2:11), and the healing of the

centurion’s son is “the second sign” (John 4:54), as being the


first and second indications of Christ’s wielding those powers

which belong to God as the Creator and Author of nature, and

which therefore pledged the God of nature, as the sole

possessor of these powers, to the truth of any one’s teaching

who came armed with them. 50

Because God has ordained to uniquely authenticate His

messengers with the gift of miracle working, Jesus told His

disciples, “As you go, preach this message: ‘The kingdom of

heaven is near.’ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those

who have leprosy, drive out demons” (Matt 10:7-8; cf. Mark

6:12; Luke 9:1, 6; 10:8). This, again, is extra-biblical divine

revelation that must be believed and obeyed and it was to be

authenticated with miracle working.

Along the same lines, we read in Acts:

Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there [in

Iconium], speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed

the message of His grace [new divine revelation] by

enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders.

(Acts 14:3; cf. 15:12; 19:10-12) 51

An important statement concerning the biblical purpose of

miracle working was written by the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians:

Actually I should have been commended by you, for in

no respect was I inferior to the most eminent Apostles,

even though I am a nobody. The [authenticating] signs of

a true Apostle were performed among you with all

perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles. (2

Cor 12:11-12 NASB; cf. Rom. 15:18-19). 52

The immediate context of Paul’s statement is the fact that some

in the Corinthian church were doubting his authenticity and

authority as an Apostle of Jesus Christ. There were also “false

Apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as Apostles of

Christ” (2 Cor 11:13) that the real Apostle was contending with.

Paul tells the Corinthians that he deserves the apostolic authority he

claims because he is a “true Apostle.” “The signs of a true

Apostle” are clearly defined as “signs and wonders and

miracles.” Accordingly, we read in Acts that, “many wonders

and miraculous signs were done by the Apostles” and “The

Apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders

among the people” (2:43; 5:12).

Miracle working was a unique, authenticating signature of an

Apostle of Jesus Christ carrying and proclaiming His extra-biblical

divinely authoritative message of the New Covenant. Therefore,


Paul’s immediate defense of his being a real Apostle is to point out

his God-given ability to perform miracles, something that not only

the “false Apostles” could not do, but other “non-apostolic”

Christians were not doing either.

Accordingly, NT scholar Paul Barnett writes concerning 2

Corinthians 12:11-12:

"The signs," which are miracles pointing to God as their

author, are the demonstration that Paul was precisely that,

one of the select group of the Apostles. He is exactly what the

professed "Apostles of Christ" now come to Corinth are not.

They are "pseudo," false Apostles (11:13); he truly is an

Apostle. "The signs" establish that.

His present reference to "signs, wonders and miracles" in

Corinth was not, apparently, a point of superiority claimed by

the "superlative" [false] Apostles [or Paul would not have used

such a defense]. Rather, Paul, having denied any "inferiority"

to them (12:11), can merely point to his apostolic miracles at

the time he first came to Corinth to clinch outright, and

without further argument, his claim to apostolicity. On this

understanding, Paul's miracles - and the "superlative"

Apostles' lack of them -were an indisputable demonstration of

his authentic Apostleship.

The suggestion that "the signs of the Apostle" [merely]

include, e.g., missionary conversions or a Christlike life is

overturned by the explicatory triad that follows: "signs,

wonders, miracles." 53

It is obvious that Paul’s appeal to miracle working is worthless,

if in fact, many “non apostolic” Christians were also performing

miracles as super-supernaturalists claim. Because Paul’s words

here deliver such a crushing blow to their idea that miracle working

was common in the early Church and should be common today,

there has been a great deal of effort to reinterpret the Apostle.

For example, Gordon Fee’s usual objectivity would seem to be

obscured by his super-supernatural beliefs when he writes

concerning 2 Corinthians 12:11-12:

Paul's affirmations about miracles are not the statements of

one who is trying to prove anything. That is, not only does he

not point to miracles as grounds for accepting either his gospel

or his ministry, but on the contrary he rejected such criteria as

authenticating ministry of any kind. The cross, with the

subsequent resurrection, and the present gift of the Spirit was

all the authentication he ever appealed to. 54

Likewise, Dr. Grudem claims in his Systematic Theology that the


Apostle Paul says nothing here that communicates that miracle

working was an authenticating sign of genuine Apostleship.

However, he would seem to be splitting hairs when he admits,

“Miracles of course had a significant function in confirming the truth

of Paul’s message.” 55 Surely he does not expect us to believe that

miracle working authenticated an Apostle’s message, but did

nothing to prove an Apostle’s ministry. The NT simply does not

separate the two as Dr. Grudem and other super-supernaturalists

are so anxious to do. When we read that, “Paul and Barnabas

spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord,

who confirmed the message of His grace by enabling them to

do miraculous signs and wonders” (Acts 14:3), we do not

conclude that God intended to only authenticate the message but

not the messengers (cf. Acts 2:43; 5:12).

Dr. Grudem also argues that Paul’s claim to miracle working is

not to differentiate himself from other Christians, but rather false

Apostles. 56 However, he seemingly ignores the fact that Paul is

additionally, and possibly primarily, wanting to support his right to

have authority in the Corinthian church, not just to claim his

superiority over false Apostles (cf. 1 Cor 4:1-3, 18-19; 9:1-3; 2

Cor. 2:9; 3:1-3; 5:12; 6:3; 7:2; 10:1-12). Particularly Paul’s

immediate statement that he “should have been commended”

by the Corinthians has much more to do with how the Corinthians

viewed his authority than his superiority over false Apostles. It is

obvious that Paul’s miracle working ability might distinguish him

from false Apostles, but this fact does nothing to disprove the fact

that the early Church recognized miracle working as a unique

authentication of true Apostles.

Additionally, Dr. Grudem claims that the “signs of a true

Apostle” have nothing to do with the “signs and wonders and

miracles” that Paul mentions, but rather are merely nonmiraculous

things such as “suffering and hardship endured for Christ.” 57 Jack

Deere presents the same argument, 58 and it is one that is fairly

popular in particularly liberal Christian literature. Indeed, we have

argued elsewhere that supernatural virtue is the ultimate divine

authentication of a divine messenger. 59 However, Christ and the

Apostles also pointed to their physical miracle working as an

additional essential authentication of their ministries.

Nonetheless, super-supernaturalists ignore the plain meaning of

the text in 2 Corinthians 12:11-12 simply to justify their claim that

miracle workers were abundant then, and are today. Let’s look at it

again:

Actually I should have been commended by you

[Christians as an Apostle of Jesus Christ], for in no respect

was I inferior to the most eminent Apostles, even


though I am a nobody. The signs [sēmeia] of a true

Apostle were performed among you with all

perseverance, by signs [sēmeiois] and wonders [terasin]

and miracles [dynamesin].

The apparent desperation to find biblical support for their

doctrine and practices is evidenced when Dr. Grudem claims that

while the word “signs” in the latter part of the sentence “must refer

to miracles,” Paul’s reference to “signs” in the first part of the

sentence refers to “suffering and hardship.” 60 All of this to deny

the obvious biblical fact that the gifts of miracle working were

unique enough to the first century Apostles, that Paul could refer to

them as “the signs of a true Apostle,” which again, makes the

super-supernaturalists claim to the ordinary nature of these gifts

then and today an absurd and unbiblical one.

Finally, the writer to the Hebrews summarizes our point in this

section when we read:

This salvation [the revelation of the New Covenant], which

was first announced by the Lord, was [miraculously]

confirmed to us by those who heard Him. God also

testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles,

and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to His

will. (Heb 2:3-4).

The need for miraculous authentication for new divine revelation

was precisely the reason the King told the Apostles to wait in

Jerusalem “for the gift [of] “the Holy Spirit” so they could

“receive [miracle working] power” in order to be His messengers

of new divine revelation (Acts 1:4-5, 8). They already had the

revelation they needed after Christ had, “appeared to them over

a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God”

(v. 3). But new divine revelation is not enough, these messengers

needed divine authentication as well which came with the ability to

miraculously speak in tongues (cf. Acts 2:1-12) and perform

miracles (cf. Acts 2:43).

And such miraculous gifts for authentication were not just

granted to Apostles, but to anyone given the responsibility of

communicating new divine revelation. Accordingly, we read of

Philip: “When the crowds heard Philip and saw the miraculous

signs he did, they all paid close attention to what he said”

(Acts 8:6) which was the new divine revelation of the New

Covenant.

With this in mind, it is alarming that the vast majority of modern

“miracle workers” in the Church will not even dare to claim that

they are sources of divine extra-biblical revelation that all must


believe and obey. Yet that is precisely what every God-sent miracle

worker in the Bible was and there are no exceptions. In other

words, such “miracle workers” in the Church today do not have a

single biblical example or teaching of Scripture that they can point

to in order to support their “ministries” unless it is Simon the

Sorcerer. 61 There simply were no miracle workers or faith healers

who did not also receive direct, divine revelation from God that

needed to be believed and obeyed by all.

It is true that some “miracle workers” today may claim a “gift of

knowledge” or “prophecy” which grants them extra-biblical and

divinely authoritative direction for another individual. Accordingly,

a self-proclaimed “prophet” may claim God has told them it is

“God’s will” for a particular person seeking their counsel, to move to

a particular place, take a particular job, or other extra-biblical

matters. But none of this fits the pattern of Scripture. The kind of

divine revelation that biblical miracle workers received was not the

kind that would primarily apply to just an individual, but was

applicable to all Christians, in the same way Scripture is. 62

Contrary then to super-supernaturalism, God has always

granted sign and Scripture gifts together, because their purposes

are interdependent. 63 Perhaps, then, we can be forgiven one verse

out of context when we say, “Therefore what God has joined

together, let man not separate” (Matt 19:6). Modern “miracle

workers” will simply find no biblical support for their claims to God-

sent miracle working unless they are willing to also claim that they

speak with the God-given and conscience-binding authority of a

Moses, Elijah, Jesus, Peter, or Paul. It is the God-like

authentication of the Prophets and Apostles that grants their

writings in the Scriptures God-like authority. We are not expected

to give such authority to documents written merely by good men. 64

One reason that modern “miracle workers” do not claim to

possess extra-biblical revelation that is to be believed and obeyed

by all Christians is that they know their ministries would come

under greater scrutiny and be exposed as the frauds they are. As

long as they are just being nice “miracle workers” supposedly doing

people good, they are unfortunately left alone.

However, the habitual severing of the God-ordained relationship

between Scripture and sign gifts is serious business because it has

undermined the foundation of what the authority of Scripture is

based upon. Contrary to beliefs in super-supernaturalism, the

miracle-working abilities of God’s Prophets and Apostles were not

meant to be imitated, but were meant to be His unique signature on

such men as His messengers. Their exclusive possession of gifts of

healing and miracle working is the foundation of our confidence that


what these men wrote was divine revelation instead of human

invention.

Accordingly, the reason we believe that Moses, Jesus, Paul, and

Peter were unique sources of divinely authoritative revelation is that

they uniquely performed miracles. If modern so-called “Prophets”

and “miracle workers” possess the same gifts as those who

supernaturally revealed and authenticated the covenants recorded

in Scripture, then what authoritative superiority do Moses, Christ,

and Paul have over them? None, if the modern claims to the same

gifts are true. To whatever degree you dilute the superiority of

their miracle working, as the doctrine and practice of super-

supernaturalism does, you dilute the divine authority of their

writings.

Accordingly, Peter Jensen, Anglican Archbishop of Sydney

writes, “The constant recourse to claims for miracles today

diminishes the revelatory significance of those recorded in the New

Testament.” 65 Likewise, in this context, Christian apologist Norman

Geisler warns:

The issue has significance for apologetics. First, existence of

apostolic, sign gift-type miracles today raises the issue of

whether the New Testament miracles uniquely confirmed the

truth claims of Christ and the Apostles, as recorded in

Scripture. Second, if miracles that confirm divine truth claims

exist today, are truth claims they accompany to be accepted

on par with those of Scripture? 66

The fact that super-supernaturalism separates miracle working

from its biblical purpose not only undermines the authority of

Scripture, but makes the source of any real miracles in their midst

suspect. The reason God sends miracle workers is to authenticate a

new covenant or a messenger of extra-biblical divine revelation that

God’s people must believe and obey. If this is not God’s plan today,

then who might send miracle workers? satan, who sends them to

deceive. 67

Therefore, if modern “miracle workers” want any biblical support

for their claims today, they must admit to one of the following: 1)

they are a source of new extra-biblical divine revelation that has the

authority of Scripture, or 2) they really do not perform miracles at

all, or 3) their miracles are demonically empowered. These are the

only options the Bible will offer someone who claims to be a miracle

worker. And if number 1 is not true, then they had best flee to the

humbling but forgivable concession of number 2, if they do not wish

to be accused of number 3.


Extras & Endnotes

A Devotion to Dad

Our Father, we thank you that the greatest miracle working

occurring today is the supernatural regeneration of the Holy Spirit

which resurrects the spiritually dead to spiritual life! Forgive the

Church for any misplaced emphasis on physical miracle working

that has distracted from the real miracles occurring today. We pray

that your Church would love and see You more than the mere

healing of the body.

Gauging Your Grasp

1) How do we define the essence and purpose of “gifts of

healing,” and “miraculous powers” (1 Cor 12:9-10).

2) What is the essential difference between the direct miracles all

Christians can request God to do today, and the human miracle

working only those with the real gift of healing could do?

3) What are the biblical attributes of those with the real gift of

healing? Do you agree or disagree that modern “faith healers”

match these attributes?

4) What is the significance of the fact that biblical miracle workers

even convinced their enemies of their divine power?

5) What is our explanation for the conspicuous absence of miracles

over Nature in modern super-supernaturalism?

6) Do you agree or disagree with the conclusion of this study: If

modern “miracle workers” want any biblical support for their

claims today, they must admit to one of the following: 1) they

are a source of new extra-biblical divine revelation that has the

authority of Scripture, or 2) they really do not perform miracles

at all, or 3) their miracles are demonically empowered.


Recommended Reading

Books 10 and 11 of Knowing Our God: Diving Miracles and

Human Miracle Working.

Publications & Particulars

1 NT scholar Anthony Thiselton offers supporting evidence for our

distinction between the gifts of healing and miracle working when he writes:

On these matters patristic evidence and arguments deserve serious attention. Chrysostom [c. 347-407] perceives both overlap and

contrast with healings: "He who had a gift of healing used only to do cures; but he who possessed [miracle working] used to punish also . . . even as Paul imposed blindness and Peter brought death" (Acts 13:11; 5:1-11) [I Cor. Homily 29:5]. So miracle working includes healing, but also whatever human healing does not include. Thomas Aquinas [1225-1274] also referred the latter to miracles over nature like Moses’ dividing the Red Sea and Joshua stopping the sun. (The

First Epistle to the Corinthians [Eerdmans, 2000], 954) We also believe it is a mistake to confuse the gifts of healing and

miracle working with exorcism, as we discuss in section 11.10.B

2 For an introduction to super-supernaturalism see chapters 10.13-16.

3 According to Nave’s Topical Bible, all of the healings in the NT are described in the following references: Mt. chs. 8-9; 12:9-13, 22; 15:22-28; 17:14-21; 20:29-34; Mk. 7:31-37; Lk. 7:11-16; 13:10-13, 14:1-6;

17:12-14; 22:49-51 Jn. 4:46-53; 5:2-9; 9:1-7; 11:1-46; Acts 3:2-10; 5:15-16; 9:34; 9:40; 14:8-10; 19:11-12; 20:9-12; 28:8-9 (John R. Kohlenberger, ed., [Zondervan, 1992], 414, 684). Reading them will

help a person understand how miraculously superior these healings were compared to those claimed today. They will also confirm, without exception, the biblical characteristics of the gifts of miracle working that

are presented here.

4 The only clear exception is the record of people being healed by “handkerchiefs and aprons that [Paul] had touched” (Acts 19:12). But even here we would point to the fact that such healings involved the touch of the one having the gift, not a simple prayer. Luke also reports that, “people brought the sick into the streets and laid them on beds and mats so that at least Peter’s shadow might fall on some

of them as he passed by,” and while they might have received healing, the text does not say this.

5 The proper interpretation of James 5:14-16 will be taken up at section 11.5.E

6 It is true that “workers” is not in the Greek text of 1 Corinthians 12:28,


which simply has dynameis (“miracles”). The idea of workers of miracles as opposed to direct divine miracles seems demanded by the text. For example, the literal translation of verse 29 would be “all are not miracles?” Because it appears in a list of gifts attached to people, even

the rather literal NASB renders this, “workers of miracles.”

7 Excerpted from section 10.5.A.1.

8 David Garland, Reading Matthew: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the First Gospel (Crossroad, 1993), 94-97.

9 E. J. Carnell, An Introduction to Christian Apologetics (Eerdmans, 1956),

273. Yet, just a page earlier, Dr. Carnell himself would seem to confuse

direct miracles with delegated miracle working when he writes: The doctrine that miracles no longer occur is one of those fundamental canons which separate Protestantism from Roman Catholicism. . . . Miracles are a seal and sign of special, covenantal revelation; but revelation has ceased. There cannot, therefore, be new miracles. (Ibid., 272)

It is, of course, just this kind of inaccuracy that super-supernaturalists

take advantage of in order to accuse historicists of not believing in modern miracles

10 Regarding our first characteristic, that the gift worked through the command or touch of a person, rather than simply an answer to prayer, it might be objected that Peter’s raising Tabitha from the dead is an exception (Acts 9:36-41). Luke records that before he commanded Tabitha to “get up,” he had gotten “down on his knees and prayed.”

Still, Peter’s command to “get up” was certainly involved in the healing. Our point here is to distinguish between the ability of any Christian to ask God to heal someone, and the miraculous ability for a person to command a healing. Tabitha is no exception

11 A study of the OT prophets reveals a similar pattern. However, unlike

the NT, Moses and Aaron performed their miracles with the raising of a

rod (cf. Exod 7:19; 8:5; 8:16; etc.), and Elijah divided the Jordan river by striking it with a cloak (cf. 2 Kgs 2:14).

12 We would suggest, for example, that D. M. Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) ignores this distinction when he writes:

We must never use the word 'claim' [in regards to miracles]. It is incompatible with sovereignty. People say, 'Claim this gift claim healing.' You cannot claim healing. The Apostle himself claimed

healing three times and did not get it. Never claim; never even use the word. We are to submit ourselves -it is the Spirit who gives. The claiming of gifts is clearly incompatible with the whole of the New

Testament emphasis. No, no, he is Lord, he controls and he gives. You can supplicate but you must never claim. Never! (The Sovereign Spirit: Discerning the Gifts [Harold Shaw, 1985], 48-9

On the contrary, if someone has been given the gift of miracle working

and the accompanying miracle faith to command or claim a miracle, they certainly can do so. Lloyd-Jones’ thoughts, however, apply very well to


situations where the gift of miracle faith is absent and people are still “claiming” a miracle instead of asking for one.

13 Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit Power (Zondervan, 1993), 18.

14 Ibid.

15 For a discussion of James 5:15-16 see section 11.5.E

16 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Zondervan, 1994), 1063-1069.

17 Ibid., 1067 (italics in the original).

18 For further discussion of the proper expectation of miracles as illustrated in China’s underground Church see section 10.3.C.3-5.

19 Brother Yun and Paul Hattaway, The Heavenly Man: The Remarkable True Story of Chinese Christian Brother Yun (Monarch Books, 2002), 247.

20 Ibid., 207-8.

21 For further discussion of the powerful healing effects of spiritual conversion see section 11.10.A.

22 B. B. Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles (Banner of Truth Trust, 1972), 58.

23 John MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos (Zondervan, 1992), 256-257.

24 For an introduction to the different kinds of biblical faith see section 6.1.D-E.

25 For further discussion of miracle faith see chapters 11.4-5

26 Wayne Grudem in Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?, Wayne Grudem ed. (Zondervan, 1996), 159

27 Grudem, Theology, 366.

28 Doug Bannister, The Word and Power Church (Zondervan, 1999), 156,

193.

29 Yun, 173-4.

30 For further discussion of Bishop Irenaeus’ testimony concerning the gift of healing see section 11.7.B.2.

31 There is an important distinction between functional [psychological] disease and [physical] organic disease: A functional disease is one in

which a perfectly good organ does not function properly [because of psychological ailments]. An organic disease is one in which the organ is

diseased, maimed, physically impaired, or even defunct. “Faith healers” can affect the former, but not the latter. See section 11.9.A.

32 For further discussion regarding the rather amazing illnesses that can be caused by psychological problems, and the natural cures that can be provided through psychological means see chapter 11.9

33 For further discussion of the awe-inspiring effect of miracles see section


10.2.C.

34 Excerpt from 10.2.C.3

35 Max Turner, The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts (Hendrickson, 1998), 332-333, 335.

36 Thomas R. Edgar, “The Cessation of the Sign Gifts” BSac 145 (1988), 378.

37 For further discussion regarding the fraud in super-supernaturalism see chapter 11.8

38 Ronald Kydd, Healing Through the Centuries: Models for Understanding (Hendrickson, 1998), xxvi.

39 J. P. Moreland, Kingdom Triangle (Zondervan, 2007), 185.

40 For other legitimate explanations for super-supernatural claims to miracles see chapters 11.8-12.

41 For further discussion regarding the rather amazing illnesses that can be caused by psychological problems, and the natural cures that can be provided through psychological means see chapter 11.9

42 Grudem, 1022-25.

43 For examples of the habit in the super-supernaturalist camp to claim the rest of us need to be more “open-minded” and “believing,” and if we were then their pathetic ministries would be recognized as more miraculous, see section 10.16.G

44 For further discussion of Simon the Sorcerer’s spiritual state see section 6.6.C. While here we suggest he may have been a mere magician, at section 11.12.A we admit that his abilities may have been demonically

empowered as well.

45 For further discussion regarding divine authentication of divine revelation see sections 3.1.D and 7.1.B.5 and 7.6.F

46 Excerpted from section 7.3.C.3.

47 Excerpted from section 7.6.F. For further discussion regarding divine authentication of divine revelation see sections 3.1.D, 7.1.B.5 and 7.6.F.

48 J. P. Moreland and Klaus Issler, In Search of a Confident Faith (Intervarsity, 2008), 18-19

49 Many Evangelicals suggest the significance of Elijah’s miracle working was that it occurred during a time of apostasy, therefore, apparently

offering biblical evidence that such circumstances could bring more Elijah’s.

For example, the long time Professor of Systematic Theology at

Westminster, Sinclair B. Ferguson writes: Outbreaks of the miraculous sign-gifts in the Old Testament were, generally speaking, limited to those periods of redemptive history in


which a new stage of covenantal revelation was reached and during which the kingdom of God required special defense against the danger of annihilation by the powers of darkness: the days of the Exodus, the entry into the promised land, and the establishment of

the people there; the time of Elijah and Elisha and the establishing of the prophetic ministry; and the days of the Exile. (The Holy Spirit [Intervarsity, 1996], 224)

We sympathize with Dr. Ferguson’s attempt to demonstrate the uniqueness of the sign gifts, but when he fails to note that every God-sent miracle worker was a messenger of extra-biblical divine revelation,

and instead highlights the miracle working of Elijah and Elisha when “the kingdom of God required special defense against the danger of annihilation by the powers of darkness,” he leaves open the possibility that non-revelational miracle workers may be sent by God in such circumstances today. Such a view would not reflect the full teaching of Scripture

50 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (NICNT) (Eerdmans, 1995),

608

51 This episode in Acts 14 is just one occasion where an Apostle performs miracles in order to authenticate new revelation in the presence of

Gentiles. This refutes the idea that when Paul said, “Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom” (1 Cor 1:22), that such miraculous authentication was somehow confined to the Jews. The apostles elsewhere performed miracles among Gentiles (cf. Acts 15:12;

20:6-12; 28:7-10). The Jewish demand for supernatural authentication of supernatural revelation was not cultural, but creational and biblical

52 Super-supernaturalist Wayne Grudem suggests that 2 Corinthians 12:12 is not biblical evidence for the purpose of miracle working. For further discussion see section 8.4.B.2

53 Paul Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Eerdmans, 1997),

580. Barnett lists K. H. Rengstorf in the TDNT 7.258-60 as supportive of his view.

Nonetheless, even a respected NT scholar such as C. K. Barrett dismisses the obvious and contends:

Paul's rivals, originally standing on a Jewish-Christian platform, had no difficulty in accommodating themselves to the requirement [of working miracles] (and thus in some respects give the impression of

claiming to be 'divine men'. (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (BNTC) [Henddrickson, 1997], 321, cf. 29).

In other words, Barrett suggests there were an abundance of bona fide miracle workers in the pagan religions, and for example lists Apollonius

of Tyana. Elsewhere we have noted the very sketchy and questionable data on Apollonius (cf. section 11.8.C) and more liberal scholars such as Barrett do not have the enough evidence for real pagan miracle

workers in the apostolic age. If an abundance of such people existed, again, Paul would not have offered the evidence of his miracle working as a defense


54 Gordon Fee, God’s Empowering Presence (Hendrickson, 1994), 888

55 Grudem, 364 (Underlining added for emphasis).

56 Ibid., 362.

57 Ibid., 363-364.

58 Deere attempts the same arguments, no doubt, based on Grudem’s work. (Power, 104-105). Carson disagrees with both Grudem, Deere, and, he says, Turner, and rightly points out that, “The expression signs of an apostle or the like occurs in a few crucial passages (Acts 2:43; 5:12; 2

Cor. 12:12), and it teaches us not to avoid the link [between “the miraculous gifts” and the “role of attestation”] altogether.” (Spirit, 156).

59 For our claim that virtue is the ultimate test for a divine messenger see especially sections 9.12.D and chapter 11.13.

60 Grudem, 363.

61 See section 11.12.A regarding Simon the Sorcerer.

62 Some may object that Ananias (cf. Acts 9:10-18) is a miracle worker that does not fit our claim that every God-sent miracle worker was also a source of new extra-biblical divine revelation that was to be believed and

obeyed by all. We discuss his special case in the next chapter at 11.2.B.3

63 For further discussion of the definition and purpose of Scripture and sign gifts see sections 3.1.D, 7.1.B, 7.6.F.

64 This divine method of miraculous authentication is especially important for doctrinal revelation. This is because our New Nature by virtue of the indwelling Holy Spirit through our regeneration is also a powerful source

of divine authentication regarding the moral directional revelation in Scripture (see section 3.5.A). However, how could we be assured that, for example, God the Father:

chose us in Him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in His sight. In love He predestined us to be adopted as His sons . . . having been predestined according to the plan

of Him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of His will. (Eph 1:4-5, 11) While we could know we are saved through the Gospel by its

supernatural effects in our lives, we still would not know we got saved because God “chose us” and “predestined us” to be so. These are incredibly weighty truths, and the only reason we can know that they are from God is because the apostle Paul who penned them was a man of

both supernatural virtue and power to perform miracles.

65 Peter Jensen, The Revelation of God (InterVarsity, 2002), 272.

66 Norm Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (Baker, 1999), 468.

67 For further discussion of demonic miracle working see chapters 10.6 and


11.11-13.

chapter 11.1 the biblical attributes of miracle...

Documents