The
The history of New Testament Christianity--as every careful Bible student knows--has involved one significant battle after another. Some of the battles have bordered on being silly. For example, how many angels can sit on the head of a pin? Others were much more serious. Some of the battles had a decidedly modern ring. Many of the early conflicts were resolved and no longer trouble the church. For example, the Gnostic controversy with which Paul almost certainly dealt with in his letter to the Colossians and which John roundly condemned in his epistles, no longer disturbs the church, at least, not in the same guise. The paganistic New Age movement and some segments of the Women’s Liberation movement have resurrected certain elements of Gnosticism. Sylvia Browne, the infamous American psychic, claims to embrace the religion of Gnosticism. But among committed Bible believers, Gnosticism is dead.
The controversies and battles that have brought heartaches and sometimes division among the professed followers of Christ are far too numerous to mention. Those interested in this topic should consult Harold O..J. Brown’s scholarly book, Heresies (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984). Dr. Brown has excellent examinations of Gnosticism, Montanism, Adoptionism, Arianism, Pietism, and many others. Reading Dr. Brown’s book, or similar books, will give you some background on heresies--how they arose, how faithful preachers and theologians dealt with them and how to combat them today when they rise.
The New Testament makes us aware of one major heresy that developed in the first century of the Christian era: The tendency for some Christians to return to the Law of Moses. This false teaching sought to arrange a marriage between Christianity and Judaism. Paul shows in the Galatian letter and in other epistles that such a hybrid religion was not pleasing to God. These are Paul’s own words: “Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify to every man who is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, you who are seeking to be justified by the law; you are fallen from grace” (Gal. 5:1-4).
We would like to
think that the temptation to return to some of the regulations of the Law of
Moses has disappeared among those who claim to be Christians. Sadly, that is not the case. Anyone who preaches that Christians should
keep the Sabbath, play on mechanical instruments of music, and burn incense in
worship, bind tithing on the church, and observe other ordinances of the Mosaic
Law has fallen from grace, if he were ever in grace. The author of Hebrews strongly affirmed: “For
the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also in the
law” (Heb.
Among the Pharisees and the Sadducees, there were major differences over the supernatural or the miraculous. When Paul was tried before the Jewish council, he “perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of Pharisees, of the hope of the resurrection of the dead I am called into question. And when he had so said, there arose a dissention between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided. For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both” (Acts 23:6-8). The Sadducees were antisupernaturalistic; they were the modernists or liberals of their day. The Pharisees believed in the miracles of the Old Testament, in angels and in spirits.
Today’s conflicts over miracles arise from several different sources. There is the dispute between atheists and theists. Atheists deny the existence of God almighty. If God does not exist, there is no point in talking about miracles. There are great differences between modernists and Bible believers. Some modernists or liberals admit the possibility of miracles, but insist that miracles are actually impediments to belief for modern men or they attempt to explain away the miracles of the Bible. The late Dr. William Barclay, the well-known Scottish theologian, sought to explain away virtually every miracle in the New Testament. If you think I might be exaggerating slightly, read Dr. Barclay’s book, And He Had Compassion: The Healing Miracles of Jesus (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1975). There are extensive and grave disagreements between Pentecostals and non-Pentecostals. For the next few minutes, let us give our attention to those areas of conflict.
Atheists and theists have had a running battle for many years, but not just about miracles. The differences between these two worldviews are absolutely irreconcilable. Obviously, since the atheist does not believe in the existence of God, he logically denies the possibility of any manifestation of the supernatural. The world, according to atheists and other kinds of unbelievers, is a closed system. There cannot be any intervention from outside the material universe since there is no one outside to intervene. All atheistic worldviews--whether humanistic, communistic or materialistic--categorically deny the possibility of miracles. And unbelievers are right--if there is no God. How could there be a miracle if there is no God to empower it?
The atheist feels no compulsion to examine any supposedly miraculous event--whenever and wherever that event is supposed to have happened. Like the philosopher David Hume, modern atheists believe that miracles are impossible. By his philosophy or by his science, he has completely ruled out all miraculous events. His dispute, then, with theists is not over the resurrection or over the virgin birth or over turning water into wine; he simply ignores the reports of the supernatural because there can be no miracle. When we are dealing with atheists or secular humanists, we must first establish the existence of God. Otherwise, there is no point in discussing the miraculous with unbelievers.
Incidentally, your speaker and many other theists have far greater respect for some atheists than we do for modernists and liberals. The atheist is far more consistent in denying the possibility of miracles than the modernist who pretends to believe in God and in the Bible, but is compromising in his attitude toward the supernatural. Modernists and liberals have a far more destructive influence on the cause of Christ than do atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.
There is a great
conflict between Bible believers and liberals.
I could show that from the writings of several modern liberals, but I
shall confine my reading to Dr. Leslie Weatherhead, a prominent English
theologian. In 1966, Weatherhead wrote a
book with the title, The Christian Agnostic (
Since the resurrection of Christ is the very foundation of New Testament Christianity, how does Leslie Weatherhead deal with this great truth? Please listen to his observation. “What the disciples saw after Easter Day was technically an apparition.” Have you ever heard of an apparition’s eating a meal (Lk. 24:41-43)? Weatherhead writes of Christ’s spiritual or resurrection presence, to rule out the idea of a physical or bodily resurrection (p. 130). Physical resurrection is the only kind the Bible writers knew. Jesus did not die spiritually; he died physically. He was bodily raised from the dead. Without Christ’s bodily resurrection, there is no Christianity, as Paul makes very plain in 1 Corinthians 15.
Weatherhead says
it is illogical to “argue that because Jesus rose from the dead we shall do the
same” (p. 137). It may seem illogical to
a rank modernist or an agnostic, but it was not illogical to an inspired
apostle. Paul assured the Corinthians:
“Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you
that there is no resurrection of the dead?
But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen:
and if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also
vain. Yea, and we are found false
witnesses of God; because we testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he
raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: and if Christ be
not raised, your faith is vain; you are yet in your sins. Then they also who are fallen asleep in
Christ have perished. If in this life
only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now is Christ risen from the dead, and
become the first fruits of them who slept.
For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ
shall all be made alive. But every man
in his own order: Christ the first fruits; afterward they who are Christ’s at
his coming” (1 Cor.
Conflicts over
miracles have not only involved atheists like Robert Green Ingersoll and
theists like the majority of people in my audience, between liberals like
Leslie Weatherhead and John Shelby Spong and staunch Bible believers; but they
have arisen between various Pentecostal preachers and those who reject the
spurious miracles of Pentecostalism or neo-Pentecostalism. Most of you are probably aware of the
movement in the religious world that began early in the twentieth century called
“Pentecostalism” or the “Charismatic movement.”
In recent years, another approach to the miraculous calls itself
“neo-Pentecostalism.” The Pentecostal
movement teaches that the days of miracles have not ceased--that healing the
sick by miraculous means, speaking in tongues, and other supernatural gifts are
still available for Christians in every generation. This unscriptural approach to miracles has
affected virtually every religious body in the
There are millions of people who honestly believe that all the biblical miracles are genuine--that they actually occurred just as the Bible teaches, but who emphatically deny that so-called “modern miracles’ actually take place. I accept without reservation all the biblical miracles--from the creation of the world to the Lord’s second coming. But I sincerely teach, as do most preacher who identify themselves as “Christian,” that the Bible does not allow for modern divine healing, tongues-speaking, raising the dead, turning water into wine and similar supernatural events. The miracles had their place in the scheme of human redemption, but they are no longer needed and they are no longer available. We have a complete revelation of God’s will for man. That revelation was confirmed and authenticated by the miracles. It does not need further confirmation and authentication.
But what about the reports of spectacular healings by the modern faith healers, such as, Benny Hinn, Rod Parsley, Paul Crouch and John Wimber? Dr. John F. Mac Arthur, Jr.’s book, Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids: ZondervanPublishing House, 1992), says that Wiber “reported an incident where a woman’s toe, which had been cut off, supposedly grew back.” Wimber also told of a woman with a cleft palate that miraculously closed “three days after God gave a ‘word of knowledge’ that we she would be healed” (p. 131). Wagner and Wimber seem to be “convinced that many dead people are being raised” (p. 132). Have you ever wondered why men like Wimber and Wagner never furnish the names of the people who have grown new limbs or teeth or whose cancer has been miraculously cured or who have been raised from the dead? They sometimes claim that medical doctors witnessed the miracles, but they do not tell who the doctors were. You do not have to be a Bible scholar to know that these reports are fabricated. Am I saying that God does not have the power to miraculously heal the sick? Absolutely not! I am saying that the Bible does not allow for modern miracles. A careful reading of 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 should convince anyone who is open to being convinced that miracles have ceased.
Widespread interest in modern divine healing and in tongues-speaking received a major impetus from the television programs sponsored by the Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association. Multiplied millions watched Oral Roberts allegedly heal sick people. His name became a household word in thousands and thousands of homes across the nation. In recent years similar programs have experienced decline because of the conduct of some of the charismatic preachers, such as, Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker. The behavior of these and similar television evangelists throw considerable doubt on the reality of modern miracles. Their conduct proves that their personal lives can stand some improvement. Would God enable such deceivers to perform miracles?
One of the
charismatic leaders--Pat Boone--a former member of the church of the New
Testament--has written very critically of the churches of Christ. In his book, A New Song (Carol Stream, IL:
Creation House 1970), Pat accuses “doctrinal authorities in the
We still believe in God the Father, Jesus Christ, God’s only Son, the Holy Spirit, the supernatural revelation God has so graciously provided for us and in the Lord’s second coming. But we know the miracles ended because of Paul’s arguments in 1 Corinthians 13:8-12.
In his book, A New Song, Pat tells of an experience his wife Shirley had. He said he heard her repeating the Latin phrase, Ave Deum, which means “praise God.” According to Pat’s account, when he explained the Latin expression to his wife, she knelt by the bed and began to praise God “in a lovely flow of the most beautiful language I’ve ever heard.” Pat asked if Satan would provide such a beautiful language. The answer to that question is very simple: Yes. The devil will do all within his power to deceive God’s people. Pat said that he and his wife knew they had just experienced a miracle (p. 118). I believe Pat has overlooked a number of possible explanations for his wife’s using the Latin expression, Ave Deum. He could easily have misunderstood what she said. She may have learned the Latin form having been in high school and college choral groups. After all, her father was the famous Red Foley who was not exactly ignorant of terms used in various songs, including spiritual songs. Evidence that a supernatural event had occurred is without foundation.
I shall close
this study today with a brief reference to Dr. Benjamin Warfield’s book, Miracles: Yesterday and Today: True and
False (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953). The book was originally written in 1918 under
the title, Counterfeit Miracles.
Dr. Warfield shows conclusively that every age of church history has
been troubled by exaggerated claims regarding miraculous manifestations. He discusses patristic and medieval marvels,
miracles attributed to the virgin Mary and to certain saints, Irvingite gifts,
faith-healing, mind cures and other so-called miracles. He lists alleged visits of the virgin Mary to
those who were sick or discouraged or dying.
He examines the cures that are supposed to occur at various shrines
around the world, especially at
I urge you to examine the claims of charismatics and others who pretend to have supernatural powers. We do not need miracles because we have God’s holy word--the word that has been confirmed by miracles, signs and wonders. Read the Bible, believe it and obey it to enjoy eternal life.
Winford Claiborne
The International Gospel Hour