Bro Suber's controversial sermon

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by augustianian

Pretty simple. See the miracles of Jesus and His apostles...if someone can duplicate those, i.e. raising the dead, healing the blind, organic miracles such as the growth of a limb etc...etc...then we can talk.

Relief of a back ache or a headache is NOT a miracle and is not evidence of an "apostle" or a "prophet."

It isn't? What do you base that conclusion on? Is it only a miracle if OTC meds can't take care of the problem? Where is there an exhaustive list of which illnesses are "regular" healings and which ones are miraculous?

Also, if a "prophet" is correct 100 percent of the time when he says "Thus says the Lord."

I agree...sort of...however, there have been cases when God has made prophets look bad, as in the case of Jonah and Ninevah. God is free to change His mind, and the reputation of the prophet appears to be of little or no consequence.

Then we go to his doctrine. Does he speak the truth? Does he know how to exegete the scriptures? Are the words that are coming out of his mouth consistent with the words that came out of God's??

This is still a generic *proof*. All believers' doctrine and conversation should be consistent with God's Word. So that isn't indicative of an Apostle or Prophet exclusively. A teacher, preacher, evangelist or pastor would have to abide by the same criteria. So would a layperson, sharing the Gospel with an unbeliever.

How's that?

a

Somewhat satisfactory, but it would be nice of you to provide scripture to back up your personal definitions so I can see where you derived them from. I know of scripture that will support your third conclusion, but again...that isn't exclusively concerning a prophet or apostle, but the ministry and believers in general.

P.S. Jesus said that we would know a false prophet from a true prophet by his "fruits." (Matthew 7:20) What are the fruits? Isn't that different from gifts and/or miracles?

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by augustianian

If my logic were used with your premise then I suppose the above argument would work.

But...however,
the very fact that there was no duplication between the prophets of the OT and their predecessors argues FOR my position. I'm arguing for discontinuity also. Apostles/prophets of today ain't doing what their predecessors were doing. The burden of proof is on them to prove otherwise.

a

When you say "aint doing what their predecessors were doing", you mean in any fashion, not necessarily exact duplication?

And by discontinuity, do you mean that God appoints prophets as needed, inconsistently, rarely and/or unpredictably?

Are you separating prophesying as indicated in the NT (...my sons and daughters....) from a Prophet as listed with the five ministries?

[augustianian]

First of all, there doesn't have to be a list just a definition. Because words usually lose their meaning over time the same can be said for biblical words also. But a miracle is an event that only can happen because of, through, or from supernatural extraordinary means. I would also add the word instantaneous. Also playing into the definition of a "miracle" would be the physical circumstances. In no definitional way, whether in modern medicine or in the biblical account, could the relief of a headache and/or back ache be considered miraculous unless joined by an organic malady, such as cancer, without the assistance of medicine. Now that is not to say that a healing has not happened but rather that such a healing cannot be classified as a miracle.

Lazarus getting a cold and sipping down some hot porridge (chicken?) and then getting better because of the already resident antibodies in his blood stream...not a miracle.

Lazarus getting pneumonia, dying, staying dead for three days and then living...miracle.

Bartimaeus stubbing his toe and then over the course of days it gets better...not a miracle.

Bartimaeus receiving his sight...miracle.

The 1980 US Hockey team winning the gold medal....not a miracle even though it's fondly remembered as the "Miracle on Ice".

As to your first question: Is the relief of a headache and/or a backache "miraculous" enough for you to use the word "prophet" or "apostle"?? Headaches and backaches are common affairs...I bet right now there is someone being "healed" of a headache. Pretty common and does not reach the level of "rare event" needed to be considered a "miracle." Also, the lessening of the pain can be attributed to other factors such as psychological manipulation, the "prophet" playing on the expectation of the one who has such pain and adding to that crowd dynamics can create a placebo effect that will numb the pain. Can it be a healing?? I suppose. But it is not a miracle and does not reach such a level that would cause me to call someone a "prophet."

If it does for you...well that's fine. I don't think you're being biblical though, because somewhere in your lexicon of knowledge you're re-defining
terms.

As to your second question: No where in the bible is someone cured of a headache or backache and that be defined as a miracle.

As to your third question: Well if it can be remedied by OTC meds it's definitely NOT a miracle. But "miracle" is not a word I would use for an illness that is cured by a steroid shot, which is not an OTC med.

As to your fourth question: Who says there has to be a list?? If there is no list does that negate my contention?? No. You can start a list if you want starting with resurrecting the dead and working your way down. If you want to redefine the word miracle then go ahead, I'll refer to your "prophets" and "apostles" as Diet Apostle and Prophet Lite. Good luck on finding the Real Thing.

The circumstances are not the same as a NT apostle/prophet, especially since God destroyed Ananias and Sapphira for lying.

Nowhere is it recorded that the people of Ninevah were aware of Jonah's disobedience, not that it would matter but it is a point that is relevant today.

Also, I don't think that I even brought up a apostle/prophets reputation on moral grounds. I just apply II Corinthians 12:12 for the apostle and Deuteronomy 13:1-5 and Deuteronomy 18:20-22 for the prophet.

The status given to an "apostle" and "prophet" is different. That's why they get the mike and the "layperson" doesn't.

Why should I listen to anyone who doesn't know what they're talking about??

If I don't listen to a layperson then that's just a disagreement.

But if I don't listen to an "apostle/prophet" then Im going against God.

Again Deuteronomy 13:1-5, and Deuteronomy 18:20-22 makes a clear distinction between the prophet and the "layperson".

Ok. Here it is...Matthew 1:1-Revelation 22:21. Anything that looks like the definition I gave at the beginning of this response...that's a miracle.

The ministry which you so want to ascribe to apostles/prophets is not a fruit of their ministry nor is it a fruit of the "generic" believer...so because of the absence of such a ministry my point concerning the modern day apostle/prophet is established because they are not doing it either.

If someone disagrees then prove the contrary...and I'll rejoice with you.

P.S. Jesus said that we would know a false prophet from a true prophet by his "fruits." (Matthew 7:20) What are the fruits? Isn't that different from gifts and/or miracles?

I don't know. Sort of. Maybe. Maybe not. Most likely. It can be. No possible way it can. Probably...not.

a

[augustianian]

Im guessing them and their predecessors ate hummus, were kosher in their diet and wore sandals...so...there was some duplication. You were making the case for discontinuity between OT prophets and their predecessors...I was agreeing with you about them and modern day "apostle/prophets" and NT apostle/prophets...so since you already know what YOU mean by discontinuity (my word not yours...but it fits) take the specific distinctions between the two and let's see if they apply to our conversation.

Yes, no (that depends on what you mean by inconsistently), yes, and no (that depends on what you mean by unpredictably). This is really a question for God and not me. All Im doing is trying to be a good historian and a good exegete. Other than that.......God's not whispering in my ear.

Yes.

a

[MissBrattified]

My brain is too tired to comment after reading all that...but I do like this scripture: (which you provided)

Deut. 18:20-22 "When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."

I like it because I once had a man prophesy doom to me, and because I knew he was being "presumptuous", I knew not to be afraid, no matter how intimidating he was.

[augustianian]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

My brain is too tired to comment after reading all that...but I do like this scripture: (which you provided)

Deut. 18:20-22 "When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."

I like it because I once had a man prophesy doom to me, and because I knew he was being "presumptuous", I knew not to be afraid, no matter how intimidating he was.

A clear example of what a Christian is supposed to do.

a

[augustianian]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I like it because I once had a man prophesy doom to me, and because I knew he was being "presumptuous", I knew not to be afraid, no matter how intimidating he was.

Im a little interested in this story.

What happened...if you want to talk about it??

a