Must all dispensationalists believe in cessation of miracles?

[Guojing]

Man you like to disagree with the word on a regular basis....

Jesus learned to be obedient by the things which he SUFFERED.......and DAVID was chastened of the LORD because of his sins and a cursory read of the Psalms indicates PHYSICAL ailments................and what about the serpents sent among the PEOPLE who were disobedient.......or the man that was given LEPROSY as punishment for disobedience.....

There are exceptions to your hard fast rules.....

Why are you using OT examples to illustrate for the church now? Jesus bore our diseases on the cross, so that we don't have to bear them. Its the same reason why Moses lifted up the bronze serpent in the wilderness (John 3:14-15).

I am disagreeing with your interpretation of the Word, not the Word itself.

 

[Nehemiah6]

It appears that many dispensationalists, such as C R Stam, Les Feldick, and the owner of the blog doctrine.org, all share the view that there is no more miracles of healing for today.

There is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between "no more miracles of healing for today" (which is false) and "no more miraculous spiritual gifts of healing within the churches" (which is true).

The first statement would suggest that God has stopped doing His miracles of healing altogether, whereas they are probably happening on a daily basis all around the world. This is over and above the natural powers of the body to heal itself. But the second statement suggests that the sign gifts have been withdrawn, since the end of the apostolic age. Read Counterfeit Miracles by B. B. Warfield (who was by no means a Dispensationalist).

Cessationists DO NOT believe that miracles have stopped. Every time a soul is saved a miracle takes place. But there are daily miracles of healing directly from God in answer to prayers also. On the other hand, the sign gifts were primarily for the apostles and their companions. That is why James tells Christians what to do for healing in James 5.

As to your *Mid-Acts Dispensationalism*, that is actually Hyper-Dispensationalism, and most Dispensationalists would reject it as nonsense. The Church came into existence on the Day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was poured out from Heaven. And thousands of believing Jews were added to the Church very shortly after.

...And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. (Acts 2:47)

The Church began with believing Jews ("the good olive tree") and believing Gentiles were added to it as branches from "the wild olive tree". See Romans 9-11. And Peter was the one who had the keys of the Kingdom (the Gospel) for both Jews and Gentiles. However, the Mystery of the Church was revealed to Paul in great detail.

 

[glf1]

I believe dispensationalists should cease with their doctrine.

Hey! Locutus... : )
That should be:
I believe that dispensationalists should have ceased with their doctrine.
lol

 

[glf1]

I disagree with this, God uses the Word of God mainly, sometimes he use trials like persecution, but he will never use illnesses to teach us. But I certainly know of many Christians who have a similar view as yours.

Simple reason for my belief is that in Deut 28, even under the law, sickness was never seen as a blessing, and always a curse. What's more under grace.

Its the devil that came to kill steal and destroy. 1 John 3:8 says He that commits sin is of the devil; for the devil sins from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

Hey! Guojing...

27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. 30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. 31For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. 32But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. 33Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.

Yiikes & PTL!

 

[Guojing]

The Church came into existence on the Day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was poured out from Heaven. And thousands of believing Jews were added to the Church very shortly after.

...And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. (Acts 2:47)

The Church began with believing Jews ("the good olive tree") and believing Gentiles were added to it as branches from "the wild olive tree". See Romans 9-11. And Peter was the one who had the keys of the Kingdom (the Gospel) for both Jews and Gentiles. However, the Mystery of the Church was revealed to Paul in great detail.

The problems with believing that the Church began in Pentecost

- There were no Gentiles in the Church until at least after Cornelius, which was after Stephen was stoned. Even then, no one really know the role they play, people assumed they have to do as the Jews did, which is follow the law of Moses, until the council decision in Acts 15.

- Ananias and Sapphira were killed because they lied to the Apostles, there is no unforgivable sin under the new grace dispensation. My pastor, who believe like you, adopts the view that they are not actually saved, because Luke recorded "a certain man". That explanation, to me, is not a very strong one.

- They shared everything they had (Acts 4:32), following what Jesus commanded them in Matthew and Luke. No church practice that now, for very good reasons.

 

[Guojing]

Hey! Guojing...

27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. 30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. 31For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. 32But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. 33Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.

Yiikes & PTL!

Yes, if you don't discern properly, that when you take the bread, you are believing that "by his stripes you are healed", you fail to partake in that healing that Jesus purchased for you by his stripes.

If that is the case, you will be weak and sick. It does not mean Jesus made you sick to teach you anything.

 

[glf1]

Seems there are quite a number here who believe in "rightfully dividing the word of truth". I am a "mid-dispensationalist", meaning that I believed the dispensation of grace began only with the salvation of the Apostle Paul in mid Acts, the mystery program, the church where Jews and Gentiles are equal, began only then at Acts chapter 9.

One thing I am still trying to decide is whether miracle signs of healing have indeed ceased at this age of the church. It appears that many dispensationalists, such as C R Stam, Les Feldick, and the owner of the blog doctrine.org, all share the view that there is no more miracles of healing for today.

Is that necessarily the case? I am in a church where apparently, there are people who testify about miracles of healing. We were also taught that, in Paul's epistles, the word save, saved, or salvation, comes from the greek word "Sozo", which also includes health.

So my question is, can you be a dispensationalist and yet still believe that miracles of healing are for us today? What do the rest think?

Hey! again Guojing... : )

In Jn 14:12 Jesus said, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father."
Jesus also told us that the Spirit wouldn't come unless he went to the Father. And it is the Holy Spirit who ministers the gifts of the Spirit to the Church. The gifts of the Spirit operate by faith and are therefore unavailable to those who do not believe.
Well, Jesus is still with the Father and the same Spirit is still reproving the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgement now as he did when he was first sent to us as our comforter.

Eph 4: 11-13, "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ."

1 Cor 4:20 "For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power."

Jesus is still with the Father, which is the reason Jesus gave to our doing greater works than he did.
Apostles and prophets by definition, prophesy and work miracles and their ministry contributes to the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.
Which we have not attained to as of yet since the church has been adding babes, who need to grow into a perfect man.

 

[Guojing]

Hey! again Guojing... : )

In Jn 14:12 Jesus said, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father."

Great verse, dispensationalists would probably reply to you, he is talking to Jewish disciples, just like they do not think Mark 11:24 is a promise to the church

But I agree with you, I would consider myself one but I still believe miracles of healing are for the Church today. I use the Parable of the Sower to understand why some are healed 30, 60, 100% while others are not healed.

 

[dcontroversal]

Why are you using OT examples to illustrate for the church now? Jesus bore our diseases on the cross, so that we don't have to bear them. Its the same reason why Moses lifted up the bronze serpent in the wilderness (John 3:14-15).

I am disagreeing with your interpretation of the Word, not the Word itself.

NOT really.....and only in your mind.....

 

[presidente]

Seems there are quite a number here who believe in "rightfully dividing the word of truth". I am a "mid-dispensationalist", meaning that I believed the dispensation of grace began only with the salvation of the Apostle Paul in mid Acts, the mystery program, the church where Jews and Gentiles are equal, began only then at Acts chapter 9.

One thing I am still trying to decide is whether miracle signs of healing have indeed ceased at this age of the church. It appears that many dispensationalists, such as C R Stam, Les Feldick, and the owner of the blog doctrine.org, all share the view that there is no more miracles of healing for today.

Is that necessarily the case? I am in a church where apparently, there are people who testify about miracles of healing. We were also taught that, in Paul's epistles, the word save, saved, or salvation, comes from the greek word "Sozo", which also includes health.

So my question is, can you be a dispensationalist and yet still believe that miracles of healing are for us today? What do the rest think?

I would warn against unorthodox doctrine that teaches that Paul's gospel was different from Peter's. Paul baptized Gentiles and Peter taught justification by grace.

Pentecostals are generally dispensational in their eschatology but believe God does miracles.

Not believing the Spirit gift, believers doing miracles and other things because some man draws a line and writes a category on his dispensational chart and says there are no miracles in that time period would be rather foolish.

Something else to keep in mind is how people can hold so their theories so strongly they read them back into scripture.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Or those that believe the church started when Jesus calls out his first two disciples and begin to gather together with them....and NOTE....they are identified as THE CHURCH in the present tense by JESUS CHRIST at least twice before any of the 3 you listed....

Thank you you beat me to it

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I believe god still uses miracles. He heals and performs miracles all the time,

Just not the kind we see in holy roller churches.

 

[Nehemiah6]

- There were no Gentiles in the Church until at least after Cornelius...

And that is exactly how it was supposed to be:...and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. (Acts 1:8). As you can see, the Gospel would go out progressively from Jerusalem, and that would take a little time.

...there is no unforgivable sin under the new grace dispensation.

Again, that is incorrect. There is a sin unto death. Premature death for Christians.
If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. (1 Jn 5:16,17)

- They shared everything they had (Acts 4:32), following what Jesus commanded them in Matthew and Luke. No church practice that now, for very good reasons.

There are still Christian groups such as some Mennonites, the Huttertites and the Amish which share everything. And we also find that the later New Testament churches were not doing what the Jerusalem church did (which was ideal).

 

[Hevosmies]

So my question is, can you be a dispensationalist and yet still believe that miracles of healing are for us today? What do the rest think?

YES.

I know plenty. Most Christians I know are pentecostals, who: as you know believe in prophecy, speaking in tongues, healing, and ALL THAT for today. And they also believe in the pre-trib rapture and I would classify them in the dispensational camp. They believe once the rapture happens God will deal with Israel again and so on.

So the answer is YES YES YES.

 

[Guojing]

And that is exactly how it was supposed to be:...and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. (Acts 1:8). As you can see, the Gospel would go out progressively from Jerusalem, and that would take a little time.

My view is that all the Jews must accept their Gospel of the Kingdom FIRST, before the Gentiles can be reached. Peter is aware of this OT timetable, that was why he was initially very reluctant to go to Cornelius House.

I have had a discussion about this point elsewhere. But if you disagree, well we can agree to disagree here.

Again, that is incorrect. There is a sin unto death. Premature death for Christians.
If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. (1 Jn 5:16,17)

If you want to link this particular sin to the story of A & S to argue your point, you have to explain properly instead of just making a vague reference to this passage. Why do you think this is linked to that Acts account?

Both of them were killed because of lying to the Holy Spirit, which if you look at what Jesus said in the Gospels, was linked to the unforgivable sin. But under the grace dispensation, there is no more such a sin. Christians are not supposed to be in fear, which resulted from their deaths.

 

[Tim416]

Jesus said blasphemy against the Holy Spirit would never be forgiven for the pharisees claimed he healed people by Beelzebub rather than the Spirits power. Makes you think, if spiritual gifts/tongues are genuine today, its a bit risky for anyone to claim they are of anything other than the Holy Spirit

 

[Guojing]

Jesus said blasphemy against the Holy Spirit would never be forgiven for the pharisees claimed he healed people by Beelzebub rather than the Spirits power. Makes you think, if spiritual gifts/tongues are genuine today, its a bit risky for anyone to claim they are of anything other than the Holy Spirit

Saul led the Jews to stone Stephen, who was full of the Holy Spirit, for preaching Jesus. So you could say that Saul committed the blasphemy of the HS.

So why do you think he was forgiven in the end?

 

[Tim416]

Saul led the Jews to stone Stephen, who was full of the Holy Spirit, for preaching Jesus. So you could say that Saul committed the blasphemy of the HS.

So why do you think he was forgiven in the end?

Really? Your reasoning obviously was not Jesus reasoning.

 

[Guojing]

Really? Your reasoning obviously was not Jesus reasoning.

My main point is that there is no unforgivable sin now for the Christian, under the grace dispensation.

If you want to believe there is still one, you have to explain.

 

[Tim416]

My main point is that there is no unforgivable sin now for the Christian, under the grace dispensation.

If you want to believe there is still one, you have to explain.

Discernment is good for a Christian, and we use that discernment, which we are given to understand what is written in the bible. Does a Christian, who has the Holy Spirit in them recognise that which is of the Holy Spirit and that which is not? Now relate that to my quote of Jesus words