Signs and wonders in comparison to the authority of scripture

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Must the Word of God be equipped with signs and wonders to be authoritive?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 17.6%
  • No

    Votes: 12 70.6%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 3 17.6%
  • I do not know

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    17

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,427
4,195
113
#61
Unfortunately, there is a small Pentecostal sect that does misapply one verse out of context. You've probably heard of the snake handling churches. There have always been churches who take verses out of context and plenty of cults will base their primary dogmas upon a small minority of verses wrested out of context. That shouldn't affect the credibility of it's existence though.

There were various times in history when obvious miracles and signs were done by God and shown to multitudes. We look at the time when Moses confronted Pharaoh. There were special miracles to prove that Moses spoke on behalf of the LORD God. God still performs miracles, but He chooses to not perform those particular ones. I asked myself why that is a number of times. I think I know now.

When the Apostles carried out the great commission, there was only the O.T. available. Why should multitudes of people trust anything these Preachers said?
1. They used the Scriptures they had available just as Jesus used....Moses and the prophets. OT.
2. Much like Jesus, they were seeing many healed at their meetings. Israel already had plenty of reasons to believe the teachings of the Messiah/ Christ. They had plenty of reason to believe the teaching of the Apostles too. It did not contradict the OT. Noble churches like those in Berea searched the Scriptures they had to evaluate the truth of the apostles' teaching. With them, it wasn't a matter of needing to see any signs or wonders.

You mentioned verse 18. If the critical text translators and publishers don't believe that verse, should they not be honest and exclude them from their bibles? I think so.

I might be in the minority, but I don't believe that it is an isolated passage: Perhaps because I'm not in the minority. I believe the T.R. as it was not trusting a manuscript or two...(Critical Text.) It used the Majority of texts.. We see that verse to be true in one of Paul's experiences.

There are dozens of examples of God miraculously protecting his people in the O.T. He confirms the end of Mark's gospel in Acts 28:1-11

"
  1. And when they were escaped, then they knew that the island was called Melita.
  2. 2 And the barbarous people shewed us no little kindness: for they kindled a fire, and received us every one, because of the present rain, and because of the cold.
  3. 3 And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand.
  4. 4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live.
  5. 5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm.
  6. 6 Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.
  7. 7 In the same quarters were possessions of the chief man of the island, whose name was Publius; who received us, and lodged us three days courteously.
  8. 8 And it came to pass, that the father of Publius lay sick of a fever and of a bloody flux: to whom Paul entered in, and prayed, and laid his hands on him, and healed him.
  9. 9 So when this was done, others also, which had diseases in the island, came, and were healed:
  10. 10 Who also honoured us with many honours; and when we departed, they laded us with such things as were necessary.
  11. 11 And after three months we departed in a ship of Alexandria, which had wintered in the isle, whose sign was Castor and Pollux."
This was perhaps a sea snake that took shelter from the storm on the shore as some species are known to do. Drop for drop, sea snakes have some of the most potent venom in the world. Any other time, these people were used to seeing the bite victim die. Paul did not because God miraculously intervened. He used the opportunity to doubtless lead many of these pagans on the island to Christ.

We see the passage at the end of Mark make a lot of sense IMHO. I believe that God still can and often does protect His servants. I've experienced many miracles of healing and protection. I have rough drafts of books filled with those events. If I ever have children, I hope that their faith will be strengthened by the answers to prayers and miracles in those books. However, they won't need miracles to confirm God's Word, because they will be taught the Bible from the start and never turned over to the heathen schools.
Even strangers come to know Christ as their Savior when I witness to them. Why?
The Holy Spirit Who lives within me performs His ministry (John 16:8-11). Also, The gospel is the power of God unto salvation, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

☕🙂👍📖
I believe they are in context because if you can take that we are to heal, speak in tongues in the same paragraph as drinking poison then why do they not remote that as much as healing and tongues?
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
4,779
1,901
113
#62
The logic is sound when if you have letters in formation during the first century then they are typically viewed as being more authentic that letters in the 600s A.D.
By "letters" do you mean the epistles?
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
4,779
1,901
113
#66
No I should of said manuscripts.
Okay, I thought you meant something like that. I just wanted to make sure you didn't mean the individual Greek letters.

The problem is no one knows if Sinaiticus, for example, is in formation or if it has altered something that came before it. That's why I say it's not sound. The textual critics have gotten way ahead of themselves in a rush to judgement.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,427
4,195
113
#67
Okay, I thought you meant something like that. I just wanted to make sure you didn't mean the individual Greek letters.

The problem is no one knows if Sinaiticus, for example, is in formation or if it has altered something that came before it. That's why I say it's not sound. The textual critics have gotten way ahead of themselves in a rush to judgement.
Well with any field of science, it is healthy to always be critical and to continue looking for truth even if you believe it has already been found.

Faith is required in any historical field of science because just like Alexander the Great we only have manuscripts centuries after his death.

Look at the book of Genesis and the origin of Earth and the universe. We merely assume the book is making a scientific claim when the culture during Moses's life did not have the mindset of a science book. We assume and make our opinions based on our interpretation versus the interpretation of the author.

Regardless, I believe the text has been preserved accurately by textual criticism. The Latin Vulgate was not the best in accuracy but as Christians rediscovered the Greek language they began to study the earlier sources which exposed errors in the later sources.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
4,779
1,901
113
#68
Well with any field of science, it is healthy to always be critical and to continue looking for truth even if you believe it has already been found.

Faith is required in any historical field of science because just like Alexander the Great we only have manuscripts centuries after his death.

Look at the book of Genesis and the origin of Earth and the universe. We merely assume the book is making a scientific claim when the culture during Moses's life did not have the mindset of a science book. We assume and make our opinions based on our interpretation versus the interpretation of the author.

Regardless, I believe the text has been preserved accurately by textual criticism. The Latin Vulgate was not the best in accuracy but as Christians rediscovered the Greek language they began to study the earlier sources which exposed errors in the later sources.
I believe it's still an open question and will be until more evidence comes in.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,427
4,195
113
#70
I believe it's still an open question and will be until more evidence comes in.
That is why it is best to cross examine any manuscript that contains scriptures.

Due to fact we do not have the originals so we only have copies of the originals. Which have been copied over centuries and mass produced after the invention of the printing press.

It also helps to compare the writings of early church fathers in relation to the manuscripts. The early church fathers still had their theological differences based on interpretation but they also quoted many scriptures.

I will add that out of the many manuscripts the message and verses really have stayed quite accurate from my studies of this. Of course, they can account for scribes who misspelled, added commentary, or repeated scriptures.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
19,688
10,281
113
#71
The problem is no one knows if Sinaiticus, for example, is in formation or if it has altered something that came before it.
Actually both Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus have been shown to be thoroughly corrupt manuscripts. As a result, they survived (having been cast aside and not used). Their age means nothing since the corruption of the Scripture by the Gnostics began very early. Conservative textual scholars are convinced that the manuscripts of later dates are more reliable. Then there are the lectionaries, the patristic quotations, and the bibles of the Greek Orthodox Church to refute all the corruptions.
 

Pilgrimshope

Well-known member
Sep 2, 2020
8,193
3,170
113
#72
In relation to the signs and wonders that Jesus did and of the Apostles, I have come across a teaching that states that the Word alone if not equipped with signs and wonders like Jesus portrayed and that of the Apostles then the Word will not be as effective as it could be.

As to not muddy the water, I'll hold my opinion.
“And the LORD said unto Moses, Stretch out thine hand toward heaven, that there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, even darkness which may be felt.

And Moses stretched forth his hand toward heaven; and there was a thick darkness in all the land of Egypt three days:”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭10:21-22‬ ‭KJV‬‬

When God speaks the creation moves according to its creators word

The word of God moves the natural things he commands the elements

“And there arose a great storm of wind, and the waves beat into the ship, so that it was now full. And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm.

And they feared exceedingly, and said one to another, What manner of man is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭4:37, 39, 41‬ ‭KJV‬‬

of course Gods word is accompanied by signs and miraculous events that’s why the gospel has stood the test of time Gods word always proves itself true

this doesn’t mean that everyone who believes the gospel is going to perform miracles though that is a specific spiritual gift for specific chosen people

“And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭12:28-30‬ ‭KJV‬‬

The answer is no all Christian’s don’t have all the spiritual gifts one speaks in diversity of tongues other receives the gift of prophecy another receives e first of miracle working still another the gift of healing

The miraculous events and signs and wonders were for the intent of establishing the gospel as truth

“how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord,

and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭2:3-4‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Because they all saw Jesus risen from the dead , they saw him walk on water , because the people saw Paul raise a dead boy , they saw peters shadow heal people , they witnessed the prison fall down while they prayed and sang hymns

a they saw Paul get bitten by a deadly snake and shake it off like a bee sting because of all of the wotnesses of th we in explainable events wotnessed by many many people the word of God the gospel is still believed and preached to this day

certain things for certain people and always for certain situations that are going to impact and be a witness to glorify Jesus Christ in earth
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,427
4,195
113
#73
Actually both Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus have been shown to be thoroughly corrupt manuscripts. As a result, they survived (having been cast aside and not used). Their age means nothing since the corruption of the Scripture by the Gnostics began very early. Conservative textual scholars are convinced that the manuscripts of later dates are more reliable. Then there are the lectionaries, the patristic quotations, and the bibles of the Greek Orthodox Church to refute all the corruptions.
Well until you or I become scholars in the field then we are only left to the debate between scholars who say those codexes or manuscripts are great sources compared to the scholars you support who say there not.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
19,688
10,281
113
#74
Well until you or I become scholars in the field then we are only left to the debate between scholars who say those codexes or manuscripts are great sources compared to the scholars you support who say there not.
No. Facts are facts. So you can either accept them or reject them. The matter is not even debatable.

This is just like the matter of the lethal bioweapons called "COVID vaccines". They are killing people every day and have already killed millions. But the establishment is still lying about them, just like Westcott & Hort lied about the text of the Bible, and the establishment critics continue to lie.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,427
4,195
113
#75
No. Facts are facts. So you can either accept them or reject them. The matter is not even debatable.

This is just like the matter of the lethal bioweapons called "COVID vaccines". They are killing people every day and have already killed millions. But the establishment is still lying about them, just like Westcott & Hort lied about the text of the Bible, and the establishment critics continue to lie.
Okay. But your relying on someone who claimed something to be a fact. While there are other scholars who disagree. So how can you say fact without hands on experience in the field? We often make the mistake of appealing to authority but for the layman, authority is all we have to study from. The problem is that we are finite, confined by location, can only retain so much, and have access to only so much.

So while scholars debate we have to in faith believe the Spirit has also worked within the many manuscripts providing us the assurance to believe our modern Bibles.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
19,688
10,281
113
#76
Okay. But your relying on someone who claimed something to be a fact.
When there is actual documentation, photographs, collation of manuscripts, and corroboration by others, it is no longer opinions, but facts. Here is the space from which Mark 16:9-20 has been deliberately omitted from Codex Sinaiticus. And the BLATANT LIE is that only TWO corrupt documents have this flaw. All the rest have the last twelve verses of Mark.

 

Edify

Well-known member
Jan 27, 2021
778
287
63
#77
But the question is, are the miracles required in order for the Word to be authoritative? Must you raise the dead or drink poison and live while preaching the Word of God for the Words to be effective?
When the Holy Spirit convicts the heat of sinners black & cold, isn't that the most important sign/miracle of all?
 
Jan 31, 2023
56
11
8
#78
This doctrine of whether are not Apostles are still for today has divided many... but from what I've seen, they still exist, as do evangelists.