Important question about God's silence and lack of miracles

[jlay]

That argument cuts both ways.

I understand what Bart is saying, and in one sense agree. But Quoting John 21:25 IMO is not a valid example to defend that position, since it is just as fallacious to assume that miracles did happen, as much as it is to assume they didn't. Actually it would seem more fallacious to assume something happened when there is no record of it. The fact that all of Jesus' miracles were not recorded is not evidence for miracles happening in other time periods, and that they simply were not recorded. This argument, although it doesn't say it direclty implies (at least too me) that since we know that all of Jesus' miracles weren't recorded, there were likely to be other miracles in different times and places that also went unrecorded. Could there be miracles in these times and places? Possibly. But using John 21:25 to suggest such isn't valid. No perhaps Bart is not implying that in this statement, and if so I apologize. There is a lot we can learn about miracles from the scriptures, and I think we can draw valid conclusions that miracles, in a specific sense, are not happening as such today.

What we have to do is examine how and why miracles occur in the scriptures. Perhaps we shouldn't say that no miracles occured in the period between the final OT writing of Malachi and Jesus' earthly minsitry. We'd have to be omniscient and omnipresent to say that. However, we can conclude that none were happening to merit recording, or to indicate that God was communicating new revelation, or in a way consistent with miracles as recorded in the scirptures. (unless your RCC)
Miracles are tied to a specific person or persons and to a specific revelation from God to man. They are not random or arbitrary. So, we can look at biblical patterns and draw conclusions about miracles, and whether they were happening in the same fashion as they were in the 1st century. For example, I think a proper conclusion is that NO ONE for the last 1900+ years has walked in any authority such as what we see in the apostolic church. Miracles, in that sense, ARE NOT happening. That doesn't mean that no miracles have happened. But, that they are overwhlemingly the exception. This wasn't the case in the 1st century. Miracles invloving Jesus and the apostolic church were common. Matt 4:23, Acts 5:16 They were observed and verified. Even the critics are recorded as testifying to there authenticity.

Miracles in the bible are essentially tied to Moses, Elijah and Elisha, Jesus and the apostles. There are other examples but they are isolated and minute. Anytime miracles of note happened they focused on a person, and how God was working through that person to reveal new information from God regarding His plans in the earth.

We are told that false signs and wonders WILL occur, even deceiving the elect. (Matt 24:24) So, if miracles are being claimed and they do not follow these distinct patterns we see evidenced over 1,500 years of scripture, then would we not would be wise to be highly suspect?

The reason many today claim miracles is because they sncerely want to believe what the bible teaches. Ask and you shall receive.... Seek ye 1st the Kingdom of God..... This is in the scripture, no question. But this isn't a matter of whether it is in ther scripture, but how one divides the reading of the scripture and applies it.
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." (Mark 16:15-18)
Who are them that believe? The apostles. No. They are the one's in all the world who are baptized.
We saw this very thing begin on Pentecost, and later even saw Gentiles speak in these tongues. Yet it ends. Yet the context says this applies to those who believe all over the world. But even before all the apsotles died we essentially see this program fade away.

[Legatus]

I largely agree with jlay on this one (maybe for slightly different reasons but it comes out the same either way).


First it should be noted that when I talked about miracles recorded in the bible, I was talking about great miracles of note, and even more about bunches and bunches of miracles. If those had happened, even if they were not in the bible, we would have heard about it. There may well have been an occasional miracles on about the frequency we see today, rare but not unheard of. However, bunches and bunches of miracles are only recorded (in the bible OR outside it) in the time of people who God wanted us to notice and listen to, especially Jesus and the apostles. God only did bunches and bunches when he had a specific reason to do so.


First, it is true that during the 400 years of silence after the last recorded prophet and Jesus (actually John the baptis and two prophets in the temple where Jesus was sacrified for when he was a baby) there may indeed have been both speaking through prophets and miracles. However, none of the speakings were important enough to record, or said anything that God had not already said, and there may have been an occasional rare miracle, but not enough to attract attention. God had prophecied specific signs, miracles, when the messiah would come, and God waited till then to do them.


Also, once again, Pentacost was a one off, it was prophecied to happen, and it did. That doesn't mean that we can expect a contunual seccession of Pentacosts, because that was not prophecied. God gave specific power, as prophecied, to witness to the Jews, who knew that prophecy, which is why God had told them to look for that prophecy happening Acts 2:16 Acts 2:17 Acts 2:18 , so they would listen to those to whom it happened. God specifically said that all do not speak in tongues or do miracles, so we cannot demand that, we cannot demand endless unprophecied pentacosts. The other miracles were also prophecied, even to telling what kind of miracles they would be, to show that the massiah had come Mat 11:2 Mat 11:3 .Mat 11:4 Mat 11:5 Mat 11:6. To keep doing them in big bunches would confuse people about who the messiah was and who his apostles were 2 Cor 12:12 ( "superapostles" .2 Cor 11:5 2 Cor 12:11 and false prophets try to fake it though, then and now). They were prophecied for a specific time only and when that had been fullfilled they went (largely) away.


As for the signs that follow them that believe, two things should be noted. First, reading ONLY what it says, and also what it does NOT say, it never said that those signs would happen in great big bunches all the time. An occasional miracle, as we see today, is all that is nessissary to make what Jesus said completly true. Also, he was specifically speaking to the apostles, who did these signs, and in great big bunches. Thus while it is true that God did say miracles could happen to any believer, he only does them in bunches for very specific reasons (which have already happened and are not prophecied to happen in those big bunches again).


Also, there is more to belief that just beleiving in Jesus miracle wise. Of course, if you don't beleive in Jesus, forget it, however, you also need a few other things. For instance, you have to not only believe that he is, but that he is a rewarder of those who dilligently seek him, basically that God can answer prayer, that if you pray, something may happen, that God can indeed do miracles. Then comes the hard part, you must also know that God does not HAVE to do a miracle, that is the hard part of faith, which could be called TRUST. One way to get that trust is if God specifically says he will do a specific thing, he speaks to someone and says "tell that cripple to get up and walk", and it happens (yes, this actually happened a while back, once, just once, the next day they brought another cripple, God did NOT say it, he stayed crippled). The hard way is when God says he will do a specific thing, and then it happens years later, as in my previous post, this is rather common (be carefull what you ask for, you might get it!). Trust includes trusting that God will know when to do just what you ask for, and when NOT to. You cannot demand miracles, and God never said you could, anywhere. God said that you can ask, and if you don't aks you can expect nothing to happen, but he also said that if you ask with wrong motives you also won't get it James 4:2 You want something but don't get it. You kill and covet, but you cannot have what you want. You quarrel and fight. You do not have, because you do not ask God. James 4:3 When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures. In short, beleif includes trust, trust that God may say yes, or no, or wait, if you are not willing to accept whatever God's answer is, do you really believe? This goes with the two big truths of life: 1.There is a God 2.Your not it.



Conclusion, there were prophecies of bunches of miracles of specific kinds when the messiah would come and when his apostles would speak for him, they happened. There are no such prophecies of bunches of miracles given about YOU, so you cannot expect them.

Jesus did say that any beleiver could see miracles, but never said how many miracles, so we can beleive that they may happen, but, since there are no specific prophecies about how many, we can expect them to be rather rare (there being no prophecied messiahs or aposltes around). If we are really a believer we should beleive that God will know when to do or not do any miracle. Let god be God.

[Canuckster1127]

Seems like a great deal of circular logic to me.

But in any event, I stand by my statement. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. Beyond that I make no other comments other than to note that miracles are recorded in many instances outside of scriptures in apocraphyl and so-called pseudopigraphal writings and they have to be assessed on their own merits.

As I noted, it's very common in western philosophy and culture, imbedded as it is in skepticism to minimize and diminish the hand of God. I'm not a particularly charismatic or miracle seeking kind of guy. I'm not prepared however to presume to limit my sense of God's power or to attempt to systematize to where I reject the possibility of God moving. As I've noted before, Christianity in the west and the US is not the whole. In fact, most of the growth and impetus of spiritual growth in Christianity is outside of western Christianity now. As a member and worker in the past in one of the largest missionary church organizations who still tracks and maintaing contacts with many of those missionaries and support workers in contexts outside of western views, there are a great deal of reports that in the end can be written off or accepted as possible pretty much at the will and to fit the preconceived notions of the hearer.

I'm skeptical by nature, but I retain enough or am growing enough in the realm of the mystical and appreciation for the spiritual renewals taking place now and in the past, that I'm not prepared to declare what God can or will not do and I make no apologies for that.

[neo-x]

While have a good point Jilay & Leg, but as you yourself said it cuts both ways. However, the simple fact is that a lot of activity is not recorded in the Bible, Paul's travels, acts and epistles seriously outnumber peter or other disciples, a prime example of how material can be left out, even if it is important. The Bible certainly doesn't record every second of someone's life or activity.

Could there be miracles in these times and places? Possibly. But using John 21:25 to suggest such isn't valid.

I would say it is a logical conclusion, rather than an invalid statement.

[jlay]

Sure, a lot of activity is not recorded in the bible. But what does that prove? We don't need to speculate that Jesus and the apostles performed other miracles. We KNOW based on the recorded facts that they did. There was a very clear supernatural annointing on their life. So, of course it is fair and consistent to say that they likely performed other miracles that were not recorded. We can look at the scriptures and find consistency because of what is recorded. It is a far different matter to then make assumptions and apply that to the inter-testament perior and to the post apostolic period.

Now, if people are walking in that annointing today, or in the last however many years, guess what? It will be OBVIOUS. I have a theological reason to believe it isn't. One that, as I have shown, holds to a scriptural standard.

My argument is not that 'a' miracle has not happened since the time of the apostles. My argument is that activity as we see surrounding Jesus, the Apostles, Moses, Elijah is NOT happening today. If it is then you are welcome to present your evidence.

I would say it is a logical conclusion, rather than an invalid statement.

If you are going to follow it logically then it has to be consistent with the text.

"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written."
The context is Jesus. The time (He did them) is His earthly minsitry. So, how do you logically conclude that this applies to miracles in the inter-testament period, and the last 1,900+ years?

The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

Known evidence is not evidence for the unknown.

I 100% agree that we can not limit God. We can limit our own perceptions. We should not be so skeptical in our minds to limit our receiving something genuine that may be happening today. But we also shouldn't ignore the patterns within the scripture, or Jesus' warnings Himself about future times regarding false signs and wonders.

I often would wonder how so many will be deceived until I see how desperate so many Christians are to see, "supernatural stuff." Not saying this is the case for anyone posting here, only saying that it most certainly is a reality today.

[neo-x]

My argument is not that 'a' miracle has not happened since the time of the apostles. My argument is that activity as we see surrounding Jesus, the Apostles, Moses, Elijah is NOT happening today. If it is then you are welcome to present your evidence.

I would say it is a logical conclusion, rather than an invalid statement.

If you are going to follow it logically then it has to be consistent with the text.

"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written."
The context is Jesus. The time (He did them) is His earthly minsitry. So, how do you logically conclude that this applies to miracles in the inter-testament period, and the last 1,900+ years?

The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

Known evidence is not evidence for the unknown.

John 21:25 25, does not of course applies to the last 1900 years or the inter-testament period, but it was in support to the point that not everything is summed up or recorded. If it can happen to Jesus, it can happen to anyone.

Anyways, I agree with you all the way on this

I 100% agree that we can not limit God. We can limit our own perceptions. We should not be so skeptical in our minds to limit our receiving something genuine that may be happening today. But we also shouldn't ignore the patterns within the scripture, or Jesus' warnings Himself about future times regarding false signs and wonders.

I often would wonder how so many will be deceived until I see how desperate so many Christians are to see, "supernatural stuff." Not saying this is the case for anyone posting here, only saying that it most certainly is a reality today.

We should discern rather than blindly believe in anything that makes a miraculous claim, just saying that we also shouldn't just automatically sign off everything that has a claim.

[jlay]

If it can happen to Jesus, it can happen to anyone.

Can you elaborate a little more on what you are saying here? I want to be clear on what you are saying. My 1st impressions are not good. Nothing, "happened" to Jesus. Jesus happened to the world. My 1st reading of this makes the miraculous work of Christ come across as arbitrary. It happened to Jesus, it can happen to anyone? What is the scriptural defense? Maybe I'm reading it wrong.

John 21:25 25, does not of course applies to the last 1900 years or the inter-testament period, but it was in support to the point that not everything is summed up or recorded.

My reading of how it was used was that it implied much more than the fact that Jesus and the apostles performed miracles that were left unrecorded. But that similar things may be happening in these other time periods and today. But this logic falls into the same pit it accuses others of digging. We are told somethings aren't recorded. That is an evidential statement. But the evidence doesn't prove any miracle, and it only speaks to the subjects at hand. Say we are reading a book on NASA, regarding the 1960 space race. The book says there were many other space flights by NASA that weren't recorded in this book. That is a claim for those things. But only as it relates to the context. It wouldn't be sound to say that this is evidence for space flight in the 1920s. It would be a fallacy to think that we can reason, "We should be open to space flight in the 1920s because the book says that other space flights happened."

On the other hand, in John 21 we have specific instances involving specific people. For example, we are told that Jesus did other things. In Mark, we are told that the disciples were sent out 2 by 2 with supernatural anointing. We aren't told with elaborate detail what they did, but it is perfectly fair to assume that they did miracles. It isn't fair to take that fact, and then liberally apply it to these other times, or today. That is not sound logic. "We know there were other miracles performed by Jesus that aren't recorded, therefore there are other miracles happening in these other times that are not recorded." That fails. Whether you say it plainly like that, or you infer it.

Today, it is impossible to argue that things are happening like that. Not that any miracle hasn't happened. Someone may pray the prayer of faith, and receive healing. Is that a miracle? Yes. But, is it because a person was operating in the same authority and power as Christ and the Apostles? Did a person get in the shadow of a believer and receive healing? No. If miracles happen, they are personal.

[neo-x]

Can you elaborate a little more on what you are saying here? I want to be clear on what you are saying. My 1st impressions are not good. Nothing, "happened" to Jesus. Jesus happened to the world. My 1st reading of this makes the miraculous work of Christ come across as arbitrary. It happened to Jesus, it can happen to anyone? What is the scriptural defense? Maybe I'm reading it wrong.

Oh, I just meant that if the whole account of Jesus life wasn't penned down, so why should I expect someone's else's? Nothing more than that.

Today, it is impossible to argue that things are happening like that. Not that any miracle hasn't happened. Someone may pray the prayer of faith, and receive healing. Is that a miracle? Yes. But, is it because a person was operating in the same authority and power as Christ and the Apostles? Did a person get in the shadow of a believer and receive healing? No. If miracles happen, they are personal.

Hmm, you seem pretty sure that no one can do what they did. tell me then, how do you interpret John 14:12-14 "I tell you the truth. The person that believes in me will do the same things I have done. Yes! He will do even greater things than I have done. Why? Because I am going to the Father. And if you ask for anything in my name, I will do it for you. Then the Father's glory will be shown through the Son. If you ask me for anything in my name, I will do it.""

It isn't fair to take that fact, and then liberally apply it to these other times, or today. That is not sound logic. "We know there were other miracles performed by Jesus that aren't recorded, therefore there are other miracles happening in these other times that are not recorded." That fails. Whether you say it plainly like that, or you infer it.

I am not saying that Jesus did miracles so today they must happen, I am saying that if all the miracles of Jesus did not get recorded,it shows fairly that this may very well be case with a lot of other miracles happening at later times. It is a possibility at least.

It would be a logical fallacy to use the NASA analogy, first a space race is not the issue here, a shuttle would certainly be reported one way or the other, a miracle may not. Second if you insist on using it, then perhaps I will say that instead of 1920, I would say why not 1980, we are talking about whether those miracles happened after the ministry of Jesus or the apostles, not before. Why would you assign it a prior date, we are not talking about that.

Btw you are inferring your conclusion, the same way you are refuting mine. why not in the light of the above quoted verse you can't assume that somewhere people could still have that kind of power given by God and you simply didn't come across it. would that not be fair to assume?

[jlay]

John 14:12-14 "I tell you the truth. The person that believes in me will do the same things I have done. Yes! He will do even greater things than I have done. Why? Because I am going to the Father. And if you ask for anything in my name, I will do it for you. Then the Father's glory will be shown through the Son. If you ask me for anything in my name, I will do it.""

The context of John 14 is Jesus teaching the 12 an intimate teaching about what? The outpouring of the spirit at Pentecost. This is where Jesus introduces that the HS will come to them after He is gone, so that they can continue the preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom. (John 14:16)
There is little question what Jesus said. The person that believes in Him WILL do the same things. Jesus raised the dead, and performed many miracles.

Now there are a few ways to handle this verse.
The first explanation is simple. In this context, the 'same things' Jesus referred to were not miracles. The Last I checked, Christians are not raising people from the dead and performing other miracles. You might say there are instances of this happening. But they are spurious at best, and I would challenge you to provide any personal witness or participation of this. I can assure you that no one here can provide me first hand testimony that someone raised another from the dead, or restored a withered hand. I am not saying that infirmaties haven't been healed. I'm saying it is clear that a specific believer has not raised someone back to life. There is a difference here. A crucial mistake is being made here. I repeat for the umpteenth time. I am NOT saying that miracles do not happen. I am speaking to the specifics of what we see in the bible regarding individuals operating in obvious supernatural authority.

2nd: Jesus was speaking to His disciples only. They most certainly did the things (Miracles) that Jesus did.

3rd. Jesus was referring to the time of the restored Kingdom of Israel. Depending on your theology, we would expect exactly that to happen. More miracles. As the Messiah was received, Israel would be restored, The commission would be preached and demonstrated in power, with tongues, miracles, etc. Every corner of the Earth would be impacted and drawn to Messiah through these signs and wonders. Even Gentiles. All believers would undergo physical water baptism, receive the outpouring of the HS at the laying on of hands, and would walk in apostolic power.

4th. There are no real believers today, or so few that we rarely if ever even hear of a verifiable, genuine miracle. If you are going to read John 14 the way you are, and consistently apply it, then my question to you is, if you are a believer, why aren't you doing "these things?" You are welcome to read John 14:12-14 they way you are, but IMO, this would only raise more questions about your own personal salvation than anything else. FWIW, in my reading of it, I have no reason to doubt your salvation.

5th. The Bible is false.

It would be a logical fallacy to use the NASA analogy, first a space race is not the issue here, a shuttle would certainly be reported one way or the other, a miracle may not. Second if you insist on using it, then perhaps I will say that instead of 1920, I would say why not 1980, we are talking about whether those miracles happened after the ministry of Jesus or the apostles, not before. Why would you assign it a prior date, we are not talking about that.

You failed to show how that is fallacious. Everything in history is not recoreded, that's your point, no? So what if you say 1980? We could examine the context of the statement, examine the evidence of the 80s, and conclude, yes, other flights did happen. The reason I assign a prior date is because the intertestament period between Malachi and Matthew was mentioned in this thread. It's an analogy. Not all things being compared are analogous. It's kind of an essential element in reasoning with analogy. For example I wouldn't compare a space walk with Jesus walking on water. This is about recorded history and how we can make conclusions about what may or may not have happened.

why not in the light of the above quoted verse you can't assume that somewhere people could still have that kind of power given by God and you simply didn't come across it. would that not be fair to assume?

Simple. I'm a beliver, and I know hundreds of other believers personally, and thousands of others. And not one has this power. Do you?
I seriously doubt someone operating in this power as Jesus did on Earth is going to escape notice. Today or anytime in history.

It is a possibility at least.

Neo, we'd both agree that miracles are possible. What we don't agree on is individual persons operating is apostolic power. I conclude based on a conistent theology that individuals are NOT doing such.
Based on how you are reading the scriptures, I can see how you would think that they are.
I do believe miracles are possible today. I also believe that there will be a time on the Earth when believers will operate in signs and wonders, just as Jesus said. Which was my reason for participating in this thread. That there is a theological position that explains the question in the OP.

[neo-x]

Neo, we'd both agree that miracles are possible. What we don't agree on is individual persons operating is apostolic power. I conclude based on a conistent theology that individuals are NOT doing such.
Based on how you are reading the scriptures, I can see how you would think that they are.
I do believe miracles are possible today. I also believe that there will be a time on the Earth when believers will operate in signs and wonders, just as Jesus said. Which was my reason for participating in this thread. That there is a theological position that explains the question in the OP

Thanks for clearing that up, I was mistakenly under the impression that you were claiming two opposite things at once, that miracles may happen and then asserting that there is a good possibility, they can not. I see your position now.

God bless.

[DRDS]

Some examples of times when God did not seem to be doing much in the way of miracles:

God did miracles and spoke around the time of the patriarchs,Abraham,Isaac and jacob,as well as Joseph to some extent. Then...400 years and no miracles.
You will note that this was the time of basically the founding of the jewish nation that was to result in the messiah, thus the miracles are quite likely to be of the type to attract our attention to these people so that we will know that God is up to something important here.

God did miracles and spoke a LOT around the time of Moses.
You will note that Moses wrote the law, as well as wrote a large part of the early old testiment, including parts of Genesis where only God, speaking to Moses, could have known of those events since they were long before Moses was born, in some cases way way before Moses was born, even at the start before anyone had been born. It was thus important that God do these miracles and speak since this stuff was the foundation of the bible and God wants us to see that.

God did some miracles and spoke around the time of the prophets, to the first kings, and later to following prophets, although following prophets there was more speaking than miracles.
The time periods between miracles was sometimes quite long, and usually coencided with someone whome God wanted people to REALLY listen to, even to our day.

There was a 400 year period of dead silence and no miracles between the last prophets (who people largly ignored) and Jesus. This was not because there were no beleivers then, since there were some even around the time of Jesus's birth, which shows that some beleived even during that 400 years of silence.

There was a world record of miracles during the time of Jesus and the apostles, which stopped when all the apostles had been verified by those miracles as such.
You note here that this was something God wanted us to REALLY notice, and people whome God wanted us to REALLY listen to.

The conclusion from that is that when God wants us to notice someones words, God will often use miracles to show us that God is the one behind those words, to show that this is my chosen prophet, or Son, or apostle, basically to act as a witness . When God has finished what God had to say, and it is written down and thus available to all, God will stop doing miracles in bunches since the purpose of those miracles was to act as a witness and that has been accomplished. There may be an occasional miracle here and there, as there are still to this day, but not in bunches, not enough to attract our attention that something special is going on like a major prophet, the messiah, or an apostle, someones whoes words should be added to the bible. The bible having been finished, we can expect no more bunches of miracles.

As for individuals, the previous quote from The Screwtape Letters (in this thread) is appropriet, from the following examples:

Abraham, God spoke, then it was years before he spoke again to Abraham, so many years that Abraham had given up hope for a son.

Jacob had one dream, it was then 14 years till God actually met him (during which time there were years of hard work, being cheated on a wife and wages, etc), it had been so long that Jacob actually tried to wrestle with God since it seemed God had abandoned him and his brother Esau was coming to kill him (God then dislocated his hip to prevent him from running for the hills and never being seen again). Note, one dream (was that really God??) followed by 14 years of silence.

Joseph had a dream, and then spend 13 years as a slave in a foriegn country, some of it in jail, before anything actually happen (then, it happened all at once).

Moses was miraclulously saved from being killed in Egypt as a baby, and then was a prince in Egypt for 40 years, and was sure that with his military prowess (he had rallied the Egyptial army successfully versus the Ethiopians) he could then start a Jewish revolt. Instead, he had to run off into the desert and tend someone elses sheep for 40 long years before God spoke to him for the first time. Note, he was raised as an Egyptian, and Egytians considered shepards as the lowest of the low, and Moses wasn't even a shepard of his own sheep.

David was anointed by a miracles doing prophet as king of Israel, killed Goliath, and spent time in the current kings palace, even marrying the kings daughter. He was then run off and spent many years hiding, sometimes having to be fed by his family coming out to keep him from starving. He eventually despaired of his life in Israel and ran off to the Philistines. Shortly after that he sudenly (relativly speaking) became king of Isreal. Being anointed, seening good things happen, then many long years of Gods silence and bad things happening, I begin to see a pattern here...

The apostles, lets take John for example, Jesus does miracles, John does miracles, lots of miracles for a while, then they slow to a crawl, and John eventually finds himself a slave in a salt mine for a long time, while God is silent. Only after a while of that does God show up and send the Revelation (to show John that God still had things under control, knew what was coming, and was coming again to set things right). First, lots of miracles, then dead silence and John in a salt mine.

Paul the apostle, lots of miracles, then, they slow and basically stop, and Paul is eventually not rescued by God when he is executed (as he had been earlier).

We see a regular pattern here, as seen in Screwtape, of God often starting off with speaking and even miracles, followed by years of dead silence.
For bunches of miracles, we see God doing them only when God wants to point our attention to someone God wants us to REALLY listen to, like the patriarchs, Moses the lawgiver, the prophets, and Jesus and the apostles. When those sorts of people are not around, there is an accasional miracle and nothing more, never bunches of miracles.

And as for a miracle that God did (only one) to point us to something that God wants us to listen to, see my link earlier in this thread to the audio of "Breaking the Silence" originally released as a tape by "Focus on the Family". In this tape, just (and I mean JUST) as the miracle is about to happen, the speaker talks about how yes, God CAN do miracles, but he may not, and just as he was saying that often God would allow "pit" experiences (very bad, no miracles, silence), when it seems God had abandoned him, yet he had accepted Gods will anyway, his voice was healed right on the word "pit". I think this is something God was pointing us to, that we should accept God even if he seems silent and not doing anything (that we can see).

Thanks for this AMAZING insight. This has helped so much thanks greatly! I was also wondering, what all do you know about the inner witness of the Holy Spirit? I've still have been trying to understand this issue since people like William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga see this as something legitimate and legitimately from God and not just a strange feeling that people concoct within themselves (see chrismatics to see what I mean). What I've seen lately from many Christian sites that I've been to states that the Holy Spirit's inner witness doesn't happen very much but during times of major decisions or times where a believer could be facing a serious trial or hard time, the Holy Spirit will either warn this person with a feeling of uneasiness or a indication to be on alert. And other times, the Holy Spirit will give the believer feelings of comfort and peace when they are either making the right decision about something or for when they need comfort during very hard times.

Now from what you know is THAT the way or one real way that the Holy Spirit's inner witness speaks to us? If not do you happen to know what the right way the Holy Spirit or a way the Holy Spirit communicates with our spirit? Thanks again for your time, God bless.

[Legatus]

Well, this one is a bit iffy. I mean, there is no where in the bible where it is said that the Holy Spirit will witness like so. The examples of God speaking from the bible are varied, and seem to change depending on who God is talking to and when. For instance, during some times (like the time of Joseph), people beleived God spoke through dreams, so God spoke to Joseph and Pharaoh through dreams. I know of no time today when one can say that the Holy Spirit is always like thus and so, it seems that throughout history, it varies from person to person and even varies at different times for the same person. Also, sometimes the Holy Spirit will speak to you by having someone else do the speaking. An example, you go to church, you have a problem or question, you ask God to speak of it, don't be suprised if the pastor speaks about that, also, if you don't ask God to speak about it, don't be suprised if the pastor does NOT speak about it. Basically, if you don't ask for it, you won't get it.

BTW, EXCELLENT source for this question,
http://www.blackaby.net/

"Knowing God does not come through a program, a study, or a method. Knowing God comes through a relationship with a Person. This is an intimate love relationship with God. Through this relationship, God reveals Himself, His purposes, and His ways; and He invites you to join Him where He is already at work.
This is the central thesis of Experiencing God by Henry T. Blackaby and Claude V. King. The authors' emphasis on revelation through personal relationship makes faith sound like a true adventure--leading believers to engage with people and circumstances they might otherwise have avoided. The organization of Experiencing God adds to this effect, proceeding step by step through the various ways a believer's relationship with God is deepened (via the Bible, prayer, and the Church, among others). Although there's strong tension between the self-help tone of this book and its hard-line argument that faith is purely a response to God's initiative, many readers will nevertheless find great encouragement in hearing a still, small voice among a vast number of everyday experiences. "


The basic idea is simple, you don't find God, God finds you, and you accept that. God is the one with the power to come to you, you cannot ascend up to heaven and demand an audience. You don't so much find what God wants you to do about this or that you are concerned with, you find out what GOD is concerned with and wants you to join him in what HE is doing. Instead of trying to get God to join you and help you, you join God and find out what God wants, trusting that God will lead you into what is best for you and others around you. Instead of centering it around you, you center it around God, who is, after all, the only one who really knows what is going on anyway.

I once asked the question, how do I know what God's will is. Immediatly asfterwards, I went to church, they had some kind of course (I knew nothing about it), I go to it, it turns out to be exactly what I asked for, this course (suprise!). Be carefull what you ask for, you might get it. I mean seriously, if you want to know the will of God, it may not be the same as what YOU want, if you are not prepared to accept that, well, than he won't tell you and you won't hear it (or you will and decide "well, that can't really be God...").

BTW, there are two responses if God actually speaks to you:
1) Listen and do it.
2) RUN!
Option two tends to not work so well, look at Jonah for an example. Another example, Moses, he basically said (after God had worked on him for 40 years to get him ready, without his knowing about it) Exo 4:13 But Moses said, "O Lord, please send someone else to do it.".
Basically, are you really SURE you want to hear from God? If you are not really prepared for option 1, well, don't be suprised if you don't hear anything. Also, God may say something he wants you to do, but it may actually take years of preperation before God thinks you are ready to do it, or He may say he will do something, but it may be years till he actually does it. Example, Joseph, it was some 13 years of being in a foriegn country, as a slave and then in prison, before God did what he said he would do. God told Abraham he would have a son, he waited 25 looooooong years. Of course, God may actually do something you like, but you can't count on that, he is not a tame God, he does what HE thinks best.

In other words, are you really really sure you want to hear from God?

[DRDS]

Hello again, sorry I didn't reply sooner I've been busy for the past few days. I was going to tell you, what you told me really got my attention. Because the way you describe your possible encounters with God or with the Holy Spirit they almost or pretty much perfectly MATCH my experiences that I've had over the years.

The only problem I've had until now is I've never had any serious believers (or believers who study theology and apologetics) inform me that they too have similar experiences. For quite sometime I thought it was just me trying to fit God into these odd occurrences and that other believers had no such experiences or if they did they were the more direct signs from God like dreams, visions, words of knowledge, or more unusual occurrences.

To give you a good recent example of one of these such instances. Back a few months ago a couple of weeks before my birthday in my apologetics studies I was concerned about the idea of why God doesn't perform the big miracles today like he did back in biblical times.

Perhaps I've even asked about it on this forum. But anyway while I had this on my mind I was listening to one of my favorite apologetics podcasts. This one that I was listening to was "Crossexamined" by Frank Turek, who co-authored the book "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist" with Norman Geisler.

Well anyway, I had already listened to most of his recent podcasts and I decided to scroll down the list and listen to some of his older podcasts that were done last year. I looked around and noticed that the older podcasts did not have the discussion topics listed only the date it was recorded.
And I happened to be attracted to the one that was done on my birthday last year.

So not knowing what I was going to get as far as a discussion topic, I decided to listen to it. And oddly enough, it was a interview he did with Gary Habermas on the subject of doubt and the very thing I was concerned about (why God doesn't perform the big miracles today like he did back in biblical times) was addressed by both of them!

Now other times I will be thinking about someone who I haven't met in a long time and then later that day I see them or meet them without planning it.

And I know that to many hard core atheists and skeptics love to write things like this off as a mere coincidence. But when they happen over and over and happen at the very times I need to hear certain things, I have to really try hard to dismiss all of them as mere coincidences.


But since I was talking about establishing a more closer and intimate relationship with God I was wondering does praise and worship help much for you? Over the years especially when I've gone to charismatic churches or see such services on television and I see people waving their hands with their eyes closed and sometimes with their arms stretched upward (almost as if in the spiritual realm God is reaching downward to give them something).

What I was curious about (since I mostly come from a "boring" southern baptist background) is God supposedly causing them to get into almost like a spiritual trance or is doing something to them to cause them to be in that state of mind and motion or is that merely them just getting caught up in the music, atmosphere and moment of praise and worship?

Because if it is the latter than I could easily do that to myself in fact I think I have before from just deeply thinking or reflecting about God and God's plans and promises, but if it is the former than just how in the world do I get that extra access to God or get God to do that to me?
Because if that is something God causes them to do without any effort by themselves I clearly want a piece of that. Either way I'm just really longing to get closer and more intimate with God. I specifically would love to know what His presence or His direct love feels like.

But of course, I need to know first if God really even does that for His people today. If He don't that's ok I guess, but if He does just how in the world do I take the steps necessary to get me to that point? Thank you again for your time and God bless.

[Legatus]

Pertinant quotation "All I know is, when I stop praying, the coincidences stop happening".

I don't really know that what happens in some charismatic churches is actually of God, it could be, but in many cases it may simply be self or other hypnotism (televangilist types and such money grubbers often use this), or various means to get you into a "hypersuggestable" attitue. However, God could also do it, just because someone might fake it doesnt mean all of it is fake. I just don't think it can be demanded of God or expected all the time. And when they start rolling in the isles or all "speaking in tongues" at once, well, that is forbiden by scripture (specifically, Paul went into all that charismatic stuff at length, starting here 1 Cor 12:1 and going on at great length. If that church does not do it Pauls way, be suspicious. Of course, a church that does it wrong can still have many Christiansd and such, and a church that does it right could be dead as a doornail, but I would bet the other way.

[DRDS]

You know come to think of it, is there anywhere in the Bible where God sends His "presence" in order for a follower to feel loved and comforted? Is that even a true promise or thing that God claims to do for His followers? I mean, I hear about this stuff all the time in churches and on Christian tv stations, but is it truly biblical? Or, is the only way we can even get half way close to feeling God's love for us personally (other than dying and being with Him in heaven), is to just mediate or deeply think about God's general promises for all of His followers?