November 12, 2014

From Gary... A favorite snowflake



Soon it will be snowing in our northern states, perhaps very soon.  And there will be plenty of snowflakes for everyone.  I wonder, could it even be possible to have a favorite flake?  Could the infinite diversity of infinite complexity just be too much for the human mind to contemplate, let alone pick a "favorite". But, what if we saw people like snowflakes.  I mean, appreciate them for what they are- their uniqueness and individuality.  Race, sex, age, history and the like somehow would seem unimportant. And then there is this little statement...

Acts, Chapter 10
  34  Peter opened his mouth and said, “Truly I perceive that God doesn’t show favoritism; 35 but in every nation he who fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.
Both you and I are very special; but, neither of us is inherently superior.   There is no "master" race, for God made us all alike. So what, if someone is smarter,  stronger or more attractive than you are.  Remember, even Adolph Hitler had a girlfriend.  To God, we are all like beautiful snowflakes- and he treats us all the same; that is, we all have the same opportunity to be right and do right.  And this begins with understanding who God is and grows to knowing what HE wants us to do and why!!!  Hummm, where do I begin?? The answer is... right where you are- and from there; open your Bible and read.  Relax, you stand a pretty good chance of succeeding- God doesn't show favoritism!!!!  Hummm, I wonder if GOD HAS A FAVORITE SNOWFLAKE????? 

From Mark Copeland....Jesus And The Children (Matthew 18:1-14)

                       "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

                    Jesus And The Children (18:1-14)

INTRODUCTION

1. One of the more touching and endearing scenes during the life of
   Jesus was when He used a little child to teach His disciples some
   lessons - Mt 18:1-14

2. For all who would be true disciples of Jesus, there are valuable
   lessons to be gleaned from  this passage

[The first thing we are taught is...]

I. THE NECESSITY OF CONVERSION (1-4)

   A. WITHOUT CONVERSION, THERE IS NO SALVATION...
      1. "Unless you are converted", Jesus said
         a. "You will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven"
         b. Without conversion, we cannot have our sins blotted out
            - cf. Ac 3:19
         c. And we will not enjoy "times of refreshing from the Lord"
            - cf. Ac 3:19
      2. Note that the process of conversion is passive: "be converted"
         a. I.e., it is something you must allow to be done to you
         b. It begins when we in faith submit to "the working of God"
            1) That is, in baptism - cf. Col 2:12
            2) Wherein by God's mercy we experience "regeneration",
               "renewal" - Tit 3:5
         c. It continues as we live the Christian life
            1) God continues His working in us - cf. Php 1:6; 2:12-13
            2) He will do so until the coming of Christ - 1Th 5:23-24
      -- Have you, indeed are you, submitting to the working of God in
         your life so as to be truly converted?

   B. A CONVERSION INVOLVING CHILDLIKE HUMILITY...
      1. This was the concern of Jesus in Mt 18:4
         a. For His disciples had asked who would be greatest in the
            kingdom
         b. Jesus used a child to illustrate the sort of humility one
            must have
      2. Paul later used Jesus as an example of humility - Php 2:3-5
      -- Those who submit to the working of God in their lives will
         produce this kind of humility necessary for salvation - cf. 
         Col 3:12-13

[The next thing we learn from this passage is...]

II. THE SIN OF STUMBLING BLOCKS (5-7)

   A. WHO ARE THE "CHILDREN"?
      1. Some think Jesus used an infant to make his point about
         humility, and is now discussing His adult disciples
      2. But the Greek word for "child" (paidion) can refer to one as
         old as twelve years - cf. Mk 5:39-42
      -- I understand Jesus to be discussing children old enough to
         believe, old enough to sin - Mt 18:6

   B. THE TERRIBLENESS OF CAUSING CHILDREN TO SIN...
      1. It would be better to be killed by drowning - Mt 18:6
      2. "Woe to that man..." - Mt 18:7
      3. Why so terrible?  Because it is a sin against Christ Himself!
         a. Note Mt 18:5 and consider its opposite
         b. Paul learned this lesson on the road to Damascus - Ac 9:4-5
         c. He taught this truth to brethren in Corinth - 1Co 8:9-13

   C. HOW ONE CAN PUT STUMBLING BLOCKS IN A CHILD'S WAY...
      1. By doing anything to keep them from serving Christ freely
      2. Directly, by persecuting, ridiculing, opposing, or dissuading
         them from serving the Lord
      3. Indirectly, by living a life inconsistent with what we claim
         to be!
      -- Are we putting stumbling blocks before our children, even 
         unwittingly?

[The next thing we can glean from these verses is...]
      
III. THE REALITY OF FUTURE PUNISHMENT (8-9)

   A. SOME DENY PUNISHMENT AFTER DEATH, BUT NOT JESUS...
      1. E.g., Seventh-Day Adventists and Members of the Watchtower
         Society (JWs)
      2. Yet Jesus, more than any other, taught the reality of an
         eternal, suffering place of torment!
         a. The word "Gehenna" is used twelve times in Scripture, all
            but once by Jesus!
         b. Elsewhere He mentions "everlasting fire" and "everlasting
            punishment" - Mt 25:41,46
         c. And so did His disciples - He 10:26-29; Re 21:8
      3. Consider the implication of Mt 18:6 and He 10:28-29...
         a. What could be worse than drowning in the sea or dying
            without mercy?
         b. Acc. to those who deny punishment after death...nothing!
      -- Dare we "water down" what Jesus and the Bible teaches about
         the destiny of the wicked?

   B. WE SHOULD THEREFORE TAKE SIN SERIOUSLY...
      1. So much so, that we remove whatever is close and dear to us if
         it causes us to sin!
      2. Jesus is using hyperbole, of course, for what good would it be
         to pluck out only one eye?
      -- Sin is like cancer; sometimes "radical surgery" is the only
         solution!

[Finally, we are taught in this passage about...]

IV. THE PRECIOUSNESS OF GOD'S CHILDREN (10-14)

   A. THEIR ANGELS ALWAYS BEHOLD GOD'S FACE...
      1. What this may involve, one can only speculate
         a. Many think this refers to "guardian angels" - cf. Ps 91:
            9-12
         b. We do know that angels are "ministering spirits sent forth
            to minister for those who will inherit salvation" - He 1:14
      2. Our text speaks of their presence before God - Mt 18:10
         a. Which some take to refer to their readiness to carry out
            the Father's wishes (Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke)
         b. At the very least we know there is joy in their presence
            when sinners repent - Lk 15:10
         c. Will they not be dismayed when one of God's children sin,
            or is made to stumble by others?
      -- Their close proximity to God in heaven suggest the honor God
         has toward those children who believe!

   B. THE SON OF MAN CAME TO SAVE THEM...
      1. Jesus came to die for them, too! - Mt 18:11
      2. Jesus illustrated His concern for them with the parable of the
         lost sheep - Mt 18:12-13
      -- If Jesus was willing to give His life for them, dare we 
         despise or neglect them?

   C. THE FATHER DOESN'T WANT TO LOSE EVEN ONE...
      1. It is not His will - Mt 18:14
      2. Notice:  He does not want to lose "one" of these little ones!
      -- If both the Father and Son think so highly of these little 
         ones, should not we?

CONCLUSION

1. The words of Jesus should motivate us to take children seriously...
   a. For parents:  how important to bring your child up in the nurture
      and admonition of the Lord!
   b. For teachers:  How serious and noble is your task of teaching our
      children!
   c. For all of us:  We are examples and role models, whether good or
      bad...and God will hold us accountable for the effect we have on
      them!

2. And for those who would enter the kingdom...
   a. Heed the necessity of being converted!
   b. Let the example of child-like trust and humility be a guide as to
      how we should serve God and one another!

Have you humbled yourself in obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Mark Copeland... Jesus On Divorce, Remarriage, & Celibacy (Matthew 19:1-12)

                       "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

           Jesus On Divorce, Remarriage, & Celibacy (19:1-12)

INTRODUCTION

1. A serious problem in the world today is that of divorce and 
   remarriage

2. As described by God, divorce is a treacherous, violent act - cf.Mal2:16
   a. Its affect on children has been well documented by Judith
      Wallerstein, author of Second Chance (Ticknor & Fields, 1988)
      1) Almost half of children of divorces enter adulthood as 
         worried, under-achieving, self-deprecating, and sometimes
         angry young men and women
      2) Half grew up in settings in which the parents were warring
         with each other even after the divorce
      -- Reported in Time, 2/6/89 
   b. Parents who divorce are not left unhurt either
      1) "A divorce is like an amputation: You survive, but there's
         less of you." - Margaret Atwood (Marriage Partnership, Vol.
         7, No. 4)
      2) Average percentage change in a woman's standard of living the
         year following a divorce:  minus 73%  -Daniel Evan Weiss, (The
         Great Divide, Poseidon Press, 1991)

3. Remarriage after divorce is not without it problems also...
   a. It does not always heal the wounds inflicted by the divorce: "I'm
      lucky my parents have stayed together. Unlike so many of my 
      friends, I've never had to cry on a holiday." - Tales Out of High
      School. Marriage Partnership, Vol. 5, no. 6
   b. Many remarriages are unlawful in God's eyes, constituting what
      Jesus called "adultery"

4. While I am concerned about the social and psychological effects of
   divorce and remarriage, it is the spiritual effects that concern me
   most...
   a. Too many people are ignorant of what the Bible teaches on this
      subject
   b. Such ignorance leads to quick and easy divorces, and to
      adulterous marriages that are unlawful

5. In Mt 19:3-12, we find Jesus discussing divorce, remarriage and
   celibacy...
   a. His teaching was occasioned by a challenge from the Pharisees
   b. But He used the opportunity to teach His disciples what people
      today need to know!

[As we consider this passage carefully, we find that Matthew first
records...]

I. THE PHARISEES' QUESTION (3)

   A. TO TEST HIM, NOT TO BE TAUGHT BY HIM...
      1. Divorce was a touchy issue then, even as it is today
      2. Divorce was not uncommon (e.g., King Herod)
      3. The scribes were divided over the proper grounds for divorce
         a. The school of Hillel taught that a man could divorce for
            just about any reason
         b. The school of Shammai permitted divorce only in the case of
            fornication

   B. ANY ANSWER JESUS GAVE WOULD OFFEND SOMEONE...
      1. If He took the popular lax view, the Pharisees could deride
         His claim as a teacher of superior morality - cf. Mt 5:20
      2. If He upheld the stricter view, He would be unpopular with the
         majority (which the Pharisees could use against Him)

[Of course, Jesus was not concerned with what man thought, but in
pleasing His Father in heaven.  This becomes evident as we next
consider...]

II. JESUS' ANSWER (4-6)

   A. HE APPEALS TO THE WORD OF GOD...
      1. "Have you not read...?" - Mt 19:4; cf. Gen 1:27; 2:24
      2. He does not place stock in the opinions of religious leaders
         of the day
      -- Is there not something for us to learn here?  Where should we
         go to find the answer concerning the issue of divorce?

   B. HE REMINDS THEM OF THEIR GENESIS...
      1. "He who made them at the beginning `made them male and 
         female'..." - Mt 19:4
      2. It is helpful to keep in mind:
         a. Where we came from
         b. Who created us
         c. What we are
      3. For our views on divorce and remarriage will be influenced by
         our views of ourselves!
         a. Are we simply animals?
            1) Compelled by instinct?
            2) Unable to control fleshly desires?
            -- Then divorce and remarriage ought to be free and easy
         b. Or God's highest creation?
            1) Made in His image?
            2) Able to control fleshly lusts to the glory of God?
            -- Then divorce and remarriage ought to reflect God's
               desire for man's holiness!

   C. HE ATTRIBUTES THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE TO GOD, NOT MAN...
      1. Notice, it was GOD who said "For this reason..." - Mt 19:5;
         cf. Gen 2:24
      2. Therefore questions about marriage (such as divorce and
         remarriage) must be answered by God, not by man (nor by man's
         laws)!

   D. HE EMPHASIZES THAT IN MARRIAGE GOD CREATES A UNION...
      1. The two become one flesh - Mt 19:5-6; cf. Gen 2:24
      2. They are joined by none other than God Himself!

   E. HIS CONCLUSION:  LET NOT MAN SEPARATE WHAT GOD JOINED...
      1. What GOD has joined together, let not MAN separate - Mt 19:6
      2. Man has no right to separate what God Himself has joined

[It is clear that God's intention is that marriage is to be for life!
It is God who joins the couple, and no one has the right to rend
asunder what God has joined together!

Are there any exceptions to this rule?  The Pharisees thought so, as we
now notice...]

III. THE PHARISEES' REBUTTAL (7)

   A. THEIR REBUTTAL APPEARS BASED ON THE WORD OF GOD...
      1. Jesus had urged scriptural reasons against divorce - Mt 19:4-6
      2. They allege scriptural authority for divorce - Mt 19:7

   B. THEIR APPEAL TO SCRIPTURE WAS ON SHAKY GROUNDS...
      1. They appealed to Moses' statement in Deut 24:1-4
      2. Which they took to permit divorce as long as a "certificate of
         divorce" was given to the wife - cf. Mt 5:31
      3. Yet a careful reading of that passage reveals:
         a. Moses was forbidding the remarriage of a spouse who marries
            someone else
         b. The reason was despite the "certificate" the woman became
            "defiled" when she remarried - Deut 24:4
         c. The word "defiled" is used elsewhere to describe adultery
            - Lev 18:20; Num 5:13-14
         d. She actually became an adulteress by the remarriage! - cf.
            Ro 7:1-3
      4. While they appealed to this passage in divorce (and 
         presumably, remarriage), it actually described the treachery
         of divorce:  defilement of the spouse - cf. Mt 5:32

[The shakiness of their rebuttal is seen further as we consider...]

IV. JESUS' RESPONSE (8-9)

   A. MOSES "PERMITTED" DIVORCE DUE TO THEIR HARD HEARTS...
      1. The Jews at that time were a hardened people - cf. Deut 9:6;
         31:27
      2. Is this not a commentary on the state of one's heart when they
         desire to divorce their spouse?
         a. It takes a hard-hearted person to want to divorce their
            spouse
            1) Either to divorce arbitrarily (for no scriptural ground)
            2) Or to divorce when the guilty person is pleading for
               forgiveness and reconciliation
         b. Of course, that is exactly the condition of those in the
            world (or those in the church who are of the world) - cf.
            Ep 4:17-19

   B. IT WAS NOT WHAT GOD HAD IN MIND FROM THE BEGINNING...
      1. The permission to divorce was only temporary
      2. Note carefully:
         a. The Law of Moses (which was temporary) considered the
            hardness of men's hearts, and permitted hard-hearted 
            actions
         b. The gospel of Christ cures the hardness of one's heart!
            1) His grace removes the heart of stone, and replaces it
               with a heart of love!
            2) I.e., a heart able to abide by God's original design for
               marriage
      3. Paul would later make it clear that under normal conditions
         divorce is not an option - 1Co 7:10-11

   C. JESUS SETTLED THE POINT WITH AN AUTHORITATIVE "SAYING"...
      1. "And I say unto you..." - Mt 19:9
         a. His sayings were with authority - cf. Mt 7:28-29
         b. Upon which He expected people to base their lives - cf.
            Mt 7:24-25; 28:20
      2. Divorce is allowed only in the case of fornication - Mt 19:9
         a. Divorce for any other reason results in adultery when there
            is remarriage
         b. Which is what Jesus taught in Mt 5:32
      3. To marry a divorced (put away) person results in adultery
         a. Does this apply only to a person put away for a cause other
            than fornication?
         b. Or to the one who is guilty of fornication?
         c. The lack of the definite article would suggest any "put 
            away" person
            1) Either an innocent person wrongly "put away"
            2) Or a guilty person rightly "put away" for fornication

   D. OBSERVATIONS...
      1. Any divorce must be on those grounds specified by Jesus...
         a. For marriage is an institution ordained by God - Mt 19:5
         b. And we must not separate what God has joined - Mt 19:6
      2. A divorce for any other grounds...
         a. Is an attempt to separate what God has joined together
         b. Results in a remarriage where people commit adultery
            - Mt 19:9; cf. Mk 10:11-12
      3. Jesus' teaching was contrary to two views held by the Jews of
         His day...
         a. That as long as a "bill of divorcement" was given, they
            were free to divorce and remarry for any reason
            1) Consider Mt 5:31 as an example of their belief
            2) Yet Jesus taught:
               a) To divorce for any reason other than fornication
                  causes the spouse to commit adultery - Mt 5:32
               b) To divorce and remarry for any reason other than
                  fornication is to commit adultery - Mt 19:9
         b. That they could marry a woman who was divorced (with the
            exception of the priests - cf. Lev 21:7,14)
            1) Yet Jesus taught that to marry a divorced woman was to
               commit adultery!
            2) Again, the lack of the definite article in both Mt 5:32
               and Mt 19:9 indicates:
               a) Whether the woman was put away for the right reason
                  or not
               b) In either case, the end result is adultery!
      4. Jesus defined the meaning of adultery...
         a. It was not uncommon at that time for some Jews to believe:
            1) That a man was guilty of adultery only if he violated
               another man's wife
            2) That he could be married, have relations with a single
               woman, and still not be guilty of adultery
         b. But Jesus defined adultery to include:
            1) Sex with the spouse of another (the standard definition)
            2) Looking at a woman to lust for her (certainly this would
               include either a married or single woman) - Mt 5:27-28
            3) Marrying a person who was divorced by his or her spouse 
               - Mt 5:32; 19:9
            4) Remarrying when one did not divorce for fornication
               - Mt 19:9

[As one might expect, what Jesus said prompted strong reactions.  While
we do not know how the Pharisees reacted, we do know...]

V. THE DISCIPLES' REACTION (10)

   A. IF DIVORCE IS ALLOWED FOR ONLY ONE REASON...
      1. It is better not to marry! - Mt 19:10
      2. The single life would be preferable to being so bound to one's
         wife!

   B. CONTRAST THIS WITH THE REACTION OF MANY TODAY...
      1. The disciples of Jesus:
         a. "If such is the case with divorce and remarriage, it is
            better to be single!"
         b. With them, there was no question about obeying Christ's law
            on this subject
         c. Only that in view of His teaching, the preferable option is
            celibacy
      2. Many people today:
         a. "If such is the case with divorce and remarriage, it is
            better to be lost!"
         b. Rather than submit to scriptural marriage or celibacy, many
            people are more likely to opt for eternal damnation!
         c. Choosing to prefer a few years of adultery over an eternity
            of bliss!

[With the disciples' mention of celibacy as a viable option, Jesus used
the opportunity to speak on the subject as it related to His previous
"saying" or teaching...]

VI. JESUS' REPLY REGARDING CELIBACY (11-12)

   A. NOT EVERY ONE CAN ACCEPT THIS "SAYING"...
      1. I.e., the saying of Mt 19:9
      2. The saying of Jesus regarding divorce and remarriage

   B. WHO CAN ACCEPT IT?
      1. "those to whom it has been given" - Mt 19:11
      2. "he who is able to receive it" - Mt 19:12

   C. WHO MIGHT THESE BE?
      1. Those willing to accept it "FOR the kingdom of heaven's sake"
         - Mt 19:12
         a. The kingdom of heaven means that much to them
         b. They are willing to do whatever necessary to enter it
      2. Even it means making themselves "eunuchs" - Mt 19:12
         a. I.e., remaining single, even though they were not "born
            thus from their mother's womb"
         b. In order to remain true to the teaching of Jesus
      3. That such sacrifices might occur is implied in Mk 10:29-30;
         Lk 14:26
         a. One must put Christ before all others, including one's
            spouse
         b. Doing so may even cause one to leave their spouse 
         c. Yet the only situation in which one would be justified in
            doing so...
            1) Would be if their marriage was unscriptural
            2) For otherwise one is not to leave their spouse - cf. 
               1Co 7:10-11
      4. For those willing to live the celibate life if necessary...
         a. They will receive the ability to live by His Will - cf. 
            Php 4:13; Ep 3:20
         b. They can provide more service to the Lord being single 
            - cf. 1Co 7:32-35
         ...just as many single and widowed serve the Lord faithfully
            in celibacy!

CONCLUSION

1. Any view of divorce and remarriage must take into consideration...
   a. The Word of God
   b. The nature of man and woman
   c. The sanctity of the union between man and woman created by God
   d. The consequences of rebelling against God, trying to separate
      what He has joined
   e. The value of entering "the kingdom of heaven"

2. The only course for faithful Christians is to comply with the
   teachings of Jesus...
   a. That divorce:
      1) Is an indication of one's hardness of heart
      2) Puts the spouse in a position to commit adultery when they
         remarry
      3) Causes one who has divorced their spouse to commit adultery
         when they remarry
   b. That there is only one ground for divorce and remarriage:
      1) Which is fornication
      2) In which the innocent person has the right to divorce and
         remarry
   c. That celibacy is a viable option:
      1) For those who desire to enter the kingdom of heaven
      2) Who may find it necessary to "make themselves eunuchs" (remain
         celibate) in order to do so

3. For those who find themselves in "unlawful" (i.e., adulterous
   marriages - cf. Mk 6:17-18), there is forgiveness through the blood
   of Jesus...
   a. But as with any sin, forgiveness in conditioned upon repentance
   b. Just as the Jews who had married foreign wives needed to repent
      by putting them away (cf. Ezra 9-10)
   c. So one repents by leaving any relationship described as adultery

May the Lord bless those with the faith to live according to His word,
and may we be diligent in teaching our children what the Bible teaches
regarding divorce and remarriage!

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Mark Copeland... The Difficulty With Riches (Matthew 19:16-26)

                        "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

                 The Difficulty With Riches (19:16-26)

INTRODUCTION

1. A well known story in the life of Jesus involves His interview with
   a rich young ruler - Mt 19:16-26; Lk 18:18-27

2. In this story we find a man who was so right, yet wrong...
   a. He came to the right person - Mt 19:16
      1) He came to Jesus
      2) Who could tell Him the way to eternal life
   b. He asked the right questions - Mt 19:16b,20
      1) "What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?"
      2) "What do I still lack?"
   c. He certainly received the right answers - Mt 19:17-19,21
      1) "...if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments"
         (suitable for one living under the OT covenant)
      2) "If you want to be perfect, go, sell...give to the poor...and
         come, follow Me" (fitting for one who would become a disciple
         and follow Jesus during His ministry)
   d. But in the end, he made the wrong decision - Mt 19:22
      1) He went away sorrowful
      2) For he had great possessions

3. As rich young ruler went away sadly, Jesus told His disciples about
   the difficulty of riches...
   a. That it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God - Mt 19:23
   b. That it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle
      - Mt 19:24

4. What is it about being rich that makes salvation so difficult?
   a. Are we aware of the dangers of riches?
   b. Do we understand the proper attitudes toward wealth, whether we
      are rich or poor?

[Let's first consider...]

I. THE DIFFICULTY WITH RICHES

   A. THE ABSORBING INTEREST OF RICHES...
      1. Riches do not satisfy, and we foolishly think that simply more
         riches will bring satisfaction - cf. Ec 1:8; 5:10
      2. With riches comes the preoccupation with them:  how to use,
         maintain, store, etc.
      -- Like a black hole, the accumulation of riches can absorb what
         time and energy we have so that we have little for anything
         else (such as family, church, the Lord)

   B. THE DECEITFUL PROMISE OF RICHES...
      1. Jesus warned about the deceitfulness of riches - Mt 13:22
      2. Riches promise much, but really offer little in return
         a. They can easily disappear, rust, or be stolen - Pr 23:5;
            Mt 6:19
         b. They cannot buy one's salvation - Ps 49:6-9,16-20
         c. Neither can they protect one from God's wrath - Zeph 1:18
      -- Riches can deceive one into thinking they are in need of
         nothing; the parable of the rich fool illustrates the folly of
         such thinking - Lk 12:16-21

   C. THE FOOLISH PRIDE OF RICHES...
      1. Wealth tends to promote a sense of arrogance and pride - cf.
         Deut 8:11-17
      2. It was such pride that was the downfall of Sodom and Israel
         - Ezek 16:49-50; Hos 13:4-6
      -- Blinded by such pride, one will not seek God - Ps 10:4

   D. THE HARDENING SELFISHNESS OF RICHES...
      1. The wealthy, while in a position to help others, often close
         up their hearts to the cry of the poor
      2. This was one of Israel's sins - Am 2:6; 5:11-12; 8:4-6
      -- Abusing the poor to make money, failing to respond to their
         cries for justice, interested more in money than the welfare
         of the poor...such are problems that often afflict the rich

[Certainly not all who are rich are guilty of such things.  Some of the
most godly people in the Bible were rich (Job, Abraham, Joseph, David,
Solomon, Barnabas, Philemon, Lydia).  But these are reasons why it is
so hard for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. If they let mammon
become their god, they will not be willing to serve the true God! (cf.
Mt 6:24)

From what we have seen about the danger of wealth, let's now draw
some...]

II. LESSONS GLEANED FROM THE DIFFICULTY OF RICHES

   A. THE FOLLY OF COVETOUSNESS...
      1. Why be so anxious to be rich, when riches might prove to be a
         curse for us?
      2. Besides, covetousness is viewed by God as a form of idolatry
         - Ep 5:5; Col 3:5
      3. It not a sin to be rich, but the desire to be rich is wrong
         a. Those who desire to be rich will fall into temptation, and
            not go unpunished - 1Ti 6:9; Pr 28:20
         b. The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil - 1Ti 6:
            10
            1) For which some have strayed from the faith
            2) And suffered many sorrows

   B. THE DUTY OF CONTENTMENT...
      1. Contentment along with godliness is true wealth - 1Ti 6:6-7
         a. "He is richest who is content with the least." - Socrates
            (470-399 B.C.)
         b. "Contentment comes not so much from great wealth as from
            few wants" - Croft M. Pentz (The Complete Book of Zingers)
      2. Contentment is a virtue that is learned - e.g., Php 4:11-12
         a. By having a proper perspective on life - 1Ti 6:7
            1) "You can't take it with you"
            2) Ever see a hearse pulling a U-Haul trailer?
         b. By understanding what is truly essential in life - 1Ti 6:8
            1) Food and clothing...anything more is a luxury
            2) Realizing this, we will appreciate how blessed we are!
      3. Therefore Christians are to be content with what things we
         have - He 13:5

   C. THE NEED FOR SYMPATHY FOR THE RICH...
      1. Jesus loved the rich young ruler - Mk 10:21
         a. We should certainly love those who are rich
         b. We should not be envious, nor despise them
      2. If the rich are overcome by their riches, we should bear in
         mind...
         a. That the desire to be rich affects both the rich and those
            who want to be rich
         b. That the rich face many temptations that the poor do not
      3. The rich are in need of salvation as much as the poorest
         beggar - Ro 3:23; 6:23

   D. FAITH IN THE POWER OF GOD...
      1. Though it is hard for a rich person to be saved, it is not
         impossible - Mt 19:23-26
         a. No one can save themselves, whether rich or poor
         b. But God can save the rich by His own power, through the
            gospel - Ro 1:16-17
      2. There were many rich people who became Jesus' disciples
         a. Those that supported Him during His earthly ministry - Lk 8:1-3
         b. Others such as Zaccheus, Matthew, Barnabas, Lydia, Aquila
            and Priscilla, Gaius, Philemon
         c. Such people used their riches in service to God and others
            - cf. 1Ti 6:17-19
      3. Therefore...
         a. The rich should have the gospel preached to them
         b. We should pray for the rich
         c. We should rejoice greatly that there are rich men and women
            in the kingdom of God

CONCLUSION

1. The issue of wealth and riches is often one of contention...
   a. The poor are often envious of the rich
   b. The rich often despise the poor

2. But riches and poverty both have their difficulties...
   a. Wealth can one make one arrogant, less receptive to the gospel
      and the kingdom
   b. Poverty can make one bitter, filled with envy of others

3. Whether rich or poor, we should all be aware...
   a. Of our need for salvation that comes only by the grace of God
   b. That we can share together in the riches of salvation

Have you become an heir to the "unsearchable riches of Christ"?

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Gary... Bible Reading November 12




Bible Reading   
November 12

The World English Bible



Nov. 12
Isaiah 64-66

Isa 64:1 Oh that you would tear the heavens, that you would come down, that the mountains might quake at your presence,
Isa 64:2 as when fire kindles the brushwood, and the fire causes the waters to boil; to make your name known to your adversaries, that the nations may tremble at your presence!
Isa 64:3 When you did terrible things which we didn't look for, you came down, the mountains quaked at your presence.
Isa 64:4 For from of old men have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither has the eye seen a God besides you, who works for him who waits for him.
Isa 64:5 You meet him who rejoices and works righteousness, those who remember you in your ways: behold, you were angry, and we sinned: in them have we been of long time; and shall we be saved?
Isa 64:6 For we have all become as one who is unclean, and all our righteousness is as a polluted garment: and we all fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.
Isa 64:7 There is none who calls on your name, who stirs up himself to take hold of you; for you have hid your face from us, and have consumed us by means of our iniquities.
Isa 64:8 But now, Yahweh, you are our Father; we are the clay, and you our potter; and we all are the work of your hand.
Isa 64:9 Don't be furious, Yahweh, neither remember iniquity forever: see, look, we beg you, we are all your people.
Isa 64:10 Your holy cities are become a wilderness, Zion is become a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation.
Isa 64:11 Our holy and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised you, is burned with fire; and all our pleasant places are laid waste.
Isa 64:12 Will you refrain yourself for these things, Yahweh? will you hold your peace, and afflict us very sore?
Isa 65:1 "I am inquired of by those who didn't ask; I am found by those who didn't seek me: I said, See me, see me, to a nation that was not called by my name.
Isa 65:2 I have spread out my hands all the day to a rebellious people, who walk in a way that is not good, after their own thoughts;
Isa 65:3 a people who provoke me to my face continually, sacrificing in gardens, and burning incense on bricks;
Isa 65:4 who sit among the graves, and lodge in the secret places; who eat pig's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels;
Isa 65:5 who say, Stand by yourself, don't come near to me, for I am holier than you. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burns all the day.
Isa 65:6 "Behold, it is written before me: I will not keep silence, but will recompense, yes, I will recompense into their bosom,
Isa 65:7 your own iniquities, and the iniquities of your fathers together," says Yahweh, "who have burned incense on the mountains, and blasphemed me on the hills; therefore will I first measure their work into their bosom."
Isa 65:8 Thus says Yahweh, "As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one says, 'Don't destroy it, for a blessing is in it:' so will I do for my servants' sake, that I may not destroy them all.
Isa 65:9 I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains; and my chosen shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there.
Isa 65:10 Sharon shall be a fold of flocks, and the valley of Achor a place for herds to lie down in, for my people who have sought me.
Isa 65:11 "But you who forsake Yahweh, who forget my holy mountain, who prepare a table for Fortune, and who fill up mixed wine to Destiny;
Isa 65:12 I will destine you to the sword, and you shall all bow down to the slaughter; because when I called, you did not answer; when I spoke, you did not hear; but you did that which was evil in my eyes, and chose that in which I didn't delight."
Isa 65:13 Therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh, "Behold, my servants shall eat, but you shall be hungry; behold, my servants shall drink, but you shall be thirsty; behold, my servants shall rejoice, but you shall be disappointed;
Isa 65:14 behold, my servants shall sing for joy of heart, but you shall cry for sorrow of heart, and shall wail for anguish of spirit.
Isa 65:15 You shall leave your name for a curse to my chosen; and the Lord Yahweh will kill you; and he will call his servants by another name:
Isa 65:16 so that he who blesses himself in the earth shall bless himself in the God of truth; and he who swears in the earth shall swear by the God of truth; because the former troubles are forgotten, and because they are hid from my eyes.
Isa 65:17 "For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former things shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
Isa 65:18 But be you glad and rejoice forever in that which I create; for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy.
Isa 65:19 I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people; and there shall be heard in her no more the voice of weeping and the voice of crying.
Isa 65:20 "There shall be no more there an infant of days, nor an old man who has not filled his days; for the child shall die one hundred years old, and the sinner being one hundred years old shall be accursed.
Isa 65:21 They shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them.
Isa 65:22 They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree shall be the days of my people, and my chosen shall long enjoy the work of their hands.
Isa 65:23 They shall not labor in vain, nor bring forth for calamity; for they are the seed of the blessed of Yahweh, and their offspring with them.
Isa 65:24 It shall happen that, before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear.
Isa 65:25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the ox; and dust shall be the serpent's food. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain," says Yahweh.
Isa 66:1 Thus says Yahweh, "Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: what manner of house will you build to me? and what place shall be my rest?
Isa 66:2 For all these things has my hand made, and so all these things came to be," says Yahweh: "but to this man will I look, even to him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at my word.
Isa 66:3 He who kills an ox is as he who kills a man; he who sacrifices a lamb, as he who breaks a dog's neck; he who offers an offering, as he who offers pig's blood; he who burns frankincense, as he who blesses an idol. Yes, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delights in their abominations:
Isa 66:4 I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears on them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spoke, they did not hear: but they did that which was evil in my eyes, and chose that in which I didn't delight."
Isa 66:5 Hear the word of Yahweh, you who tremble at his word: "Your brothers who hate you, who cast you out for my name's sake, have said, 'Let Yahweh be glorified, that we may see your joy;' but it is those who shall be disappointed.
Isa 66:6 A voice of tumult from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of Yahweh that renders recompense to his enemies.
Isa 66:7 "Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she delivered a son.
Isa 66:8 Who has heard such a thing? who has seen such things? Shall a land be born in one day? shall a nation be brought forth at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.
Isa 66:9 Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth?" says Yahweh: "shall I who cause to bring forth shut the womb?" says your God.
Isa 66:10 "Rejoice with Jerusalem, and be glad for her, all you who love her: rejoice for joy with her, all you who mourn over her;
Isa 66:11 that you may suck and be satisfied with the breasts of her consolations; that you may milk out, and be delighted with the abundance of her glory."
Isa 66:12 For thus says Yahweh, "Behold, I will extend peace to her like a river, and the glory of the nations like an overflowing stream: and you shall suck of it; you shall be borne on the side, and shall be dandled on the knees.
Isa 66:13 As one whom his mother comforts, so will I comfort you; and you shall be comforted in Jerusalem."
Isa 66:14 You shall see it, and your heart shall rejoice, and your bones shall flourish like the tender grass: and the hand of Yahweh shall be known toward his servants; and he will have indignation against his enemies.
Isa 66:15 For, behold, Yahweh will come with fire, and his chariots shall be like the whirlwind; to render his anger with fierceness, and his rebuke with flames of fire.
Isa 66:16 For by fire will Yahweh execute judgment, and by his sword, on all flesh; and the slain of Yahweh shall be many.
Isa 66:17 "Those who sanctify themselves and purify themselves to go to the gardens, behind one in the midst, eating pig's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, they shall come to an end together," says Yahweh.
Isa 66:18 "For I know their works and their thoughts: the time comes, that I will gather all nations and languages; and they shall come, and shall see my glory.
Isa 66:19 "I will set a sign among them, and I will send such as escape of them to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the islands afar off, who have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the nations.
Isa 66:20 They shall bring all your brothers out of all the nations for an offering to Yahweh, on horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and on mules, and on dromedaries, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says Yahweh, as the children of Israel bring their offering in a clean vessel into the house of Yahweh.
Isa 66:21 Of them also will I take for priests and for Levites," says Yahweh.
Isa 66:22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me," says Yahweh, "so your seed and your name shall remain.
Isa 66:23 It shall happen, that from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me," says Yahweh.
Isa 66:24 "They shall go forth, and look on the dead bodies of the men who have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they will be loathsome to all mankind."

 
Nov. 12
Titus 2

Tit 2:1 But say the things which fit sound doctrine,
Tit 2:2 that older men should be temperate, sensible, sober minded, sound in faith, in love, and in patience:
Tit 2:3 and that older women likewise be reverent in behavior, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good;
Tit 2:4 that they may train the young women to love their husbands, to love their children,
Tit 2:5 to be sober minded, chaste, workers at home, kind, being in subjection to their own husbands, that God's word may not be blasphemed.
Tit 2:6 Likewise, exhort the younger men to be sober minded;
Tit 2:7 in all things showing yourself an example of good works; in your teaching showing integrity, seriousness, incorruptibility,
Tit 2:8 and soundness of speech that can't be condemned; that he who opposes you may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say about us.
Tit 2:9 Exhort servants to be in subjection to their own masters, and to be well-pleasing in all things; not contradicting;
Tit 2:10 not stealing, but showing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God, our Savior, in all things.
Tit 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,
Tit 2:12 instructing us to the intent that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we would live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world;
Tit 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ;
Tit 2:14 who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify for himself a people for his own possession, zealous for good works.
Tit 2:15 Say these things and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no man despise you.

Modern-Day Miracles, Tongue-Speaking, and Holy Spirit Baptism: A Refutation--EXTENDED VERSION by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1399

Modern-Day Miracles, Tongue-Speaking, and Holy Spirit Baptism: A Refutation--EXTENDED VERSION

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Numerous religious groups commonly claim the assistance of the Holy Spirit in their lives. Famed religious television personalities boldly announce the active influence of the Holy Spirit even as they speak. Supposedly, the Holy Spirit talks to them personally, heals viewers instantaneously, and enables them to babble uncontrollably in an “unknown tongue.” All of this is claimed to be “proof positive” of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Do miracles still happen? Can people speak in tongues today? Does God, in the twenty-first century, supernaturally countermand the laws of nature and heal people miraculously?
“Come now, and let us reason together,” Isaiah said (1:18). It is absolutely imperative that we examine Scripture—not our feelings, not what someone else says happened to them, and not our own experience. The only sure and certain approach is to ask: What does the Bible teach? The reader must ask: “Do I honestly believe the Bible to be the Word of God?” Answers to critical questions of human existence require that a person be willing to spend time in the Word, “rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). One must “search the scriptures” (Acts 17:11). One must be honest and willing to go where the evidence takes him. If you had to choose between what you genuinely think you have experienced or seen firsthand and what the Bible actually says, which would you choose? You must ask yourself: “Will I honestly accept God’s written Word on the matter of miracles?” If you will, I invite you to join me in an examination of what the Bible teaches pertaining to miracles.

THE DEFINITION OF MIRACLES

First of all, what exactly is a “miracle”? How does the Bible use the word? The three central terms used in the Bible to designate a supernatural (as contrasted with a natural) manifestation are: (1) “miracle” (dunamis); (2) “sign” (semeion); and (3) “wonder” (teras). All three terms occur together in Acts 2:22, Hebrews 2:4, and 2 Corinthians 12:12. Related terms include “work” (ergon) and “mighty deed” (kratos). The occurrence of a miracle in the Bible meant that God worked outside the laws of nature. W.E. Vine, whose Greek scholarship, according to F.F. Bruce, was “wide, accurate and up-to-date” (Vine, 1952, Foreword), stated that “miracle” (dunamis) is used in the New Testament of “works of a supernatural origin and character, such as could not be produced by natural agents and means” (1952, p. 75, emp. added). Otfried Hofius noted that a “sign” (semeion) “contradicts the natural course of things” (1976, 2:626, emp. added) and, similarly, “wonder” (teras) referred to events that “contradict the ordered unity of nature” (2:633, emp. added). Thus a miracle in the Bible was not merely an event that was astonishing, incredible, extraordinary, or unusual (e.g., the birth of a baby, a flower, or the narrow avoidance of an accident). A miracle in the Bible was a supernatural act. It was an event that was contrary to the usual course of nature (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 755). The miraculous is not to be confused with the providential, where God operates within the usual course of nature.

THE DESIGN OF MIRACLES

Second, it is absolutely imperative that one recognizes the purpose of the miraculous. Miracles in the New Testament served the singular function of confirmation. When an inspired speaker stepped forward to declare God’s Word, God validated or endorsed the speaker’s remarks by empowering the speaker to perform a miracle. Many New Testament passages articulate this fact quite plainly. For example, the apostles “went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word by the signs that followed” (Mark 16:20, emp. added). The Hebrews writer asked: “[H]ow shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation; which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard; God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders, and by manifold powers, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit” (Hebrews 2:3-4, emp. added). Referring to the initial proclamation of the Gospel to the Samaritans, Luke stated: “[A]nd the multitudes gave heed with one accord unto the things that were spoken by Philip, when they heard, and saw the signs which he did” (Acts 8:6, emp. added). The apostles prayed to God: “[G]rant unto thy servants to speak thy word with all boldness, while thou stretchest forth thy hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done” (Acts 4:29-30, emp. added).
These passages, and many others (e.g., Acts 13:12; 14:3; 15:12; Romans 15:18-19; 1 Corinthians 2:4; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; cf. Exodus 4:30), show that the purpose of miracles was to authenticate the oral/spoken word as God’s Word. Miracles legitimized and verified the teaching of God’s messengers, as over against the many false teachers (like Simon in Acts 8:9, or Pharaoh’s magicians in Exodus 7:11) who attempted to mislead the people. In the late nineteenth century, Greek lexicographer Joseph Thayer worded this point well when he noted that “sign” (semeion) was used in the New Testament “of miracles and wonders by which God authenticates the men sent by him, or by which men prove that the cause they are pleading is God’s” (1901, p. 573). Even the miracles that Jesus performed were designed to back up His claim (i.e., spoken words) to be deity. Consider two examples: (1) Using the parallel term “works” (a key word in the book of John), Jesus remarked to Philip, “Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? the words that I say unto you I speak not from myself: but the Father abiding in me doeth his works. Believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me: or else believe Me for the very works’ sake” (John 14:10-11, emp. added); (2) Nicodemus said to Jesus: “Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that thou doest except God be with him” (John 3:2, emp. added). This pattern is repeated in the New Testament many times over (e.g., John 2:23; 5:36; 6:14; 7:31; 10:37-38,41-42; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22). In other words, Jesus performed signs and miracles to prove His divine identity and thereby authenticate His message. His message, in turn, generated faith in those who chose to believe His teachings (cf. Romans 10:17). Here is the consistent sequence presented in Scripture: Signs → Word → Faith. (1) Signs confirmed the Word; (2) the Word was presented to hearers; and (3) faith was created (by the Word) in those who received it.
An excellent demonstration of this process was provided by Luke in his report of the conversion of the Roman proconsul, Sergius Paulus. Elymas the sorcerer attempted to thwart Paul’s effort to teach Sergius the Gospel. So Paul performed a miracle by striking Elymas blind. Luke next recorded: “Then the proconsul, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the teaching of the Lord” (Acts 13:12, emp. added). One might well expect the text to have said that Sergius was astonished at the miracle that Paul performed. But Luke was careful to report the situation with precision. The miracle that Paul performed captured Sergius’ attention, causing him to recognize the divine origin of Paul’s Gospel message. The Gospel message, in turn, generated faith in the proconsul—in harmony with Paul’s later affirmation to Christians in Rome that faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Over and over again in the New Testament, a close correlation is seen between the performance of miracles and the preaching of the Word of God (cf. Mark 6:12-13; Luke 9:2,6).

MIRACLES CONFIRM THE WORD

PASSAGE
MESSAGE
CONFIRMATION
RESPONSE
Acts 4:29-32 “Speak Your Word with all boldness” “by stretching out Your hand to heal and that signs and wonders may be done” “those who believed were of one heart and soul”
Acts 8:5-12 “the things spoken by Philip;” “Philip…preached Christ” “hearing and seeing the miracles which he did” “they believed Philip as he preached the things…and were baptized”
Acts 13:7-12 “sought to hear the word of God” “You shall be blind, not seeing” “the proconsul believed…being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord”
Acts 14:2-3 “speaking boldly in the Lord” “The Lord…was bearing witness to the word…granting signs/wonders to be done” “a great multitude…believed”
Romans 15:18-19 “I have fully preached the gospel of Christ” “in mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God” “to make the Gentiles obedient”
1 Corinthians 2:4-5 “my speech and my preaching” “in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” “that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God”
1 Thessalonians 1:5-6 “our gospel did not come to you in word only” “but also in power, and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance” “you became followers of us and the Lord, having received the word”
Hebrews 2:1-4 “so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord” “God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit” “give the more earnest heed”
Mark 16:15-20 “preach the gospel…they went out and preached…the word” “the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs” “he who believes and is baptized will be saved”
John 2:22 “He had said this...the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said” “when he had risen from the dead” “they believed”
John 2:23 “in His name” “they saw the signs which He did” “many believed”
But some maintain that there are other reasons for divine healing and tongue-speaking. Some say tongue-speaking is a sign that the tongue-speaker is super-spiritual. Others say miraculous healing serves the purpose of making the believer well—a mere act of mercy to relieve his pain and suffering. They say God does not want us to suffer, and so He will heal us just to ease our pain in this life because we are His children.
Regarding the first claim, in Paul’s admonitions directed to the church of Christ at Corinth, he insisted that the person who possessed the ability to speak in tongues was not spiritually superior to the one who had no such ability. The tongue-speaker had a responsibility to utilize his gift appropriately, i.e., to help others (1 Corinthians 14:6,9,12,19). His gift no more placed him in a spiritually superior position than did any other gift possessed by any other member—whether the ability was miraculous or non-miraculous (1 Corinthians 12:11-27). Tongue-speaking was simply one miraculous capability among many bestowed by God without regard to a member’s spiritual status, let alone his spiritual superiority over another member (1 Corinthians 12:7-11,28-30).
Regarding the second claim, certainly, the compassion of God was evident when people received miraculous healing in New Testament times. And, surely, relief from suffering would have been a side effect of being healed. But the Bible teaches that relieving suffering was not the purpose of miracles. Such a purpose would contradict—even thwart—the divine intent of this created Earth as a place where hardship exists to prepare us for eternity (see Warren, 1972). Death and sin entered the world due to human choice, and God allows the circumstances caused by human decisions to take their course. God is not going to interfere with the natural order of things to show partiality to some over others. The Christian is subject to the same diseases, the same tragedies, and the same physical death that befall non-Christians: “for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (Genesis 3:19). The Bible, in fact, warns Christians that they can expect to be the recipients of all sorts of hardship, opposition, temptation, and suffering (e.g., 1 Corinthians 10:13; 2 Timothy 3:12; 1 Peter 4:12-17). Commenting on the purpose of miracles, J.W. McGarvey wrote: “[T]o say that they were wrought for the single purpose of showing divine compassion toward the sick, and those oppressed by the devil, would be to ignore a purpose which is easily discerned, which is openly avowed by Christ himself, and which is of much greater importance (1910, p. 354). That purpose was “to support his proclamation…a necessary proof of the claim of Jesus” (pp. 355-356).
If God’s intention was to exempt Christians from sickness and disease, He certainly has fallen down on the job, since the vast majority of Christians throughout the last 2,000 years have experienced the exact same afflictions suffered by unbelievers. If miracles in the first century had as their object to improve the health or physical well-being of the recipient, then Jesus and the apostles were failures, because they left untouched a lot of sick and dying folk! Jesus healed the minority of the sick people of Palestine, and healed none outside of that tiny geographical region (with the exception of the Canaanite woman’s daughter). In fact, one would be forced to conclude that God’s compassion did not extend to everybody. But the Bible affirms that God loves the entire world of humanity (John 3:16; Romans 5:8). Hence, miracles did not have as their central purpose to demonstrate God’s compassion, nor to ease pain, sickness, and suffering. Writing in 1898, McGarvey made the following observations:
[U]nlike these modern advocates of “divine healing,” the apostles were never known to go about exhorting people to come forward for the healing of the body. They effected miraculous cures in a few instances, “as a sign to the unbelievers,” but they never proclaimed, either to saints or sinners, that the healing of all diseases was a part of the gospel which they were sent to preach. These so-called faith-cure churches, therefore, and the preachers who officiate in them as “divine healers,” or what not, are not modeled after the apostolic type, but are misleading the people by humbuggery (p. 351).
The usual rebuttal to these observations is that the reason some people do not receive a miracle is that “they do not have sufficient faith.” But this objection is likewise unscriptural. It is true that some individuals in the New Testament were commended for the faith that they possessed prior to being the recipient of a miracle (e.g., Mark 5:34). It does not automatically follow, however, that faith was a necessary prerequisite to miraculous reception. Many people were not required to have faith as a prerequisite. For example, all individuals who were raised from the dead obviously were not in a position to “have faith” (e.g., John 11:44). Nor did those possessed by demons have faith before being healed, since they were not in their right mind (e.g., Luke 9:42; 11:14). The man who was blind from birth actually showed uncertainty regarding the identity of Jesus (John 9:11-12,17,25,35-36). The man who was healed by Jesus as he laid beside a pool of water, in fact, did not even know who healed him (John 5:13). On one occasion, Jesus healed a paralytic after observing, not his faith, but the faith of his companions (Mark 2:5). Additional texts indicate that many who received the benefits of miracles were not required to have faith (Luke 13:12; 14:4; Acts 3:1-10).
The opposite was true as well. There were individuals who possessed faith, and yet were not healed of their ailments. The apostle Paul obviously had plenty of faith. He had an “infirmity” that was so painful that he called it “a thorn in the flesh” and “a messenger of Satan” (2 Corinthians 12:7-10). Yet his earnest prayers to God for relief did not result in his being healed. Timothy was a faithful and effective servant of the Lord. He had “frequent illnesses” and stomach trouble of such severity as to warrant Paul referring to it by inspiration. But rather than simply healing him, or telling him to “pray for healing,” Paul advised him to use a little wine as a tonic (1 Timothy 5:23). Another Christian worker and companion of Paul in his evangelistic travels, Trophimus (Acts 20:4: 21:29), had to be left at Miletus due to his sickness (2 Timothy 4:20). Epaphroditus was an extremely valuable worker in the kingdom of Christ, so much so that Paul referred to him as “my brother and fellow-worker and fellow-soldier…and minister to my need” (Philippians 2:25). When he became sick “nigh unto death” (Philippians 2:27,30)—likely due to his exhausting kingdom activity and service to Paul—Paul did not heal him. These examples demonstrate that personal faith was not prerequisite to the reception of a miracle in the first century. Miracles were inextricably bound to the authentication of the spoken Word of God.
But what about those verses that seem to indicate that faith did have something to do with whether a miracle would be forthcoming? For instance, what of Matthew’s observation that when Jesus went to His own country, He “did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief ” (Matthew 13:58)? Notice that the text cannot be correlating the presence of the miraculous with the presence of belief. After all, “not many” implies that some miracles were performed—even though unbelief was rampant. The point that Matthew was making, therefore, was that when Jesus performed a few miracles to authenticate His oral claim to deity, the evidence was rejected, making it superfluous for Christ to offer any further miraculous demonstrations. Albert Barnes explained this matter succinctly:
We are not to suppose that his [Jesus—DM] power was limited by the belief or unbelief of men; but they were so prejudiced, so set against him, that they were not in a condition to judge of evidence and to be convinced. … It would have been of no use, therefore, in proving to them that he was from God, to have worked miracles. … He gave sufficient proof of his mission, and left them in their chosen unbelief without excuse (1956, p. 150, emp. in orig.).
Jesus was simply doing what He instructed the Twelve to do: “whatsoever place shall not receive you, and they hear you not, …shake off the dust that is under your feet” (Mark 6:11). He also had said: “[N]either cast your pearls before the swine” (Matthew 7:6). If performing additional miracles would have confirmed the Word, Jesus would have performed them.
John actually settled this question for the unbiased searcher. He worded the thematic statement of his Gospel record in the following words: “Many other signs therefore did Jesus in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book: but these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in His name” (John 20:30-31, emp. added). John said that belief occurs after the miracle—not before, in order to receive a miracle! The New Testament teaches the very opposite of those who claim that miracles occur today. They say a person must have faith before he or she can receive a miracle. The New Testament teaches that miracles were performed to authenticate the divine origin of the speaker’s message and/or identity. The message, in turn, generated faith in the hearer (cf. Romans 10:17). Hence, miracles preceded faith. Even tongue-speaking was designed to convince the unbeliever to give heed to the message (1 Corinthians 14:22).
A good summary passage that pinpoints precisely the purpose of miracles throughout the Bible is seen in the incident concerning the widow of Zarephath to whom Elijah was sent for assistance in surviving the famine during the reign of King Ahab. When her son’s serious illness culminated in his death, Elijah brought the boy back to life, raising him from the dead. Her subsequent verbal observation summarizes succinctly the function of the miraculous: “Now by this I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in your mouth is the truth” (1 Kings 17:24). The miracle fulfilled its intended purpose: to verify that, as a genuine emissary of the one true God, Elijah was a communicator of God’s Word.

THE DURATION OF MIRACLES

These observations bring us to a third extremely critical realization: once God revealed the entirety of the information that He wished to make available to mankind (later contained in what we call the New Testament), the need for miraculous confirmation of the oral Word came to an end. Now, people can sit down with a New Testament, the written Word of God, and, with honest and diligent study, conclude that it is God’s Word. Many preachers and teachers today have failed to acknowledge this crucial biblical factor. They fail to face the fact that we have absolutely no need for the miraculous. Since the purpose of miracles has been achieved, the miracles, themselves, have ceased. I repeat: the Bible teaches that miracles are no longer necessary. We have everything we need to function in this life, to be pleasing to God, and to survive spiritually (2 Peter 1:3). Spiritual maturity is now within the grasp of every single individual who chooses to access the means to maturity—the written Word of God. To insist that we have need for the miraculous today is to undermine, and to cast aspersions upon, the all-sufficiency of God’s Word (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:22; 2 Timothy 3:16-17).
The most detailed treatment of the phenomena of miracles in the New Testament, including tongue-speaking, healing, and prophecy, is 1 Corinthians 12, 13, and 14. These three chapters were written to Christians at Corinth because miracles were being abused and misused. Chapter 12 defines the miracles. Chapter 13 indicates their duration. Chapter 14 explains their disposition. In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul argued that the body (the church) should function harmoniously by using miraculous gifts properly. In 1 Corinthians 13, Paul argued that love is a more excellent attribute than miraculous gifts. After all, miraculous gifts (i.e., prophecy, tongue-speaking, supernatural knowledge, etc.) were going to fail, cease, vanish, and be done away (13:8). These miraculous gifts are identified in the text with the expression “in part” (13:9-10). The “in part,” or miraculous, would cease and be done away when the “perfect” had come. But to what does the “perfect” refer?
The Greek word translated “perfect” is teleios. The term does not refer to “perfect” in the sense typically understood by the average modern English reader, i.e., to be sinless. Following this faulty notion, some have concluded that the “perfect” refers to Jesus—since He has been the only perfect person. Other interpretations apply “perfect” to heaven (the only perfect place that will be free of sin and imperfection), or Christian maturity and perfect love (the perfect condition or quality). But, in context, Paul was not contrasting qualities or places. He was contrasting quantities, i.e., those things that were incomplete and partial (miraculous gifts) with that which would be total and complete (the fully revealed Word of God). The inaccuracy of these interpretations is seen further in the Greek definition of teleios. The word refers to totality, that which is whole, brought to its end, finished, and lacking nothing necessary to completeness (Delling, 1972, 8:73; Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 816; Thayer, 1901, p. 618). When referring to persons, teleios refers to being full-grown, adult, and mature (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 817; Thayer, 1977, p. 618). Used in its neuter form, Paul was referring to a thing—not a person—something that, when completed or finished, would replace the incomplete or partial, i.e., the miraculous gifts—which clearly had only temporary significance. Commenting on the abolition of the miraculous gifts of prophecy and supernatural knowledge (mentioned in vss. 8 and 9), W.R. Nicoll observed that “these charisms are partial in scope, and therefore temporary: the fragmentary gives place to the complete” (1900, 2:900, emp. added). Kenneth Wuest agreed: “In I Corinthians 13:10, the word means ‘complete,’ and is contrasted to that which is incomplete” (1943a, pp. 117-118). Whereas James used the term teleios to refer to the all-sufficiency of God’s Word in its ability to achieve everything it was intended to do (James 1:25), the exegete is forced to conclude that Paul’s use of “perfect” referred to the completed revelation or totally revealed New Testament Scriptures. The revelation of God’s will was completed in its entirety when the final book of the New Testament, Revelation, was written by John prior to A.D. 100.
Paul offered a useful illustration to clarify his point. When the church possessed only bits and pieces of God’s will, as revealed through scattered miraculous gifts and the gradual production, between approximately A.D. 57 and A.D. 95, of the written documents from the inspired writers of the New Testament, it could not achieve full spiritual maturity. It therefore was like a child (13:11). It lacked the necessary constituent elements to reach spiritual adulthood. However, when the totality of God’s will, which became the New Testament, had been revealed, the church then had the means available to become “a man” (13:11). Once the church had access to all of God’s written Word, the means by which the Word was given (i.e., miraculous gifts) would be obsolete, useless, and therefore “put away” (13:11). Notice that in this illustration, Paul likened miracles to “childish things” (13:11). In other words, miracles were the spiritual equivalents of pacifiers that were necessary while the church was in a state of infancy. Now that the church has access to “all truth” (John 16:13), the use of tongue-speaking and other miraculous enhancements in the church today would be comparable to an adult man or woman sucking on a pacifier!
Paul then explained his point by making a contrast between the initial necessity of miracles to reveal and confirm God’s Word, and the idea of looking through a clouded mirror (see Workman, 1983, p. 8). Once the entire contents of the New Testament had been revealed, the miraculous gifts no longer would be necessary. Having all of God’s revealed Word would enable one to be face to face with that Word rather than “looking through a clouded mirror,” i.e., having partial access. Paul wrote (13:11): “Now I know in part [i.e., my knowledge of God’s revelation is incomplete and partial due to limited access via the miraculous element—DM], but then [i.e., when all of God’s Word is revealed—DM] shall I know fully even as also I was fully known [i.e., I shall be made to know or taught thoroughly (which is the figure of speech known as heterosis of the verb in which the intransitive is put for the transitive—see Bullinger, 1898, p. 512)—DM].”
Paul made essentially the same point to the Ephesians that he made to the Corinthians. Miracles—the “gifts” given by Christ (Ephesians 4:8)—were to last “till the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God” (Ephesians 4:13, emp. added). Two significant observations emerge from this latter verse. First, the word translated “till” (Middle English for “until”) is mechri, and was used as a conjunction to indicate the terminus ad quem [finishing point] of the miraculous offices (mentioned in vs. 11) bestowed as gifts by Christ. [For treatments of the use of mechri in this verse, see Thayer, 1977, p. 408; Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 517; Moulton and Milligan, 1982, p. 407; Blass, et al., 1961, pp. 193-194; Robertson, 1934, pp. 974-975; Dana and Mantey, 1927, p. 281; see also the use of the term in Mark 13:30 and Galatians 4:19]. Nicoll observed: “The statement of the great object of Christ’s gifts and the provision made by Him for its fulfillment is now followed by a statement of the time this provision and the consequent service are to last” (1900, 3:332, emp. in orig.). Paul was “[s]pecifying the time up to which this ministry and impartation of gifts are to last” (Vincent, 1890, p. 390, emp. added).
Second, the phrase “the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God” often is misunderstood to refer to the eventual unifying of all believers in Christ. But this conclusion cannot be correct. Both Scripture and common sense dispel such a notion. Complete unity within Christendom will never occur. Those who profess affiliation with Christianity are in a hopeless state of disunity. Catholicism and Protestant denominationalism are fractured into a plethora of factions and splinter groups—literally thousands of divisions and disagreements. Besides, Protestant denominationalism did not exist in the New Testament era, and the New Testament neither countenances nor legitimizes any such “manifestation” of Christianity. Nor will unity ever be achieved even within churches of Christ. The first-century congregations did not attain complete internal unity. Nor have the post first-century congregations achieved unity within.
In contrast with this interpretation, notice the use of the articles in the phrases: “the faith” and “the knowledge.” Contextually, Paul was referring to the system of faith alluded to so often in the New Testament. Jude urged his readers to “contend earnestly for the faith” (Jude 3). Paul referred to himself when he quoted others as saying, “He that once persecuted us now preacheth the faith of which he once made havoc” (Galatians 1:23). Luke reported that “a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7). Elymas sought to “turn aside the proconsul from the faith” (Acts 13:8). The early disciples were exhorted to “continue in the faith” (Acts 14:22). Due to Paul’s repeat visits in Lycaonia, “the churches were strengthened in the faith” (Acts 16:5).
So “the faith” and “the knowledge” refer to the completed body of information that constitutes the Christian religion. Indeed, eight verses earlier (Ephesians 4:5), Paul already had referred to “the faith” as the summation and totality of Christian doctrine—now situated in the repository of the New Testament. An honest exegete is driven to conclude that once the precepts of New Testament Christianity were revealed on Earth, the miraculous element no longer was necessary. Miracles lasted until “the faith” was completely revealed. They had served their purpose, in the same way that scaffolding is useful while a building is under construction. However, once construction is complete, the scaffolding is removed and discarded as unnecessary and superfluous paraphernalia.

THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF MIRACLES
IN CORINTH AND EPHESUS

1 Corinthians 12-14
Ephesians 4
“Gifts” (12:4,9, 28,30,31) “Gifts” (4:7-8)
“no schism in the body” (12:25) “joined and knit together” (4:16)
“one body, many members” (12:12,14,18-20,27) “whole body, every part” (4:16)
“apostles, prophets, teachers” (12:29) “apostles, prophets, pastor-teachers” (4:11)
“prophecies, knowledge” (13:8) “prophets, evangelists, pastor-teachers” (4:11)
“fail, cease, vanish, done away” (13:8-10) “until” (4:13)
“we come to the unity of the faith” (4:13)
“when perfect comes” (13:10) “the knowledge/the fullness of Christ” (4:13)
“shall know” (13:12) “the knowledge/the fullness of Christ” (4:13)
“child” (13:11) “children” (4:14)
“man” (13:11) “man” (4:13)
“put away childish things” (13:11) “grow up” (4:15)
“love” (13:1-8) “love” (4:15-16)
“edification of the church” (14:3-5,12,17) “edifying the body of Christ” (4:12)

THE DISPLAY AND DISPOSITION OF MIRACLES

Fourth, the actual exercise of miraculous gifts by Christians is addressed in 1 Corinthians 14. In this context, Paul used the term “gifts” (charismata, from charisma) in a technical sense (like pneumatika) to refer to miraculous abilities, designated by Thayer “extraordinary powers…by the Holy Spirit” (1901, p. 667, emp. added; cf. Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 887). Hans Conzelmann stated that the term indicated that “[t]he operations are supernatural” and of “supernatural potency” (1974, 9:405, emp. added). [The word is so used in the Pauline corpus in ten of its sixteen occurrences (Romans 1:11; 12:6; 1 Corinthians 1:7; 12:4,9,28,30,31; 1 Timothy 4:14; 2 Timothy 1:6). The only other occurrence of the word in the New Testament was Peter’s comparable use, i.e., to refer to supernatural ability (1 Peter 4:10)—see Moulton, et al., 1978, p. 1005]. In the Corinthian context of chapter 14, special attention was given by Paul to two of the miraculous gifts in particular: prophecy and tongue-speaking. Several relevant points occur with regard to the gift of tongue-speaking that help one to understand both the temporary nature of miracles as well as their irrelevance to a contemporary pursuit and practice of New Testament Christianity.

Tongue-Speaking

First, in 1 Corinthians 14, the term “unknown” (in regard to tongues) was italicized in the KJV because it does not appear in the original Greek text (14:2,4,13-14,19,27). By inserting this word into their translation, the translators were attempting to aid the English reader. They undoubtedly were hoping to convey the idea that the languages to which Paul referred were unknown to the speaker, i.e., the speaker had no prior training by which to learn or know the language. He spoke the language strictly by God’s miraculous empowerment. “Unknown” certainly was not intended to convey the idea that the tongues were unknown to all humans and, as such, were non-earthly, non-human languages.
Second, the events reported at the very beginning of the Christian religion (Acts 2) set the precedent for understanding that tongue-speaking entailed no more than the ability to speak a foreign human language (which the speaker had not studied) to people from a variety of geographical locales (e.g., Parthians, Medes, Arabians—Acts 2:9-11). The unbiased Bible student must conclude that what is described in detail in Acts 2 is the same phenomenon alluded to in 1 Corinthians 14. All tongue-speaking in the Bible consisted of known human languages (ideally known to the very audience being addressed) that were unknown (i.e., unstudied, unlearned) by the one who was speaking the language.
Third, there is simply no such thing as an “ecstatic utterance” in the New Testament. The tongue-speaking of 1 Corinthians 14 entailed human language—not incoherent gibberish. A simple reading of the chapter demonstrates that known human languages are under consideration. For example, Paul paralleled tongue-speaking with the use of the trumpet in warfare. If the bugler sounded meaningless noise, the military would be thrown into confusion. It was imperative for the bugler to blow the proper notes and tones, i.e., meaningful musical “language,” so that the army would understand what was being communicated (whether to charge, engage, or retreat). Sound without sense fails to achieve the very purpose of tongue-speaking. Paul then stated:
So likewise ye, unless ye utter by the tongue speech easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye will be speaking into the air. There are, it may be, so many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without signification. If then I know not the meaning of the language, I shall be to him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh will be a barbarian unto me (1 Corinthians 14:9-11, emp. added).
Obviously, Paul was referring to human languages—those that exist “in the world.” He envisioned a scenario where two individuals, who spoke different languages, are attempting to communicate with each other. If one speaks in Spanish and the other in German, as they attempt to speak to one another, each would be a “foreigner” to the other. Neither would understand what the other was attempting to say. Hence the need for tongue-speaking, i.e., the ability to speak human language unknown to the speaker but known to the recipient.
Later in the chapter, Paul quoted Isaiah 28:11-12 where God threatened the Israelites with the fact that their failure to listen to Him (by means of the words spoken by His prophets) meant that He soon would be communicating to them through the language of their Assyrian conquerors—conquerors whom God would send against them. This powerful illustration presupposes the fact that in both Isaiah and 1 Corinthians, human languages are under consideration. After quoting Isaiah, Paul drew the conclusion that tongue-speaking was intended by God to be directed to unbelievers. Why? Because it would prove to the unbeliever that the tongue-speaker, who did not possess the natural ability to speak that language, was being empowered by God to speak in the language spoken by the unbeliever. The unbeliever would recognize the divine origin of the tongue-speaker’s ability, and thereby be willing to consider the words being spoken as the instructions of God. Again, an examination of 1 Corinthians 14 yields the result that no contextual justification exists for drawing the conclusion that the Bible refers to, let alone endorses, the notion of “ecstatic” speech.

Tongues of Angels?

But what about Paul’s passing reference to the “tongues of angels” in 1 Corinthians 13:1? Would not this reference prove that tongue-speaking could involve languages beyond those spoken by humans? In the first place, consider the role, purpose, and activity of angels described in the Bible. The word “angel” (Greek—angelos; Hebrew—malak) simply means “messenger”—one who “speaks and acts in the place of the one who has sent him” (Bietenhard, 1975, 1:101; Botterweck, et al., 1997, 8:308; Grundmann, 1964, 1:74ff; Gesenius, 1847, p. 475; Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 7). It does not mean merely “to send,” but rather “to send a messenger/message” (Ringgren, 1997, 8:310). It is true that angels in both the Old and New Testaments carried out a wide range of activities beyond message-bearing, including: worshipping God (Revelation 5:11-12); comforting, aiding, and protecting (Daniel 6:22; Matthew 4:11; Luke 22:43; Acts 5:19; Hebrews 1:14); and executing judgment and inflicting punishment and death (e.g., Matthew 13:49; Acts 12:23). But it still remains true to say that the meaning of the term “angel” is a messenger—one who communicates a spoken message. Therefore, their principal role in God’s scheme of things was to function as messengers to humans (Grundmann, 1964, 1:74). Consequently, angels always are represented in Scripture as communicating in human language.
In the second place, what logical reason exists for humans to speak in an alleged “angelic” language that is different from human language? What would be the spiritual benefit? The Bible certainly makes no provision for humans to communicate with angels in such a language, nor would there be any need for an angel to communicate to a human in a non-earthly language. The whole point of 1 Corinthians 12-13 was to stress the need to function in the church in ways that were meaningful and understandable. Since God, by His very nature, never would do anything that is superfluous, unnecessary, or frivolous, it follows that He would not bestow upon a human being the ability to speak in a non-human language. The ability would serve no purpose! The Bible simply offers no rationale nor justification for identifying the “tongues of angels” in 1 Corinthians 13:1 with some heavenly, otherworldly, non-earthly languages.
In the third place, if, in fact, the “tongues of angels” refers to known human languages, what was Paul’s point? Since angels were God’s appointed spokesmen, they naturally would perform their assignment in such a way that God would be represented as He would want to be. God’s own angelic emissaries would have complied with their responsibility in such a way and manner that they would have God’s approval. In other words, angels would naturally articulate God’s message as well as it could be expressed (i.e., perfectly). When God inspired mere humans to communicate His will, He integrated their own educational background, stylistic idiosyncrasies, and vocabulary into their oral and literary productions. No such need would have existed for angels. Their communications would have been unfiltered through human agency. Their announcements would have been the epitome and pinnacle of eloquence and oratorical skill.
Perhaps, then, Paul was not drawing a contrast between human and nonhuman languages at all. Before referring to the “tongues of angels,” he referred to “the tongues of men.” Why would Paul say, “Though I speak with the tongues of men”? After all, isn’t that precisely what all adult humans do? We humans speak at least one human language! Paul must have been referring, then, not to the ability to speak a human language, but to the ability to speak all human languages. No tongue-speaker in the first-century church had the ability to speak all human languages. In fact, the textual evidence indicates that most tongue-speakers probably had the ability to speak only one human language—which he, himself, did not understand—thus necessitating the need for an inspired interpreter (1 Corinthians 12:30; 14:26-28). Paul could apparently speak more languages than any of the others (1 Corinthians 14:18). If the “tongues of men” referred to the number of human languages (rather than referring to the ability to speak a human language), then the “tongues of angels” would refer—not to the ability to speak an angelic language—but to the ability to speak human languages the way angels do.
Here, then, would have been Paul’s point: even if a tongue-speaker could speak every human language known to man, and even if that tongue-speaker could speak those human languages with the efficiency, skill, and perfection that God’s angelic messengers have spoken them in history, without love, the ability would be wasted. With this understanding of the text, Paul was not contrasting human with nonhuman language. He was encompassing both the quantity (if I could speak all human languages) and the quality (if I could speak them perfectly) of speaking human language.
One final point on the matter of the “tongues of angels” merits mention. Even if the expression actually refers to angelic tongues that are nonhuman, it still is likely that tongue-speakers were incapable of speaking such languages. Why? Paul was speaking hypothetically and hyperbolically. No human being (with the exception of perhaps Jesus) has ever been able to speak in all human languages. For Paul to suggest such was to pose a hypothetical situation. It was to exaggerate the facts. So Paul’s meaning was: “even if I were capable of speaking all human languages—which I’m not.” Likewise, no human being has ever been able to speak the tongues of angels. So Paul’s meaning was: “even if I were capable of speaking the languages of angels—which I’m not.” This conclusion is supported further by the verse that follows the reference to the “tongues of angels.” There, Paul used two additional hypothetical events when he said, “if I…know all mysteries and all knowledge” and “if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains” (1 Corinthians 13:2). But no one on the planet (with the exception of deity) has understood all mysteries and all knowledge, nor has had faith that could literally remove mountains. Again, Paul was merely saying, “even if I could do such things—which I can’t.”
Fourth, Paul stated very clearly that tongue-speaking was a sign to unbelievers—not believers (14:22). Tongue-speaking was to be done in their presence, to convince them of the truth being spoken, i.e., to confirm the Word. The tongue-speaking being practiced today is done in the presence of those who already believe that tongue-speaking is occurring and, when an unbeliever, who is skeptical of the genuineness of the activity, makes an appearance in such an assembly, the claim often is made that tongue-speaking cannot occur because of the presence of unbelief. Once again, the New Testament teaches the very opposite of those who claim the ability to speak in tongues today.
Fifth, the recipient of a miraculous gift in the New Testament could control himself (14:32). He was not overwhelmed by the Holy Spirit so that he began to babble or flail about. Tongue-speaking today is frequently practiced in a setting where the individuals who claim to be exercising the gift are speaking uncontrollably at the very time that others are either doing the same thing or engaging in some other action. This overlapping activity is in direct violation of three of Paul’s commands: (1) that each individual take their turn one at a time; (2) that no more than three tongue-speakers speak per service; and (3) that tongue-speakers remain silent if no interpreter is present (14:27-28).
The claim by many today to be able to speak in tongues is simply out of harmony with New Testament teaching. Anyone can babble, make up sounds, and claim he or she is speaking in tongues. But such conduct is no sign today. It is precisely the same phenomenon that pagan religions have practiced through the centuries. In the New Testament, however, no one questioned the authenticity of tongue-speaking. Why? The speaker was speaking a known human language that could be understood by those present who knew that language and knew that that particular speaker did not know that language beforehand. As McGarvey observed about Acts 2: “Not only did the apostles speak in foreign languages that were understood by the hearers, some understanding one and some another, but the fact that this was done by Galileans, who knew only their mother tongue, was the one significant fact that gave to Peter’s speech which followed all of its power over the multitude” (1910, p. 318). If and when self-proclaimed tongue-speakers today demonstrate that genuine New Testament gift, their message could be accepted as being from God. But no one today has demonstrated that genuine New Testament gift.

Holy Spirit Baptism

Where does the baptism of the Holy Spirit fit into this discussion? Today’s alleged practitioners typically associate the expression “Holy Spirit baptism” with the phenomenon that enables the believer to speak in tongues, heal someone, or work other miracles. In other words, Holy Spirit baptism is simply a generic reference to miraculous empowerment. Anyone who can speak in a tongue or perform any other miraculous action is said to have been baptized in the Holy Spirit. He is said to be “Spirit-filled.” However, it might surprise the reader to find that the Bible alludes to Holy Spirit baptism in a very narrow, specialized, even technical sense. Just because a person could speak in tongues or work miracles did not necessarily mean he had been baptized in the Holy Spirit.
The very first allusion to Holy Spirit baptism in the New Testament is John’s statement: “I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me...will baptize you in the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 3:11, emp. added). From this statement alone, one might be tempted to assume that Christians in general would be baptized in the Holy Spirit. But this assumption would be a premature conclusion. John was not addressing a Christian audience. He was speaking to Jews. Nothing in the context allows the interpreter to distinguish John’s intended recipients of the promise of Holy Spirit baptism—whether all humans, all Jews, all Christians, or merely some of those in one or more of these categories. Likewise, the exact recipients of the baptism of fire (i.e., hell) are not specified. However, as is often the case in the Bible, the specific recipients of this promise are clarified in later passages.
Just before His ascension, Jesus told the apostles to wait in Jerusalem until “clothed with power from on high” (Luke 24:49). In John chapters 14-16, Jesus made several specific promises to the apostles concerning the coming of the Spirit—the “Comforter” or “Helper” (parakletos)—upon them, to empower them to do the peculiar work of an apostle (i.e., to recall the words Jesus had spoken to them, to speak and write by inspiration, and to launch the Christian religion). If these verses apply to all Christians, then all Christians ought to have been personally guided “into all the truth” (John 16:13), and thus would have absolutely no need of written Scripture (John 14:26). However, in context, these verses clearly refer to the apostolic office.
Jesus further clarified the application of Holy Spirit baptism when He told the apostles that the earlier statement made in Luke 24:49 applied to them, and would come to pass “not many days hence” (Acts 1:4-5). Jesus also stated that the “power” that they would receive would be from the Holy Spirit, which would enable them to witness to the world what they had experienced by being with Jesus (Acts 1:8). Notice very carefully that on this occasion Jesus made an explicit reference to the very statement that John had uttered previously in Matthew 3: “for John indeed baptized with water; but ye [apostles—DM] shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days hence” (Acts 1:5, emp. added). Jesus specifically and explicitly identified the Holy Spirit baptism that He would administer (in keeping with John’s prediction) would take place within a few days, and would be confined to the apostles.
All one need do is turn the page to see the promise of Holy Spirit baptism achieve dramatic and climactic fulfillment in Acts 2 when the Spirit was poured out only upon the apostles. The antecedent of “they” in Acts 2:4 is “the apostles” in Acts 1:26. The apostles were the ones who spoke in tongues and taught the people. They were the recipients of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, as is evident from the following contextual indicators: (1) “are not all these that speak Galileans?” (2:7); (2) “Peter, standing up with the eleven” (2:14); (3) “they...said unto Peter and the rest of the apostles” (2:37); (4) Peter quoted Joel 2:28-32 and applied it to that occasion as proof that the apostles were not intoxicated; and (5) the text even states explicitly that the signs and wonders were “done through the apostles” (2:43). This pattern continues in the book of Acts: “And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people” (5:12); “the Lord, who bare witness unto the word of his grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by their hands” (14:3); “what signs and wonders God had wrought…through them” (15:12).
The next direct reference to Holy Spirit baptism consisted of Peter describing the experience of the Gentiles in Acts 10. Referring to their empowerment to speak in tongues, Peter explicitly identified it as being comparable to the experience of the apostles in Acts 2. Note his explanation: “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them, even as on us [apostles—DM] at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit. If then God gave unto them the like gift as he did also unto us [apostles—DM]…” (Acts 11:15-17, emp. added). Peter unmistakably linked the baptism of the Holy Spirit predicted by John in Matthew 3:11, and applied by Jesus to the apostles in Acts 1:5, with the unique and exclusive bestowal of the same on the first Gentile candidates of salvation. If the baptism of the Holy Spirit had occurred between Acts 2 and Acts 10, why did Peter compare the Gentiles’ experience with the experience of the apostles—rather than comparing it with many other Christians who allegedly would have received it during the intervening years? The answer lies in the fact that the baptism of the Holy Spirit did not occur during the intervening years. Baptism of the Holy Spirit was a unique and infrequent occurrence that came directly from deity.
This understanding harmonizes with additional facts. The great prophecy of the Old Testament, which made special reference to the coming New Testament era as the dispensation of the Spirit, incorporated a most noteworthy expression. God declared, “I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh” (Joel 2:28). Peter repeated it on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17). What did God mean by the expression “all flesh”? Members of the charismatic community insist that “all flesh” means “all Christians.” They maintain that every Christian can receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. They claim that to narrow the application of the promise of Holy Spirit baptism to a select group of individuals would deprive all other Christians of the opportunity to receive miraculous power. However, upon what biblical basis may such a claim be made?
Those who claim the presence of miraculous gifts are guilty of the very thing they condemn—narrowing the expression “all flesh.” Surely no one would take the position that it means all animal flesh—since animals are not the recipients of God’s spiritual provisions. Nor would anyone contend that it means all human flesh—since all wicked, disobedient, unbelieving people would hardly expect, let alone desire, to receive God’s Spirit. Those who agree that the expression “all flesh” must undoubtedly be qualified to exclude the animals and the unbelieving will nonetheless insist that narrowing the meaning to less than “all Christians” is unjustifiable.
To understand the proper meaning and application of the expression “all flesh,” one must examine the biblical use of the expression. “All flesh” often is used in the Bible to refer to the bulk of humanity (e.g., Genesis 6:12-13). It also can include all animal flesh (e.g., Genesis 6:17,19). However, with God’s special utilization of the descendants of Abraham in His scheme of redemption, “all flesh” often has the more technical meaning of “all nationalities.” The primary reason for this specialized use of the expression was due to the fact that most of the Old Testament was written against the backdrop of the presence of the nation of Israel. God is certainly “no respecter of persons” (Romans 2:11; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 3:25; 1 Peter 1:17; Acts 10:34-35). He does not favor one ethnic group over another. However, since His redemptive intention included bringing Jesus into the world for the benefit of all, someone had to be selected through whom Jesus’ arrival might be achieved. That man was Abraham (Galatians 3:8,16) and, consequently, his descendents.
As a result of this circumstance, the Jewish writers of the Bible frequently divided humanity into only two racial groupings, i.e., Jew and non-Jew (Gentile). For example, in what is obviously a strongly Messianic passage, Isaiah (the “Messianic prophet”) predicted the coming of John the baptizer who would prepare the way for Jesus. He exclaimed: “The glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together” (40:5). The reference to “all flesh” was an unmistakable reference to the availability of salvation to both Jew and Gentile in the Christian era, as evinced by Luke’s quotation of the passage (Luke 3:6). The same is true in another prophecy that Isaiah uttered pertaining to the coming Christian era: “All flesh shall come to worship before Me” (Isaiah 66:23). The Jews of Isaiah’s day would not have been very pleased with Isaiah’s declarations, since they most certainly would have understood him to be predicting the incorporation of Gentiles into God’s favor—which the Jews felt they alone enjoyed.
Paul cinched the meaning of “all flesh” in his premiere treatise on justification by faith. He drew a clear distinction between the two ethnic categories by first declaring the sins of the Gentiles (Romans 1:18-32) and then declaring the sins of the Jews (Romans 2:1-3:8). Notice carefully his concluding remarks as he brought the first section of the book to its climax: “What then? are we [the Jews—DM] better than they [the Gentiles—DM]? No, in no wise: for we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin” (Romans 3:9, emp. added). He then quoted a series of Old Testament verses, which verified his emphasis upon the two (and only two) categories of human flesh, using two significant terms: “none” and “all.” “None” means neither Jew nor Gentile. “All” means both Jew and Gentile. Then he articulated his grand and climactic conclusion: “because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified” (Romans 3:20, emp. added). “No flesh” referred to Jew and Gentile. In other words, neither Jew nor Gentile could be justified by law alone. “No flesh” and “all flesh” were technical allusions to the two categories of human flesh, i.e., Jew and non-Jew.
Observe, then, that the first recipients of Holy Spirit baptism, as we have seen, were the Jewish apostles on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. It equipped them to establish the church and to write, speak, and confirm inspired truth. The second recipients of Holy Spirit baptism were the Gentile members of the household of Cornelius in Acts 10. It convinced Jewish Christians that Gentiles were fit prospects for the reception of the Gospel, and valid candidates for entrance into the kingdom (Acts 10:34-35,45; 11:18). So Joel’s statement, that God would pour out His Spirit on “all flesh,” applied to the outpouring on Jews in Acts 2 and on Gentiles in Acts 10. The only other conceivable occurrence of Holy Spirit baptism would have been Paul, who would have received direct miraculous ability from God as well. His reception was obviously unique because (1) he was not an apostle when the Twelve received the Spirit, and (2) he was “one born out of due time” (1 Corinthians 15:8). Holy Spirit baptism, then, filled two unique and exclusive purposes: (1) to prepare the apostles for their apostolic (not Christian) roles, and (2) to provide divine demonstration that Gentiles were to be allowed to become Christians.
One additional consideration deserves comment regarding Joel’s prophecy. If “all flesh” referred exclusively to the Jewish apostles and the first Gentile converts, why did Joel include “sons, daughters, old men, young men, servants, and handmaids” in the reception of God’s Spirit (Joel 2:28-29)? As was typical of Hebrew prophecy, progressive, sequential, and complete fulfillment would be forthcoming. A prophecy could possess several features that found fulfillment in a variety of circumstances. It is apparent, on the basis of the references already discussed (e.g., Matthew 3:11; Acts 1:5; 11:15-17), that only the first part of Joel’s prophecy was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. The “last days” (Acts 2:17) referred to the entire Christian dispensation from Pentecost to the Judgment. The outpouring of the Spirit, therefore, would include more than just the baptism of the Holy Spirit that was confined to the Jewish apostles on Pentecost and the Gentiles a few years later. Though the peculiar phenomenon of Holy Spirit baptism was limited to those two specific ethnic groups (i.e., the twelve apostles and the household of Cornelius), additional activity of the Spirit would include the impartation of miraculous gifts through the laying on of the apostles’ hands (discussed below). This conclusion is evident from the fact that no “daughters” or “handmaids” received Holy Spirit baptism on Pentecost. Nor is there any evidence of the occurrence of “dreams” or “visions” on Pentecost. With the Holy Spirit’s expanded presence in the instigation of Christianity in the first century came the eventual impartation of miraculous ability separate and apart from Holy Spirit baptism. The broadened fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy (subsequent to Acts 2) is seen in the references to Philip’s daughters who prophesied (Acts 21:9) and in the occurrence of visions (Acts 9:10; 10:3,10; 16:9). However, these miraculous manifestations, though included in Joel’s prophecy, were not instances of Holy Spirit baptism. The common link in the Holy Spirit’s outpouring on Pentecost and the manifestations of the Spirit thereafter was the baptism of the Holy Spirit on the apostles—who were the keys to the further distribution of miraculous power in the early years of Christianity.

1 Corinthians 12:13

But what about Paul’s statement to the Corinthians? He wrote: “For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body…and were all made to drink of one Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:13). Some have insisted that this verse teaches that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is imparted to all Christians. Careful analysis of the verse, however, demonstrates that Paul was not referring to the baptism of the Holy Spirit that was received only twice in the New Testament (if you omit Paul). If the Corinthians had been baptized in the Holy Spirit, Paul likely would have worded the verse: “We were all baptized in one Spirit into one body.” This wording would have made it plain that their baptism was Holy Spirit baptism. However, Paul connected “baptized” with “into one body,” and placed “in one Spirit” before both “baptized” and “into one body.” Did he mean to say that their baptism entailed being indwelt with the Spirit, or having the Spirit overwhelm (i.e., immerse) them, or come upon them, i.e., that the Holy Spirit, Himself, was what the Corinthians had received or been baptized in?
The grammar of the passage provides a decisive and definitive answer. The word “Spirit” is in the instrumental case in Greek, indicating personal agency. The personal agent in the passage who did the baptizing is the Holy Spirit. His baptizing resulted in the placement of the individuals into the one body of Christ. The verb is aorist, showing that Paul was referring to a once-for-all act in the past. Wuest explained: “It is not the baptism with the Spirit or of the Spirit, in the sense that the Holy Spirit is the element which is applied to us. It is the baptism by the Spirit. This baptism does not bring the Spirit to us in the sense that God places the Spirit upon or in us. Rather, this baptism brings the believer into vital union with Jesus Christ” (1943b, p. 86, emp. added). The Corinthians were the beneficiaries—not of the Spirit—but of the Spirit’s guidance or assistance. They were baptized by the Spirit (cf. KJV, NKJV, NASV, RSV, NIV).
Further grammatical evidence in the context supports this conclusion. Earlier in the chapter, Paul said that no person could say that Jesus is Lord “but in the Holy Spirit” (vs. 3). A person could say Jesus is Lord without being in the Spirit or having the Holy Spirit in or on him. But a person could not say Jesus is Lord if the Holy Spirit had not revealed such information about Jesus—as He did by empowering the apostles to produce written revelation. A few verses later, Paul pinpointed several gifts that were given “through the Spirit,” “according to the same Spirit,” and “in the same Spirit” (vss. 8-9, ASV). All three phrases are equivalent, and refer to the Holy Spirit’s action, not the state of being in the Holy Spirit. Paul’s summary of the section verifies that this meaning is intended: “But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills” (vs. 11).
In view of these contextual details, one is forced to conclude that in verse 13, Paul could be referring to no other baptism than the baptism enjoined by Christ in the Great Commission, i.e., the “one baptism” of Ephesians 4:5, the baptism which Paul, himself, administered to the Corinthians (Acts 18:8)—water baptism. The Holy Spirit was the agent through Whom Christ enjoined water baptism by means of the preached message. When a person complies with the instruction to be baptized in water, that person is baptized into the one body of Christ. Other verses in the New Testament confirm this understanding. Jesus announced: “[U]nless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). Jesus meant what Paul meant, that when one obeys the teaching of the Spirit to be baptized in water, he is granted entrance into the kingdom. Paul reiterated this same teaching on two other occasions. To the Ephesian church, he pointed out that Jesus gave His life for the church “that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word” (Ephesians 5:26). He meant that an individual is permitted to be a part of the cleansed church of Christ when he submits to water baptism in accordance with the Holy Spirit’s inspired Word. Likewise, Paul told young Titus that Jesus “saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5). Again, he meant that one is saved (and hence added to the body) at the point of water immersion, in which spiritual renewal is extended by the Holy Spirit.
We are forced to conclude that 1 Corinthians 12:13 does not refer to Holy Spirit baptism (see also McGarvey, 1910, pp. 254-256, and Reese, 1976, p. 76). The two instances of Holy Spirit baptism previously discussed (i.e., in Acts 2 and 10) stand unmistakably in stark contrast with the baptism alluded to by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:13. The Corinthian baptism placed the Corinthians into the body of Christ, i.e., at their conversion. But when the apostles were baptized in the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, they were already saved. When the household of Cornelius was baptized in the Holy Spirit, they were not yet saved and were inducted into the body of Christ only after Peter called for “water” (Acts 10:47-48).

Laying on of Hands

If Acts 2 and Acts 10 are the only instances of Holy Spirit baptism in the New Testament, how then do we account for the fact that many others in the New Testament performed miracles or spoke in tongues? If they were not recipients of Holy Spirit baptism, how did they get the ability? The New Testament dictates only one other way to receive miraculous capability: through the laying on of the apostles’ hands. Only the apostles possessed the ability to transfer miraculous capability to others. This phenomenon is described succinctly by Luke:
Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. Now when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money, saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Spirit. But Peter said unto him, Thy silver perish with thee, because thou hast thought to obtain the gift of God with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right before God” (Acts 8:17-21, emp. added).
This description establishes two important facts: (1) only the apostles had the ability to impart to others the ability to perform miracles; and (2) those other than the apostles who could perform miracles received their ability indirectly through the apostles—not directly from God via Holy Spirit baptism.
This fascinating feature of the existence of the miraculous in the first century makes it possible to understand how other individuals received their supernatural powers. For example, Philip, who was not an apostle, possessed the ability to perform miracles (Acts 8:6,13). If he was not an apostle, and he did not receive direct ability from God via baptism of the Holy Spirit, where, then, did he derive his ability? Luke informs us that Philip previously received the laying on of the apostles’ hands (Acts 6:5-6). Likewise, the first Christians in Ephesus were enabled to speak in tongues when the apostle Paul laid his hands on them (Acts 19:6). Even Timothy received his gift from the laying on of Paul’s hands (2 Timothy 1:6).
Some have challenged the exclusivity of the role of the apostles in their unique ability to impart the miraculous element by calling attention to the admonition given by Paul to Timothy: “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery” (1 Timothy 4:14, emp. added). Even though Paul plainly declared that the “gift of God” which Timothy possessed was conferred “through the laying on of my hands” (2 Timothy 1:6), how does one explain the fact that Paul also stated that Timothy’s gift came through the presbytery (i.e., the eldership) as well? Once again, the grammar of the text provides the answer. In 2 Timothy 1:6, where Paul claimed sole credit for imparting the gift to Timothy, he employed the Greek preposition dia with the genitive, which means “through” or “by means of ” (Machen, 1923, p. 41; Dana and Mantey, 1927, p. 101). However, in 1 Timothy 4:14, where Paul included the eldership in the action of impartation, he employed a completely different Greek preposition—meta. The root meaning of meta is “in the midst of ” (Dana and Mantey, p. 107). It denotes the attendant circumstances of something that takes place—the accompanying phenomena (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, pp. 510-511). It means “in association with” or “accompanied by” (Moule, 1959, p. 61; Thayer, 1901, p. 404; cf. Robertson, 1934, p. 611). In other words, Paul—as an apostle—imparted the miraculous gift to Timothy. It came from God through Paul. However, on that occasion, the local eldership of the church was present and participated with Paul in the event, lending their simultaneous support and accompanying commendation. After examining the grammatical data on the matter, Nicoll concluded: “[I]t was the imposition of hands by St. Paul that was the instrument used by God in the communication of the charisma to Timothy” (1900, 4:127; cf. Jamieson, et al., n.d., 2:414; Williams, 1960, p. 956). Consequently, 1 Timothy 4:14 provides no proof that miraculous capability could be received through other means in addition to apostolic imposition of hands and the two clear instances of Holy Spirit baptism.

CONCLUSION

In light of all the biblical data set forth in this study, certain conclusions are quite evident. Since there are no apostles living today, and since Holy Spirit baptism was unique to the apostles (Acts 2) and the first Gentile converts (Acts 10), there is no Holy Spirit baptism today. Likewise, there is no miraculous healing today. There are no tongue-speakers today. The miraculous element in the Christian religion was terminated by God near the close of the first century. Once the last apostle died, the means by which miraculous capability was made available was dissolved. With the completion of God’s revelation to humanity, now available in the Bible, people living today have all that is needed to be complete and to enjoy the fullness of Christian existence (2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:3; Ephesians 4:14).
The alleged miracles and tongue-speaking of today simply do not measure up to the Bible’s description of the miraculous. They are unverifiable, ambiguous, and counterfeit. Today’s “divine healing” consists of vague, unseen, non-quantifiable aches and pains like arthritis and headaches. But in the New Testament, people were raised from the dead—even days after death (e.g., John 11:17). Severed body parts were instantly restored (e.g., Luke 22:50-51). People who had been born blind had their sight restored (e.g., John 9:1). Those lame from birth were empowered to walk (Acts 3:2). First-century miracles were not limited only to certain ailments and psychosomatic illnesses that could be cured through natural means, or by mental adjustments on the part of the infirm. Jesus healed “all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease” (Matthew 4:23, emp. added). No disease or sickness was exempt in the New Testament (cf. Acts 28:8-9). Where are these instances today? When has anyone restored a severed limb lost in an accident? When has a self-proclaimed “faith-healer” raised anyone from the dead? Where are the miracle workers who have healed the blind, the crippled, the paralyzed, and those whose infirmities have been documented as having been in existence for many years (John 5:3,5)? Where are the televangelists who will go to the children’s hospitals and rectify birth defects and childhood diseases? Where are those who have ingested poison or been bitten by a venomous snake and remained unharmed (Mark 16:18; Acts 28:3-5)? An honest searcher for the truth is forced to conclude that the miraculous age has passed.
But human beings always are looking for something new, something exciting, and something flashy. They grasp for the attractive and the appealing, they want the easy way out, and they want something that makes them feel religious and secure—without having to face up to personal responsibilities. Hence, there will always be those who, instead of searching the Scriptures to find out whether these things are so (Acts 17:11), will simply disengage their minds, their spiritual sense, and their ability to assess “the words of truth and reason” (Acts 26:25).
Genuine Christianity today consists of simply taking the written Word of God, and studying it carefully in order to learn what God expects of us: simple meditation and reflection upon the Word of God—no brass bands or circus theatrics, no flash of light, or dream, or vision, no sudden rush attributable to the Holy Spirit. The pathway to heaven consists of honest, intensive investigation of written revelation, and a life of diligent self-discipline and self-denial that strives to incorporate spiritual attributes into one’s life—attributes like patience, compassion, kindness, humility, forgiveness, honesty, integrity, peace of soul, joy, and clean, moral living. There are no short cuts to spirituality. The miraculous is no answer. Even in the first century, miracles were not designed to develop these spiritual attributes.
Certainly, God loves us and has promised to care for us (e.g., Matthew 6:33). But His workings in the Universe and in our lives are undertaken today providentially through the natural laws that He set into motion. After the first century, He has not—and will not—violate His own purposes by interfering with these laws in order to perform a miracle. In the final analysis, we are under obligation to seek His assistance by listening to the instructions found in His written Word. Only words from God, then and now, will equip us and prepare us for eternity. As Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life” (John 6:68, emp. added). Jesus said to the Father, “Sanctify them in the truth: thy word is truth” (John 17:17, emp. added). When Satan attempted to prod Jesus into performing a miracle, Jesus said to him, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4, emp. added).

REFERENCES

Arndt, William and F.W. Gingrich (1957), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).
Barnes, Albert (1956 reprint), Notes on the New Testament: Matthew and Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Bietenhard, Hans (1975), “Angel,” The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and Robert Funk (1961), A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).
Botterweck, G. Johannes, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, eds. (1997), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Bullinger, E.W. (1898), Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1968 reprint).
Conzelmann, Hans (1974), “charismata,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Dana, H.E. and Julius Mantey (1927), A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (Toronto, Canada: Macmillan).
Delling, Gerhard (1972), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Gesenius, William (1847), Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979 reprint).
Grundmann, Walter (1964), “angelos,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Hofius, Otfried (1976), “Miracle,” The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Jamieson, Robert, A.R. Fausset, and David Brown (no date), A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Machen, J. Gresham (1923), New Testament Greek for Beginners (Toronto, Canada: Macmillan).
McGarvey, J.W. (1910), Biblical Criticism (Cincinnati, OH: Standard).
Moule, C.F.D. (1959), An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek (Cambridge: University Press, 1977 reprint).
Moulton, W.F., A.S. Geden, and H.K. Moulton (1978), A Concordance to the Greek Testament (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark), fifth edition.
Moulton, James and George Milligan (1982 reprint), Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-literary Sources (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Nicoll, W. Robertson, ed. (1900), The Expositor’s Greek Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Reese, Gareth (1976), New Testament History—Acts (Joplin, MO: College Press).
Ringgren, Helmer (1997), “malak,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Robertson, A.T. (1934), A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press).
Thayer, J.H. (1901), Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1977 reprint).
Vincent, M.R. (1890), Word Studies in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1946 reprint).
Vine, W.E. (1952), An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Old Tappan, NJ: Revell).
Warren, Thomas B. (1972), Have Atheists Proved There Is No God (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press).
Williams, George (1960), The Student’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel), sixth edition.
Workman, Gary (1983), “That Which Is Perfect,” The Restorer, 3[9]:6-9, September.
Wuest, Kenneth S. (1943a), Treasures from the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Wuest, Kenneth S. (1943b), Untranslatable Riches from the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).