Pages

Friday, October 11, 2013

Hume in sheep's clothing


Some typically confused comments from Ed Dingess:
Steve Hays is at it again with his at-a-distance pie-in-the-sky non-falsifiable theory that God continues to work miracles in a manner not at all materially different from how He has always worked miracles. Hays’ argument is really an argument from silence. What I mean by that is that Hays’ argument appeals to claims of miracles far, far away, in a distant land in order to defend his position.

i) I've never said modern miracles only occur in Third World countries. Rather, I've objected to how MacArthurites dismiss reports from Third World Christians out of hand.

ii) Notice, though, how Ed's argument is indistinguishable from how atheists attack Biblical miracles: 

at-a-distance pie-in-the-sky non-falsifiable theory...claims of miracles far, far away, in a distant land 

Isn't that exactly how secular debunkers discount Biblical miracles? "You Christians appeal to conveniently unfalsifiable miracles from the distant past." 

If someone claims to be a miracle worker, we simply demand some form of clear and acceptable proof. Had someone been able to supply such a certification, perhaps the contours of the debate would shift. 

Even when medical corroboration is provided, MacArthurites fold their arms say that's not "on the level of undeniable miracles in the NT." 

2 comments:

  1. See my responses to Hays comments. Unlike Hays, I refrain from slander and from the other unethical practice of poisoning the well.

    http://reformedreasons.blogspot.com/

    Just the truth ladies and gentlemen and not truth for truth's sake alone but that the Word of God would do its work in ALL of us...even if, or especially when we disagree.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Unlike Hays, I refrain from slander and from the other unethical practice of poisoning the well." <-- Self-refuting statements are so awesome.

      Delete