Tuesday, April 04, 2006


John W. Loftus said:

“I find it interesting because you would argue against all of the same claims to miracles, and prophecies in other religions, along with psychics, diviner's knowledge, and magic, like I do.

I just doubt the miracles you claim happened too.”

1.Loftus is making a number of unfounded assumptions about what I supposedly believe.

Within the Reformed tradition there are three positions, ranging along a doctrinal continuum:

i) Cessationism, viz., Chas Hodge, Warfield, Gaffin, O. P. Robertson.

ii) Semicessationism, viz., Calvin, Knox, Gillespie, Rutherford (both Westminster Divines), Frame, Packer, Piper, Poythress, Spurgeon, Carson, Lloyd-Jones.

iii) Pentecostalism, viz., Grudem, Houston, Storms.

The distinction between (ii) & (iii) is a matter of degree.

I subscribe to (ii). I deny that the spiritual gifts officially continue in the life of the church. There are no prophets or healers.

But I don’t deny that God continues to work wonders directly.

2.I don’t deny all Catholic miracles.

3.In addition, those who dabble in the occult may acquire certain paranormal powers. Mediumistic magic. And this can run in families.

As a Christian, I do believe in the dark side.

4.The parapsychological literature is vast. Many cases are clearly fraudulent.

But there’s no reason to dismiss a well-documented case unless you dogmatically cling to metaphysical naturalism.

5.Not every paranormal event furnishes specific attestation for a particular tenet of the faith.

6.Moreover, miraculous attestion is a necessary rather than sufficient truth-condition.

No comments:

Post a Comment