Does God STILL use "Signs and Wonders" To Confirm Gospel Today?

My question is why would he ever need to if the effectual work of regeneration is the only means that can and does "confirm" the gospel in anyone's mind?

 

So, you believe men can come to faith apart from a prior effectual work of either regeneration (or what some call "irresistible calling?") In other words, you don't believe God must give man a "new heart" (rebirth) so as to make them willing to believe?

So what makes you a Calvinist exactly since you don't affirm Limited Atonement or Effectual Calling?

 

I think it is possible, but I don't think it is usual.

 

Yep, I saw a big sign right on I-75 the other day....said, "You wanted a sign....God"

 

Let me ask you JF, could you believe in Jesus if you had never heard of him?

Let's say there are a group of people living in the deepest jungles of Brazil that have never seen a missionary or heard the word of God. Is it possible for them to be regenerated? Is it possible for them to believe on Jesus when they have never heard one word of the Bible?

 

Yes, I absolutely believe God uses signs and wonders at times for His purposes, and that could include being evidence that the gosple is indeed the way of salvation.

But that does NOT mean He is involved in the phony, manufactured "signs and wonders" that take place in *some* charismatic groups.

AiC

 

JF can answer for himself, but here's mine.

No.

 

To the initial question of the OP:
I don't believe so, no

He used them back in the day to confirm the people He was using to bring forth His message was indeed His people, so the message would be received as His own Word. Now that we 'have' that word, He does not need to perform signs and wonders to validate people bring forth His message. Not in the initial way at least.

Remember that signs and wonders was NOT to validate the message but the MESSENGER and there were strict rules to and for the Jews regarding these kind of events by which they would acknowledge it as a work of the Lord. Now the Gentiles not so much, but note that the work went first to the Jews and then to the Gentiles. It would be validated first under the strict guidelines of the Jewish faith. Then in going to the Gentiles it could always be brought back to it's initial foundation for validation if one so desired. Not like today were if something supernatural happens everyone (in a general sense) automatically says it's of God, even if it contradicts scripture. For example a Prophet, in the role of forth-telling (not fore-telling) events to come to pass. They are not predicting, they are declaring events that WILL unfold exactly and specifically as they declare them, while the term - predicting- entails the allowance for mistakes. If a prophet in the OT ever made a mistake or was wrong on one small piece - He was stoned to death. You only got one shot. Also, if their word came true just as they said, but if either the message or messenger lead others away from God.. again they were put to death immediately as well. In the NT, while we do not stone people, we do remove them from the church body (which is symbolic of death) until they repent. However, they would be disqualified from ever being considered a prophet again. To declare a word from the Lord, is a very serious thing.

Or take for instance today's usage in many churches of tongues. How and for the reasons it is used goes against scripture, yet it persists. It is never in scripture declared as a private prayer language, in fact all spiritual gifts were given for the edification of Church body, NOT the individual (1 Cor 12:7). You find in chapter 14 of 1 Cor a rebuke of how and why it was being used and that primarily was for one's own edification and Paul rebukes them for this. IF one has such a gifting of God (and I do believe there it can be given just not in the manner and for the reasoning many hold) is to be used IN the Church and IF used it MUST be interpreted by one who has the verified gift of interpretation or by one who verifiably knows that language. Thus if one prays in tongues, how else can others who hear say Amen!

I don't hold to any such angelic prayer language nonsense as nothing in scripture speaks to this being the language being spoken. The one verse that others states say it IS, is a comparison to prove that in whatever language (tongues of men - worldly / tongues of angels - godly) if you bring the message without love - it has become useless. Like a language no one understands. Irregardless how impressive the message, without love, it is meaningless.

I can continue with various sign gifts, but the point remains the same. There is a distinction between sign gifts and signs and wonders but most do not realize this. Signs and wonders are not to validate the message, but the messenger. The miracles that God does today are not to validate His messengers per-say, but prove His promises which His messengers believe in. God acts on behalf of their faith. It is their faith that now proves and qualifies the messenger AND the message being delivered.

 

The question didnt say anything about new revelation.

Just signs and wonders

 

What signs and wonders AIC?

Allan has answered well

 

Can you help me understand why you believe such validation or qualification is necessary if the the "light switch" method is being employed?

Let me rephrase that for those who aren't privy to our former discussion: Why would God need to validate a messenger (or his message) if the secret inward work of the HS "enlightens" them to the truthfulness and gives them the needed understanding?

 

Define what "Signs" and "Wonders" you mean.

Do you mean the sign gifts and visions given to or used through believers or do mean some supernatural sign or wonder God gives to the heathen?

Then we can examine them individually. You seem to be wanting to lean toward the sign gifts in some of the post you have created.

 

You know, I have no problem with that explanation because it has God working through his means EVERY TIME, rather than the concept that they can be separated. And that's where you and I probably part ways, because you don't think the HS is doing this internal working every time the means are employed, but only certain times here and there. Thus, the means do NOTHING. They accomplish nothing.

For example, let's look at two Jews during Paul's day, who both knew of Saul and his conversion to Paul. Both hate Christianity (just like Saul did) and were set against it (hardened you might say). But one of them starts to notice the new Gentile church down the street where the people are being healed and their lives are changing dramatically. He start getting more curious and watching more closely this new church and listening a bit more to Paul's teaching. He becomes envious of the Gentiles and their new lives and the excitement of their church and changes his mind and becomes a follower of Christ. The other remains in his rebellion. What was the difference? Envy provoked one will and not the other.

Now, according to Paul this envy could provoke their wills and lead them to be saved (Rom. 11:14). In other words, that envy could actually serve a purpose in softening their hearts and making them reconsider their views. But, according to Calvinism, ONLY the inward effectual work of God can do that. Why would Paul even bother mentioning things like envy or signs if they accomplish nothing? Why not say, "I make much of my ministry to the Gentiles because God has chosen to effectually call more of them at this time, but he might effectually call more of the Jews later." Why even speak of the effect of these persuasive outward means if they accomplish nothing?