In an interview on this documentary film, J.P. Moreland speaks about how, in the western American church, the power of God has been reduced down to debates about the gifts of the Spirit, but how that to him is rather a side issue. He goes on to say that the more fundamental questions should be, regardless what you believe the gifts to be or not to be, are: 1. Is the Kingdom of God here today and is it to be manifested in power? 2. Are we to conduct and carry out the ministry of Jesus as He did, and if so, is healing and demonic deliverance supposed to be a part of that ministry?
How would you answer those two questions?
How would you answer those two questions?
(1) I do think the Kingdom of God is here today -- and I think it looks a lot like the description of it in Acts 2 (and Galatians, Ephesians, both letters to the Thessalonians and so on).
(2) You have badly misread the analogy of what it means for the believer to be like Jesus.
Let me expand on those answers so I am not misunderstood. I'd also like to point out that I answered them in substance already in a previous question, but I'll answer them again here to be as clear as possible.
I think that at the end of Acts 2, we get a description of the church which is sort of invincible -- it doesn't really leave any questions unanswered regarding what the Apostles are bringing when they tell Israel to know for certain that Jesus is both Lord and Christ. In spite of its impact on my word count, I'll cite it here again in full:
[The Believers] devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.
So when Paul tells the people in Jerusalem that the one who is Lord even to David has risen from the dead, and then adds them to the assembly of believers in baptism because they have repented of their sin, somehow he doesn't create a kingdom of dragon-slayers or wonder-workers. He instead creates a community of people who did a lot of things "day by day," but it turns out not so much the things you think are necessary for the life of the church.
Let's be clear that as a premise of this discussion, I have conceded that if there are a continuation of signs, they are Apostolic in nature, and therefore there ought to be Apostles performing them -- but they have to be the same signs that the Apostles were demonstrating. So while it is interesting that you have found J.P. Moreland to be someone demanding that we believe in and perform Apostolic signs, it's funny that you and Moreland have sort of walked away from the Acts 2 definition of the church to something else where everybody is an Apostle of some kind -- as opposed to the Apostles being a special class of believers with a specific gift and mission.
I ask the reader of this exchange to ask himself or herself: if Moreland and Bryan are right, and the Kingdom needs exorcists and healers, why is the daily life of the church in Acts 2 plainly lacking in such things? Why is the daily life of the church far more ordinary when it is described by Luke and later by Paul (in Galatians, Ephesians, both letters to the Thessalonians and so on)?
I ask the reader of this exchange to ask himself or herself: if Moreland and Bryan are right, and the Kingdom needs exorcists and healers, why is the daily life of the church in Acts 2 plainly lacking in such things? Why is the daily life of the church far more ordinary when it is described by Luke and later by Paul (in Galatians, Ephesians, both letters to the Thessalonians and so on)?
I think the answer to that question lies in the misunderstanding Bryan demonstrates in his attempt to make us feel somehow impoverished if we are not sufficiently like Jesus. It's strange that this is his gambit, because the places where the NT says we ought to strive to be like Jesus -- for example, in humility, in service, in love for other people, etc. -- don't include the places where Bryan would turn to say the NT teaches a continuation of the Apostolic gifts. Ironically, the one place where people do turn to Jesus and say, "did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name" (Mat 7:21-13), Jesus says to them, "I never knew you."
I think we should be like Jesus - in the ways the Bible says we should be like Jesus. But insofar as we ought to be His Kingdom, the Bible spells out a lot of ways that is manifest - and none of them are related to whether or not we perform supernatural signs and wonders.
I think we should be like Jesus - in the ways the Bible says we should be like Jesus. But insofar as we ought to be His Kingdom, the Bible spells out a lot of ways that is manifest - and none of them are related to whether or not we perform supernatural signs and wonders.
(740 words)
