tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post2101543719668674889..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Emotions? Sure. We got 'em. . .Phil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-7447972226508472112007-04-01T20:34:00.000-07:002007-04-01T20:34:00.000-07:00No one will probably ever get to read this because...No one will probably ever get to read this because I have entered this post so late. Nevertheless, I feel there is a point that needs to be made here that cannot be unannounced. <BR/><BR/>I will confess that what we see in modern charismatic evangelicalism is mostly nonsensical and unbalanced. However, on the other hand I cannot deny the obvious teaching of scripture that the charismata and the gift of prophecy are in usage today.<BR/><BR/>On the issue of the N.T. gift of prophecy my biggest problem with cessationist is their insistence that it must be judged according to Deuteronomy 18:15-24. Using this as a litmus test for the gift of prophecy is inappropriate and hermeneutically inaccurate. <BR/> <BR/>Here's the problem:<BR/><BR/>1. In reading verses 9-14 you will see that God was plainly instructing the Israelites not to seek guidance from diviners and soothsayers. God was commanding them to trust in Him for guidance (vs. 9-15). <BR/>2. His guidance would be provided to them through prophets from among "their brothers" and he would speak in the Name of the LORD (vs. 15-18).<BR/>3. The prophet would speak the exact words of God verbatim that would carry with them divine authority (vs. 18-19). <BR/>4. If indeed the prophet was speaking God's words then they would surely come to pass (vs. 21-22).<BR/>5. In almost every instance in the Bible where God spoke through prophets and apostles He would command them to write these things in a book to be read and obeyed (Ex 17:14, 34:27, Is 30:8, Jer 30:2, 36:2, Hab 2:2, Rev 1:11, 10:4, 14:13, 19:9, 21:5). <BR/>6. If all prophecy in the N.T. was considered to be infallible and inerrant, why was is not written down and how can a cessationist explain the fact that the Bible says that "all flesh" would experience this kind of phenomena (Joel 2:28-29 & Acts 2:17-18)?<BR/><BR/>The test for an O.T. prophet cannot apply to N.T. prophets because the command in Deuteronomy was given to a specific people (Israel) for a specific time. If N.T. prophets and prophecy was to be tested after this manner then we can conclude that anyone who was not an Israelite was a phony. But didn't the Corinthians and the Romans obviously manifest these gifts (Rom 12:6 & 1 Co 12)? We know that the churches in Asia and other Gentile regions had these gifts, so why weren't their prophecies enscriptured? How about this for an answer: Because they were not infallible or authoritative. They were men's words communicating God's revelation. I love my cessationist brethren, but the test in Deuteronomy cannot be applied to the N.T. gift of prophecy.Vox Veritashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02797338369594183440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-52662665506421616402007-03-28T09:30:00.000-07:002007-03-28T09:30:00.000-07:00Re: "[W]hen I tried to begin a series dealing wit...<B>Re: "[W]hen I tried to begin a series dealing with Gothard and Blackaby [...]"</B><BR/><BR/>⟨poignant⟩There are those of us who are still waiting for that, lo! a year and a half later. ⟨/poignant⟩Jim Criglerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11437189788683651969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-3736304565310603762007-03-27T20:58:00.000-07:002007-03-27T20:58:00.000-07:00Ian:The phrase "spoiling for a fight" is a referen...<B>Ian:</B><BR/><BR/>The phrase "spoiling for a fight" is a reference to the fact that (before I had ever once even made reference to the charismatic issue on my blog) when I tried to begin a series dealing with Gothard and Blackaby (who aren't even charismatics)—in which series I hoped to talk about <I>their</I> odd views on private mesages from God, but not about charismatic doctrine <I>per se</I>—charismatic lurkers interrupted and unleashed mayhem. Hordes of charismatics who had never even commented on my blog before came all at once to the meta, demanding that I defend cessationism (which I hadn't even mentioned), claiming that if I didn't first deal with <I>that</I> issue, I had no right whatsoever to criticize the practice of <I>non-</I>charismatics who think their own dreams and imaginations regularly contain private messages from God—even though such "words of knowledge" usually go astray.<BR/><BR/>People from England to Singapore began blogging announcements that I had declared "war" on charismatic doctrine--when I hadn't even <I><B>mentioned</B></I> the subject. No amount of pleading from me could get the angry charismatics to back off. Every time I have tried to take up the Blackaby/Gothard issue, it has been derailed by militant charismatics who insist I can't deal with the <I>Experiencing God</I> phenomenon without first answering them. It's been really, seriously annoying, and if you read the posts linked above, I think you'll see what I mean.<BR/><BR/>As far as the archives are concerned, see the links above. I listed all the major posts where I have dealt with the charismatic doctrine (even peripherally).<BR/><BR/>So to answer your questions: You can say anything you like, but if you call us "shrill" just because we disagree and don't qualify or soften the disagreement to the point where it sounds like it really doesn't matter after all, we'll prolly call you on that.<BR/><BR/>And if you bring up a bunch of arguments I have already replied to in the posts listed above, you may well be referred back to the archives.<BR/><BR/>But if you think you have fresh arguments and seriously want to discuss it, bring it. Like I said, I'm not really interested in a <I>long</I> discussion about charismatic doctrine, so keep it succinct and don't try to get me to turn the blog into a permanent debate about cessationism. We'll prolly close the topic and move on to more profitable matters in a few days.<BR/><BR/>If that sounds like more of a yellow light than a green, you've got it.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-56290449902763361582007-03-27T20:35:00.000-07:002007-03-27T20:35:00.000-07:00Cent,I wasn't aware that requiring the preaching o...Cent,<BR/><BR/>I wasn't aware that requiring the preaching of the word for the purpose of salvation was an Arminian stance. I've always been under the impression that it was only hyper-Calvinists that thought people could be saved with no proclamation of the gospel. Am I wrong?<BR/><BR/>Note: I never said that preaching was not foreordained, nor did I ever say that the pursuit (or lack thereof) of the gifts was not foreordained. All things indeed flow from God's sovereign will, but God has established means by which his grace flows, just as he established means by which light shines.<BR/><BR/>(Sorry for the lame attempt at being poetic - what can I say, I'm a Spurgeon lover.)<BR/><BR/>Anyhow, I agree to debate you on the D-Blog, I'll just have to figure out how it works. Just let me know when it's on.<BR/><BR/>Thanks again - to all the Pyro's, for taking up this issue. Even though I know that each one of you loathe speaking about it. No one sharpens me more in my theology than you guys do, so thanks, and praise be to God.Robert Ivyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03230620801363091445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-8726925376289718512007-03-27T20:15:00.000-07:002007-03-27T20:15:00.000-07:00Hi sf,the link to the article by R. C. is in my po...Hi sf,<BR/><BR/>the link to the article by R. C. is in my post above, called; "<A HREF="http://www.inchristalone.org/ZealWOKnow.html" REL="nofollow">Zeal Without Knowledge</A>"<BR/><BR/>If the link is not working, here is the url to it:<BR/><BR/>http://www.inchristalone.org/ZealWOKnow.html<BR/><BR/>I hope what R. C. has to say is a help.Adjutoriumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15586935298540319373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-87368806379941995952007-03-27T19:36:00.000-07:002007-03-27T19:36:00.000-07:00Phil,Just wondering, Is there anyway a Pentecosta...Phil,<BR/><BR/>Just wondering, Is there anyway a Pentecostal/Charismatic could respond to this post (besides agreeing with it of course) that wouldn't be perceived as "spoilig for a fight" or labeled as "been there done that can I refer you to the archives of this blog". <BR/><BR/>If I get a green light I'll add my voie to the mix.Ianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13858057932102156264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-20573822878072953832007-03-27T19:24:00.000-07:002007-03-27T19:24:00.000-07:00I am sure that John Piper understood what he meant...I am sure that John Piper understood what he meant by his experience in his recent article and would not want to be ambiguous.<BR/><BR/>But given that it is not clear to others what he meant due to the various intepretations on both sides, I was just wondering if anyone knows if he has clarified what he meant?Alan E. Kurschnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08963783504805163298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1144447002356625342007-03-27T19:03:00.000-07:002007-03-27T19:03:00.000-07:00Oh Robert:I didn't know you were an Arminian also....Oh Robert:<BR/><BR/>I didn't know you were an Arminian also.<BR/><BR/>Geez. Where to start? How about this: I have left and open invite for you at my blog to have a go at the D-Blog on the subject of the apostolic gifts. We'll start there and then we'll go after you mistaken arminianism later.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-47729132164629549322007-03-27T17:36:00.000-07:002007-03-27T17:36:00.000-07:00douglas,You said:"R. C. Sproul spoke in "tongues" ...douglas,<BR/>You said:"R. C. Sproul spoke in "tongues" once, I don't know if he still does"<BR/>...<BR/>Do you have any more info on this or a link? Thanks in advance!<BR/><BR/>sfslfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17039459193440851885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-44847958496909734552007-03-27T17:00:00.000-07:002007-03-27T17:00:00.000-07:00Prophecy: a message from God.See rule 1.Prophecy: a message from God.<BR/><BR/>See rule 1.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-9133575997685790332007-03-27T16:36:00.000-07:002007-03-27T16:36:00.000-07:00Mrs. Pilgrim,Sorry you feel nettled. It's just a ...Mrs. Pilgrim,<BR/><BR/>Sorry you feel nettled. It's just a difficult thing to do to give a "definition" when almost any definition given is likely to come under the gun by either side.<BR/><BR/>Personally, as a continuationist, I would define prophecy as a divinely inspired message from God that reveals the future in a way meant to strengthen or rebuke a specific person or group of people in the context of a specific time.<BR/><BR/>I know that's a little dense and would probably require some unpacking for a person to fully get it, but given prophecy in Scripture and what is said about it, that's the view that makes the most sense.<BR/><BR/>Of course, the disagreement will come over words like, "reveals the future," "specific person or group of people," and "specific time."<BR/><BR/>But nevertheless, that is my view.Robert Ivyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03230620801363091445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-70928779864356774222007-03-27T15:57:00.000-07:002007-03-27T15:57:00.000-07:00Well, if nobody's going to help me out here with w...Well, if nobody's going to help me out here with what you mean by "prophecy," I guess I'll be on my way.<BR/><BR/>Nice to know that you were interested in my possible example.<BR/><BR/>Yes, I'm a little nettled here. I ask a legitimate question and nobody seems to care. Perhaps I should just move along.Mrs Pilgrimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09687024308521042695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-75147375668087829772007-03-27T13:40:00.000-07:002007-03-27T13:40:00.000-07:00Phil,thanks for addressing this issue. I appreciat...Phil,<BR/><BR/>thanks for addressing this issue. I appreciate your honest, clear-thinking arguments.<BR/><BR/>A couple thoughts I had after reading the article and this comment thread;<BR/><BR/>The story of Bil is an excellent example of why this is an issue that often gets "shrill" responses on both sides. People's lives are very affected by this issue. <BR/><BR/>However, and Phil has made this clear...experience is not to be held anywhere near the esteem of Scripture. Both sides could endlessly cite story after story, personal experiences, family histories etc, to support their position. And it wouldn't help because the cessationists would (a)point out how the story wasn't really an example of a biblical (as they understand it) gift in operation or (b)question that the event happened. This leaves the cessationist with an argument that, when argued against via experience, is unfalsifiable.<BR/>On the other hand, someone who has experienced something that can only be explained as a manifestation of a gift of the Spirit is also in an position of holding an unfalsifiable belief. So hearing of experiences of others is never going to be a convincing argument. <BR/><BR/>Scripture must inform our experience. Scripture must be the measure of all these matters. And it is.joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00407734824168297388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-29101556603304783242007-03-27T13:13:00.000-07:002007-03-27T13:13:00.000-07:00Leec,If you, "don't understand how someone could w...Leec,<BR/><BR/>If you, "don't understand how someone could want more than having themselves made new and being given Gods will sufficiently revealed in Scripture," then that is a question to take up with Paul in 1 Cor 14:1, 18, 39. He was made new and had even more mysteries revealed to him than what he wrote down in Scripture, yet he still saw benefit in things like prophecy and tongues and commanded others to pursue them and trained other in how to use them.<BR/><BR/>I never said regeneration was paltry, all I am trying to do is be faithful to all Biblical texts. As Spurgeon said in a post just a week or two ago, "We are not to indulge in prophesyings as some do, making them our spiritual food, our meat and drink; but still we may take them as choice morsels, and special delicacies set upon the table; they are condiments which may often give a sweeter taste."<BR/><BR/>I've dealt with the issue of inerrant prophecy not being Scripture <A HREF="http://www.sfpulpit.com/2007/02/09/prophecy-and-the-closed-canon-part-3/" REL="nofollow">elsewhere.</A> For this comment, let me just say my position is the clearest possible combination of 1 Cor 14:37, Deut 18:21-22, and 2 Pet 1:21. Prophecy, while inerrant, must submit always to the Holy Scriptures.Robert Ivyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03230620801363091445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-68100665764297445672007-03-27T12:55:00.000-07:002007-03-27T12:55:00.000-07:00Good stuff. I used to believe in Charismatic proph...Good stuff. <BR/><BR/>I used to believe in Charismatic prophecy and Wayne Grudem's systematic theology encouraged me in that course. But I came to realise that the Charismatic belief in new revelation is very dangerous.<BR/><BR/>Every Blessing in Christ<BR/><BR/>MatthewMatthew Celestinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02874430461346560520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-70421949237623386932007-03-27T12:47:00.000-07:002007-03-27T12:47:00.000-07:00R. C. Sproul spoke in "tongues" once, I don't know...R. C. Sproul spoke in "tongues" once, I don't know if he still does:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.inchristalone.org/ZealWOKnow.html" REL="nofollow">Zeal Without Knowledge</A><BR/><BR/>Has anyone read the above article?<BR/><BR/>Even though I spent my first few formative years as a Christian in Pentecostal churches, with tongues speaking and slain in the spirit stuff going on(people being pushed over more than anything else) so on and so forth, I agree with Mr. Sproul.<BR/><BR/>R. C. and John Piper would probably have an interesting chat regarding hearing the voice of God:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/9170/SPROUL9.HTM" REL="nofollow">Do you believe that God has audibly spoken to anyone since the apostolic age?</A><BR/><BR/>I believe God speaks clearly through His word. We do not need any extra-biblical revelations to understand what God requires of us. We need preachers and teachers who expound sound doctrine for us and explaining the meaning of Scripture. Generally, Pentecostalism and charismaticism does not do that.Adjutoriumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15586935298540319373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-12158783366665611932007-03-27T12:37:00.000-07:002007-03-27T12:37:00.000-07:00I just don't understand how someone could want mor...I just don't understand how someone could want more than having themselves made new and being given Gods will suficiently revealed in Scripture.<BR/><BR/>We've been given the "sign of Jonah" and we want something more????<BR/><BR/>I find it highly offensive to have people unsolicitedly tell me that Gods taking me from a dead man and making me alive, and changing my very being is somehow paltry. Not to mention being told that God is not able to put His will for our lives fully into Scripture whilst also accusing me of trying to limit God.<BR/><BR/>Something more?<BR/><BR/>Robert:<BR/>"there are charismatics who do not believe that prophecy can be fallible"<BR/><BR/>Then how would that not be new revelation, and hence to be Scripture?LeeChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05540608568274871363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-92073798651184801002007-03-27T12:21:00.000-07:002007-03-27T12:21:00.000-07:00Hi Cent,This is sorta new... interacting across tw...Hi Cent,<BR/><BR/>This is sorta new... interacting across two blog posts. It's good though, I like it.<BR/><BR/>I think you mischaracterize the the continuationist (or at least my) position when you say that we claim that, "Scripture says that the gifts will be manifest today."<BR/><BR/>Scripture never promises that the gifts simply <I>will</I> be manifest carte blanche. Just like regeneration is not promised carte blanche.<BR/><BR/>Regeneration is promised when there is hearing of the word with faith. Just as the gifts are promised when there is diligent pursuit and the filling of the Spirit.<BR/><BR/>We should not expect to see regeneration when there is no preaching of the word, just as we should not expect to see gifts where there is no seeking of them.<BR/><BR/>Hope that helps to progress the discussion...Robert Ivyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03230620801363091445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-62906430507554833832007-03-27T12:17:00.000-07:002007-03-27T12:17:00.000-07:00Your readers may benefit from this compilation of ...Your readers may benefit from <A HREF="http://www.upper-register.com/other_studies/prophecy_tongues.html" REL="nofollow">this compilation</A> of cessationist argument:<BR/>http://www.upper-register.com/other_studies/prophecy_tongues.htmlBaushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1605803232819201682007-03-27T11:21:00.000-07:002007-03-27T11:21:00.000-07:00Phil,I understand your "rule 3" concerns. However,...Phil,<BR/><BR/>I understand your "rule 3" concerns. However, your latest reply neatly encapsulates the very problem evinced in this post. (I suppose I could wait, and refer to this post in some future post of yours on epistemology, but I'd be in similar "rule 3" danger then to, just from the opposite side of the fence).<BR/><BR/>Your "clarification" was precisely what I had in mind when making my comments, which you claim to have "missed the point". Rather, I was stressing that you have "certainties" that arbitrary (in objective terms) and off limits -- it's simply a brute fact that you won't suffer analysis on. <BR/><BR/>Fine, but that's precisely the position of many charismatics I know. They simply can't "prove" their charisms any more than you or I can "prove" your notions of inerrancy.<BR/><BR/>I didn't suppose that you were against *all* skepticism -- that's a hard position to even contemplate. Instead, I was trying to note that you are going off on charismatic "certainties" in exactly the same way that exasperates you when others come after *your* particular certainties.<BR/><BR/>That observation "straddles" the previous post and this one, so it fits neatly in neither.<BR/><BR/>But it's a point worth making, all the same.<BR/><BR/>-TouchstoneTouchstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03733806892886921425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-45139387873992495762007-03-27T10:59:00.000-07:002007-03-27T10:59:00.000-07:00Robert:Let me make sure we cover this fully.What y...Robert:<BR/><BR/>Let me make sure we cover this fully.<BR/><BR/>What you're saying that the Holy Spirit manifests the Gifts of the Apostles still today -- but you've never seen that actually happen. That is, there are no examples of your doctrine in action, but it must be true becuase Scripture says that the gifts will be manifest today -- that is, in the post-apostolic, post-enscripturating age.<BR/><BR/>Dude: that's exactly like saying I believe the Holy Spirit saves men through regeneration -- but I don't know anyone who's regenerate.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-51649188572592380472007-03-27T10:48:00.000-07:002007-03-27T10:48:00.000-07:00I am not going to enter into this "debate" but I w...I am not going to enter into this "debate" but I will say that I believe most of the extreme charismatics and those who profess cessationalists don't believe in miracles comes from a downplay of the miraculous display of bringing a dead person to spiritual life in salvation.<BR/><BR/>The power of the Gospel is truly shown through this, but it has become like a tree. Since we see a tree everyday we forget how much of a miracle of God that tree truly is. <BR/><BR/>I believe this plays a part in the life of someone who is "continuing to look for miracles" instead of seeing those that happen around them everyday...<BR/><BR/>babies being born, oxygen, creation...the fullness of God's riches on display...<BR/><BR/>If we only knew how miraculous all these things were I believe we would stand more in awe than we do. And moreso, we wouldn't stand at all, but fall to our face in fear of our wonderful God as Isaiah did in Isaiah 6. <BR/><BR/>May God be glorified.Seth McBeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08765679934165890595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-14189237225128573442007-03-27T10:46:00.000-07:002007-03-27T10:46:00.000-07:00Touchstone:I've never suggested that all varieties...<B>Touchstone:</B><BR/><BR/>I've never suggested that <I><B>all</B></I> varieties of skepticism are evil. In fact, I have inveighed against blind credulity almost as much and as regularly as I have condemned the kind of stubborn skepticism that is so often cloaked in Emerging or postmodern garb.<BR/><BR/>But, for the record (and in case someone else has missed the point as badly as you have), the <I><B>one and only</B></I> kind of skepticism I have claimed is incompatible with authentic Christianity is <I><B>doubt about the truthfulness and authority of God's Word.</B></I> If you want to indulge in other kinds of skepticism, have at it, and I won't criticize you.<BR/><BR/>For example, I myself am overwhelmingly and unapologetically skeptical of anything and everything written by people who want to claim they are Christians and yet deny that Scripture is the inerrant and authoritative Word of God. (I'm convinced Jesus was referring to just such people when He spoke of wolves in sheep's clothing.) Skepticism that holds them and their teaching in high suspicion is one kind of skepticism that I think should be aggressively cultivated.<BR/><BR/>Lots of charismatics would agree with me about that, BTW.<BR/><BR/>So the epistemology discussion is really off topic in this particular thread. Let's keep rule 3 in mind, please.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-85785801169976351262007-03-27T10:16:00.000-07:002007-03-27T10:16:00.000-07:00Phil,Doesn't this just amount to so much more "dou...Phil,<BR/><BR/>Doesn't this just amount to so much more "doubt glorification" on your part, regarding <I>charismata</I>?<BR/><BR/>You say there's no "evidence" on which to rely concerning charismatic accounts of events and gift manifestations that *are* right out of Acts in their nature and scope. But how do you discount charismatic claims, Phil? Whence your skepticism, here?<BR/><BR/>And how do hand that very same skepticism when leveled at your convictions, about cessationalism or other theological propositions?<BR/><BR/>Also, I realized you've begged off on the story of Bil as normative for you views on this, and I accept that at face value, and your appeals to exegesis as the foundation of your position. But if so, the whole Bil story seems a large, emotional diversion, then.<BR/><BR/>In any case, it's worth noting the skepticism you wield here -- skepticism that demands physical, testable proof (and should!) -- yet is something you inveigh against regularly when inbound at *your* unverifiable, subjective certainties. When one takes the epistemological position you do, I say that gives you little ground to make the case you're offering here.<BR/><BR/>(For the record, I take as dim a view of charismatic claims as you do, Phil, and probably more. Although I can bear witness to events I can't prove, or recreate that definitely leave me open to the plausibility of such claims. I just don't have the right amount or kind of "faith" to be certain in this area, I suppose.)<BR/><BR/>-TouchstoneTouchstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03733806892886921425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-79481387683360836452007-03-27T10:10:00.000-07:002007-03-27T10:10:00.000-07:00donsands:I would of course love to see God work mi...donsands:<BR/><BR/><B><I>I would of course love to see God work miracles like this, but I don't need to. I believe that this one happened.</B></I><BR/><BR/>Amen. That's exactly how I feel about it.<BR/><BR/>-Matt-Matthew H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09980710567462362530noreply@blogger.com