Family dies holding hands, praying

[_Ceeboo]

Oh..........

And Hoops still sucks!


Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Ceeboo]

One of my most favorite hymns is Be Still, My Soul. Do Catholics sing this?

Catholics do not sing (we are above such childish nonsense)

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Hoops]

I assume that by "scripture" you mean New Testament.

In this specific, narrow instance, yes, that's what I mean.

I fully agree that my RCC brothers have a different Old Testament, but that's not germane to our discussion here.

[_Hoops]

Oh..........

And Hoops still sucks!


Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Hoops]

Oh..........

And Hoops still sucks!


Peace,
Ceeboo

Don't you have something else you should be doing?

[_Chap]

Yea!

Hoops sucks!
She is an idiot!
She has no argument!
She never answers our questions to her!


Raza raza raza
Booga booga boo
We are the atheists
And we all pile on you
Gooooooooooooo Atheism!

Peace,
Ceeboo

The abuse is yours. (Yes, I know it would be simpler if the people you disagree with were coarse buffoons, but I can't help you there.)

Do you not think the characterization of Hoops as, broadly, averse to posting continuous argument and to responding to any query put to her is generally accurate?

[_Chap]

I would like to hear Hoops' theory about why God doesn't do anything too obvious, e.g., heal amputees.

I'll do my best.

First, let's remember what miracles are for. Miracles are the evidence to prove Jesus is the messiah - which Israel rejected, of course. Miracles are not to have God be a magic genie in the sky, they have a specific purpose. So miracles are Jesus' evidence of his messiah-ship and the miracles of the apostles were to show that they have the authority to establish the church and scripture.

Before Jesus death and resurrection, there was no church. There was no such thing as a Christian church and there was no scripture. Only after Paul preached to the gentiles that we got the establishment of the church and we began to formulate the Bible (based on the authority of the apostles). And it was the apostle's miracles that established their authority to institute the church age and gave them evidence that what they wrote might be considered holy scripture. If you'll remembeer, apostles power could only be conferred by laying on of his hands, it had to be done this way, in my opinion, so that the apostles could approve of that apostle. They had to be in the same room with him.

14 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

18 When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money 19 and said, “Give me also this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”

But I think your more pointed question would be where Jesus said, " 21 Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done. 22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.”

11 I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong

Jesus is talking to the disciples right after withering the fig tree, so he had just destroyed something that would not bring forth fruit, or, in other words, would not help His mission. But He is asking for faith, but faith in what? Or whom? All this time Jesus had been performing miracles as evidence and now He is saying that the apostles must have faith in who He is to fulfill their commission - though it has not been fully expllained to them yet. That they will perform miracles to fulfill their mission - which, in fact (biblically), they did.

3 how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. 4 God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

Just as His miracles was evidence for who He is, the power He gave the apostles was evidence for their authority to establish the church. Once the church had been established, by authority of the apostles and where miracles were evidence of their authority, miracles of the kind you're looking for stopped (generally). I'm not prepared to say they never occur, but this is my understanding of the whole witness of the Bible.

Thanks for explaining your position at length. It would be helpful if you did that more often.

So far as I can see your basic position is that miracles ceased very soon after the death of Jesus. (You seem to leave the door open to the possibility of exceptions, but let that pass for the moment).

Is there not a problem here, in that there is no sign at all that the Christians of the early Church had noticed this? If your account is true, it must have been quite obvious at some time in the first century that the leaders of the church could no longer do more show than sympathy when faced with a dying child, whereas a little while before they could pray and bring it back to health. But nowhere in the writings of the Fathers of the Church is there a sign of this cessation of miraculous power being noticed. They continue to record miracles as the result of Christians praying.

Were they just over-credulous? But if you can say that of them, why not of their predecessors?

[_Buffalo]

Hoops position on miracles seems to mirror that of the JWs quite closely.

[_ludwigm]

First, let's remember what miracles are for. Miracles are the evidence to prove Jesus is the messiah - which Israel rejected, of course. Miracles are not to have God be a magic genie in the sky, they have a specific purpose.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Chap

The abuse is yours.

Are you certain?

(Yes, I know it would be simpler if the people you disagree with were coarse buffoons, but I can't help you there.)

Are you absolutely certain?

Do you not think the characterization of Hoops as, broadly, averse to posting continuous argument and to responding to any query put to her is generally accurate?

I think Hoops (like a rather charming fellow named Ceeboo) has a lot of challenges posting in this enviornment.

Peace,
Ceeboo