This whole Bethel debacle has spurred me and my husband on in several discussions regarding the theology of revivals, miracles, and truth.
In the midst of all of our searching, we have come across comments which as a Christian, who believes the Truth and believes God is love, and that humility is an important part of the Christian walk, I found them to be disturbing, if not theologically incorrect.
For example, people saying “Well, Praise God that someone wanted to give God the glory for it!” even when we brought up proof that the entire story, was indeed false. Would God want to be glorified for something that was an outright lie? If God is Truth, and Satan is the father of lies, then why would making up a false story be giving glory to God?
Another, equally as disturbing perspective we have asked my in-laws about, as my Father in law is a pastor with a ministry of signs, wonders, and healings. The comment was along the lines of “I would rather believe that God did a miracle, whether fact or fiction, than require proof of it being true”. If our faith is based on miracles that might be false, then what kind of faith is that? The consensus from talking with my in-laws was that, no, you do not need to believe every miraculous sign to be true. We need to have discernment and cannot base our beliefs on miracles and signs and wonders only. Its not a lack of faith to question the validity of what we hear, its called discernment.
God never calls us to “just believe” in something that might be false, its not a lack of faith if we ask for proof, or a firsthand account. Jesus rose from the dead, and afterwards he presented himself to the disciples and to a crowd of people. Lazarus as well, was raised from the dead, and many people saw him alive after he was dead. I don’t think that asking to see proof of a miracle is a lack of faith, if anything, if there is proof of the miracle (ie, a death certificate for someone who is now living, a doctor’s report of cancer being gone, or even the person who was healed to tell us personally what happened) then that will build faith more than just man’s words.
What kind of faith is built solely on a pursuit of miracles? What happens when a loved one is confined to a wheelchair at age six by a car accident? What happens when she still is not healed, even in her 20s now? Whose lack of faith or “other issue” is it that keeps her there? I don’t sincerely believe that anyone can say it is lack of faith or some other error on her or her family, who are Christians. What if it is God’s plan, God’s will, for someone to have to go through life in a wheelchair? What if God allows these things to happen and doesn’t allow the person to be healed, because maybe their testimony will lead people to Christ?
I don’t think that the Christian religion would have survived 2,000 years without a culture based upon truth and fact, as well as faith. By following only the miraculous and saying “faith over proof”, basically that is discounting years of theological and historical research that has produced the likes of Josh McDowell’s “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” and Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Christ”. We need Christian apologetics. We need reason to believe, not just blind faith.
I don’t think Jesus calls us to have blind faith. When we hear of a miracle that happened, we need discernment as to whether it was true or not.
