David Smith's comment about modern day apostles

This comment is so tangled we decided it needed its own post. Our comments in bold.

---------------------

David Smith writes:

Greetings.

The obvious is never irrelevant. (Obviousness is not an indicator of relevance. It is obvious that the sun rises in the east, but that obvious fact has no bearing on what I'm going to eat for lunch today.)

Jesus Himself appealed to the readily apparent. (Sometimes, sometimes not. He also appealed to mysteries and profundities never before seen. 

Mt. 13:35 So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet: “I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world.” [Psalm 78:2]

Mt. 10:26-27 ...There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. 27 What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs.

Mt. 11:25 “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children."

Lk. 18:34 The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about.

Tongues Have Ceased - Let God be True

Found here. Our comments in bold.

---------------------

Once again we look for the biblical case for the ceasing of the "supernatural" gifts. The failures or excesses of certain people will not be considered. Contemporary expressions aren't evidence. The things that happened or didn't happen in church history isn't relevant. We want the BIBLICAL case, demonstrated from the Scriptures.

This rather long and repetitive article makes repeated assertions as if they were self-evident and thus didn't need to be documented. Well, they do.

The author will provide numerous biblical references, but quotes only a single Scripture right at the beginning. This is a troublesome characteristic of cessationists, they seem to hate quoting the actual Scripture. And, he will never actually explain how his interpretations are the correct ones, he simply makes assertions.

----------------------

Science. Because the answer never turned out to be magic. Ever.

Found this on facebook. As is typical for leftist science fetishists, this gets it wrong on a variety of levels.

1) It's a Category Error.
2) It's a false binary choice.
3) Neither science or magic are ever the answer. Science is the method by which the questions are explored, and magic is an appeal to mysteries. No one answers the question, "Why did this happen?" by saying "science."
4) Science is definitionally limited to testable phenomena. It has nothing to say about anything outside its realm of inquiry.