Essentially, a miracle is an unusual manifestation of God’s power designed to accomplish a specific purpose. The consistent Christian recognizes that God’s power is constantly displayed in the clockwork operation of the universe. The Bible teaches us that it is Christ’s power that holds everything together (Hebrews 1:3). Yet, we would not call that power a miracle because it is the normal way God upholds the universe. A miracle must be unusual if it is to be called a miracle. A miracle is not necessarily a violation of the laws of nature. God could demonstrate His power by using the laws of nature in an unusual way. For example, God used wind (a natural phenomenon) to drive back the water of the Red Sea, allowing the Exodus of the Israelites (Exodus 14:21). Although there is no obvious violation of physics, who could doubt that the parting of the Red Sea constitutes a miracle? At the very least, the timing of the event was miraculous. Of course, if God wants to suspend a law of nature, He is free to do so. They are His laws after all. But we should be careful about assuming God has suspended a law of nature to perform any particular miracle. After all, we do not even know all the laws of nature. Most definitions given for the word miracle are interestingly partial. The popular Christian author and broadcaster, C.S. Lewis, wrote this in the introduction to his book on the subject: “I use the word Miracle to mean an interference with Nature by supernatural power.”2 On the same page, he footnoted this definition with an explanation. This definition is not that which would be given by many theologians. I am adopting it not because I think it an improvement upon theirs but precisely because, being crude and ‘popular’, it enables me most easily to treat those questions which ‘the common reader’ probably has in mind when he takes up a book on Miracles.3 Lewis used his book to argue that miracles exist. To do so, he made use of a concept from outside nature—the supernatural. The eighteenth century secular philosopher David Hume had a different approach. He defined a miracle as “a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent.”4 He went on to argue that the evidence will always be stronger for natural laws than for miracles, and hence he concluded that the wise man should always favor natural law instead of a miracle. Hence, miracles do not happen. Hume’s definition goes beyond the standard definition of a miracle. Nonetheless, even if we accept his restricted definition, his argument does not stand.5 The arguments used by both Hume and Lewis have been critiqued as using circular reasoning. Circular reasoning is the logical fallacy whereby the conclusion to an argument is assumed as a presupposition. The notion miracles are impossible because they would (potentially) go beyond the laws of nature is not a rational argument. It merely presupposes the very thing it is supposed to be proving. The tacit assumption in the argument is that anything that goes beyond the laws of nature is impossible. But this is simply a restatement of the presupposed conclusion that there are no miracles (under Hume’s definition). Some have suggested the creationist argument is also circular, since it assumes the inerrancy of Scripture. However, the inerrancy of Scripture can be argued without assuming up front that violations of natural law ever occur. In fact, the very existence of laws of nature makes no sense apart from Scripture, as we have written elsewhere. David Hume was stumped by this very issue; he could not come up with a rational basis for induction (the temporal consistency of laws of nature) apart from the Christian worldview. Our presupposition that the Bible is true is therefore justified by the existence of uniform laws of nature, regardless of whether or not such laws are immutable. Therefore, it makes complete sense, logically and consistently, to look for the way miracles are described in the Bible and, using our presupposition the Bible is true, see what case can be made for their existence. The Word Miracle in the Old Testament Three Hebrew words are used to represent miracles in the Old Testament. These are ’ōth (אות), mō-phēth (מופת), and pālā’ (פּלא). 1. ’ōth (אות) The word ’ōth means “sign.”6 The word can be seen in the emphasized part of the following verses. Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years.” (Genesis 1:14, emphasis added) And the Lord set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him. (Genesis 4:15, emphasis added) Neither of the above verses used sign to imply a miracle happened. Instead, the sign is there for a purpose. In Genesis 1, the signs are literal, as people have always used the stars for direction. In Genesis 4, the mark signifies that Cain is not to be killed. However, in other verses, we do see ’ōth representing miracles. This illustrates that miracles were for a purpose—to demonstrate God’s power. I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt. (Exodus 7:3, emphasis added)
Posted on: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 09:36:03 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015