Perspective And Purpose

by Johnston, Brian, D. | Category: The Lord's Miracles | Jan 1992

What is a miracle?

A child is born; a caterpillar breaks out from its chrysalis; green shoots push up through the earth in Spring. Mere human technology could never achieve such results, and yet although we may sometimes say of these events "it's a miracle!' we are speaking in very general terms.

It has been said that "the daily miracles of God have grown cheap by repetition". The kind of event described above is regarded as taking place in accordance with "natural laws". The events themselves are indeed marvels, but familiar ones. Such laws are, in reality, the moment-by-moment expression of the will of God, who as Creator constantly sustains His creation.

This mediate activity of God contrasts with those occasions of His immediate activity; as when, for example, we read in the book of Joshua of how the "sun stood still, and the moon stayed". So, on occasions in history, God has intervened directly in the normal, regular functioning of His universe. This is usually what we associate with a miracle, but we need not define it as being contrary to nature; rather, its essence lies in the idea that it is a different (although not necessarily a greater) evidence of the will of God from that expressed in the marvellous norm.

Through His continuous government of Creation, God witnesses continually to His "everlasting power and divinity" (Rom. 1:20). In the "miracle", as defined above, there is a specific witness, focussed in time, to a particular group. Extraordinary signs caused Pharaoh's servants to say "this is the finger of God" (Ex. 8:19). Any study of the Lord's miracles is then a study of God's finger-its!

Some miracles might also be termed providential rather than absolute. What do we mean by this? Well, it may have been that known causes were capable of producing the effect. The miraculous element, however, lay in the timing and purpose. The miracle of discovering the coin in the fish's mouth (Mat. 17:27) was a miracle not of power, but of knowledge.

What do miracles prove?

In Exodus 7:9,10, Pharaoh said to Moses, "Shew a wonder". Clearly, they viewed such as his credentials; as authenticating his words and mission as being from God.

In the future, however, the antichrist will also come with "signs and lying wonders" (2 Thes. 2:9). These will involve the exercise of satanic power, and many will be deceived and led astray. Even the "mighty works" of those in Matthew 7:22 were not proof of the new birth. Thus, signs have to be seen in their context, evaluated in relation to the message given, and tested by the Word of God (see Deut. 13:1-1). The need to do so has never been more vital than in our own day. In this way, the Lord Jesus "was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead" (Rom. 1:4).

The Lord Jesus was One "like unto" Moses and His signs ought to have furnished the Jews of His day with all the proof they needed of His Messiahship. Did He not say: "The very works that I do, bear witness of Me, that the Father hath sent Me"? (John 5:36). In the ever-unfailing fulfilment of His words and works of power, the Jews were left without excuse in rejecting the Prophet from Nazareth (Deut. 18:22).

Since the blasphemous interpretation of our Lord's miracles by the Jews (Mat. 12:24), there have been many assaults made upon them. Sceptics, critics, rationalists and others have all had a go. The miracles have been denied, considered unhistorical or mythical, and dispensed with altogether, in attempts to reconcile revelation with science.

Rationalistic thinking as a device to explain away the miraculous is found in John 9, where Jesus healed the blind beggar. It was yet another wonderful miracle performed among countless others by the Lord Jesus while here on earth. But did everyone rejoice at the power of God? Sadly, no! Even in those days there were those who refused to accept the evidence that confronted them. Take, for example, the neighbours of the previously blind man. They quickly divided into two groups. There was the one group who recognized, and were prepared to acknowledge, in this jubilant individual, the one-time beggar. The other group poured scorn on this idea. In answer to the question: "Is not this he who sat and begged?" they simply replied "No, but he is like him". For them, it was a simple case of mistaken identity. One group were prepared to accept that the supernatural (an event outside normal human experience) had taken place. The other group insisted that there had to be a natural, rational explanation.

Today, we see the same trends. Many people prefer to accept that there must be some natural explanations for Christ's miracles. In the modern world, in the scientific age, some would say that it is illogical to insist on miracles. They say that it is simply not reasonable to believe that Jesus literally walked on water, fed over 5,000 people with just 5 loaves and2fish, and soon.

Let us consider for a moment the question which the curious crowd asked the miraculously healed beggar. "What have you to say about Him? It was your eyes He opened" (NIV). Here we find the key. When people question the plausibility of the miracles of the Lord, what they are essentially taking issue with is the Lord of the miracles Himself, that is with Jesus' claim to be the Son of God. For it is clearly neither illogical nor unreasonable to accept the miracles of Jesus if we accept that He is who He claimed to be. Unwittingly, the Jews themselves got to the heart of the problem when they declared: "But as for this man (Jesus), we know not whence He is." This is the only issue that needs to be settled, namely the identity of Jesus of Nazareth. Once His full deity is accepted on the basis of faith, then it is at once reasonable to believe in the miracles as the Scriptures present them.

John in his gospel presents the Lord as the Son of God, and correspondingly often uses the term "works" to describe the miracles. This simple, matter-of-fact approach is consistent with his portrayal of Jesus as the Son of God. The miracles were, after all, the natural form of working for the One who was indwelt by all the fulness of God.

How do they compare with Old Testament miracles?

We do not find miracles scattered evenly throughout the entire Old Testament history. They are concentrated largely in two great outbursts in the days of Moses and Joshua, and secondly, in the days of Elijah and Elisha. Consistent with this pattern, the miraculous period associated with the Lord and subsequently with His apostles, being also for a specific purpose, was limited in its extent. As the age of the Law began with miracles, so did the era of God's grace.

Perhaps significantly, in latter remnant times of the old era no miracles are recorded.

Elisha might feed 100 men with 20 loaves (2 Kings 4:42); but the Lord satisfied more than 5,000 hungry people with a mere 5 loaves and 2 fish. The implication of John 21:25 may well be that the miracles of our Lord exceeded in number all those of the Old Testament. In them He showed His control over the natural and spiritual worlds, as well as over diseases.

How do they contrast with Old Testament miracles?

Although the majority of the Old Testament miracles were still works of evident grace and mercy, a considerable proportion of them involved judgement, this severe character being in accordance with the Law. By contrast, grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, and His miracles were for blessing. The solitary exception among our Lord's miracles was the cursing of the barren fig tree in Mark 11. This change of tone may be further illustrated by observing that, in the Old Testament, leprosies were inflicted (Num. 12:10); whereas in the Lord's ministry they were removed (Mark 1:42). Under the Law a sound hand was caused to wither (1 Kings 13:4); but under grace a withered hand was restored (Mark 3:5). Whereas Moses turned water into blood; the Lord turned water into wine. The Lord had not come to judge (John 3:17), but to become the real joy-giver. Incidentally, since this is clearly stated to be our Lord's first sign, the infancy miracles of the apocryphal accounts can be at once dismissed.

What was the point of the miracles?

The Lord did not perform His mighty works to satisfy the curiosity of Herod (Luke 23:8), or the unbelief of the Jew. In the Lord's miracles there was a total absence of sensationalism. He often discouraged those who had benefited from spreading the news. A variety of purposes can, however, be noted from the Gospels: the fulfilment of Scripture (Mat. 8:14-17); to bring to repentance (Mat. 11:2~24); that His character and glory might be manifested (John 2:11); to witness to His divine origin (John 5:36); that God might be manifested by the mighty works He did (John 9:3); that God might be glorified as a result of onlookers believing (John 11:4,45); and that many might believe and have eternal life (John 20:30,31).

How are they described?

In addition to the term "works" noted earlier, miracles are mainly called "signs", "wonders", and "powers". The term "signs" presents the miracles as being credentials, or witnesses. The latter two view them as to effect and cause respectively. These three names may be illustrated by reference to the miracle of the healing of the paralytic (Mark 2:1-12). As Trench pointed out, it was a wonder, for they who witnessed it "were all amazed". It was also a "power", for the man, at Christ's word, "arose, and... took up the bed, and went forth before them all". It was thirdly a sign, for it signified that One greater than men was among them, One who had the "power on earth to forgive sins".

In the first recorded miracle in Matthew, the Lord's will and power are emphasized when He said: "I will, be thou made clean" (Mat. 8:3). As the Divine Son, the Lord was ever subject to His Father's will. John 11:41, on the other hand, may be regarded as demonstrating the perfect harmony and fellowship ever existing between Father and Son. He was filled with the power of the Holy Spirit, and the execution of His miracles was "by the Spirit" (Mat. 12:28). And so, the Lord's miracles express the truth of the Trinity acting in unity.

Johnston, Brian, D. | Jan 1992
The Lord's Miracles