VERITAS
Miracles
By Craig Branch
March 2008
When
most people consider the discipline of apologetics,
responding to the objections of non-Christians comes
to mind. And indeed that is an important application,
but apologetics is for the believer as well, on several
levels. Apologetics is for believers who may have doubts
or questions, helping them find the answers they seek
and learning to understand not only what we believe
but why we believe it. Additionally, it also helps provide
discernment in the face of heretical doctrine.
The
theme of this Areopagus Journal is miracles. The objective
is to explain the apologetic significance of miracles
as it applies to both non-believers and believers, as
well as respond to objections that skeptics have raised
to miracle-claims.
DEFINING
MIRACLES
It is important that we start with a clear definition
of a miracle. There are several ways in which they have
been defined. One might characterize a miracle as some
event or manifestation that creates a deep sense of
aesthetic awe, wonder, or reverence. It doesn’t
have to be outside of “science.” It could
be something as common as the birth of a baby, for example.
This is usually not what apologists and skeptics of
miracles mean by “miracle,” though.
The
more common definition is a supernatural event or “a
special act of God that interrupts the natural course
of events.” [1] So understood,
in miraculous events the laws of nature are suspended
by the intentional action of God. This is a useful definition
of miracles and it will play a significant role in the
articles throughout this journal.
Alternatively,
an event need not run counter to the laws of nature
in order to count as miraculous. It might be seen as
a special act of God because of its context. Examples
would be the sudden remission of cancer, with or without
therapy or treatment, after a Christian or group prays
for a healing. Natural processes may have been involved
but the context and timing of the person’s recovery
signals God’s intervention. I had such an experience
with my mother who was diagnosed with bone cancer in
her back and the Lord led me to pray and fast for her
for three days. When the surgeons opened her up, the
cancer was gone but scar tissue was on the bones. They
were predictably shocked. One doctor said that there
was a remotely possible natural explanation, but a better
one was that it was a “miracle.”
Miracles
defined in these latter two ways are our concern in
this issue of Areopagus Journal.
MIRACLES
AND APOLOGETICS
Miracles have traditionally been utilized in Christian
apologetics to provide evidences and affirmation for
the existence of an all-knowing, all powerful God and
the authenticity of His revelation in Christ and the
Bible. For example, when one considers the centerpiece
of Christianity, the bodily resurrection of Christ (1
Cor.15:3-19), the importance of miracles as proof and
vindication of Christianity should be obvious. Peter
used the message and fact of the miraculous, including
the resurrection, to open the eyes and convict the hearts
of the Jews (Acts 2:22-37). He also shared the event
of the resurrection to the gentile Cornelius (Acts 10:34-45).
And later Paul used the factual proof of the resurrection
in his apologetic to the Greek philosophers at Areopagus
(Acts 17:30-34).
The
many miracles of Jesus (e.g., raising Lazarus and others
from the dead, healing many diseases, walking on water,
calming the storm, supernatural knowledge, feeding the
multitudes, future predictions) all give significant
attestation of the purposeful intervention of God in
His creative order. In addition, we have Christ’s
disciples and apostles performing miracles, attesting
to the validity of the Christian message. We read of
numerous claims of healing and raising the dead.
Of
course skeptics naturally question the validity of those
miracles, viewing them as either superstitious nonsense,
manipulations of nature, concoctions of con-artists,
or as otherwise having natural explanations. Skeptics
also argue that we simply could not have enough evidence
for a miracle to override our confidence in the regularity
and orderliness of nature. Some point out that other
religions also claim miraculous attestation, yet Christians
claim that those religions are false. Thus, noted atheist
David Hume argued that “miracles” in conflicting
religions are self-canceling.
We
intend to respond to these kinds of objections to miracles
in this issue of Areopagus Journal. In our first article,
ARC’s Steve Cowan contributes, “Discerning
the Voice of God,” in which he explains in more
detail the role of miracles in apologetics and responds
to Hume’s charge that miracle-claims from competing
religions cancel each other out.
Christian
philosopher and apologist Dr. Winfried Corduan responds
to other skeptical objections, including those of David
Hume and Antony Flew, in “Miracles and Their Omniscient
Critics.” As you will see, most arguments against
miracles claim that we could not have enough evidence
for them to override our confidence in the laws of nature,
or that science somehow makes miracles unlikely or belief
in them irrational. Corduan aptly shows that all such
arguments require that the skeptic be omniscient—which,
of course, is impossible.
We
must also point out that the inconsistency between miracles
and nature only applies to one specific “scientific”
worldview, a mechanistic view that claims everything
that occurs happens only according to rigid scientific
laws which totally control everything. Perhaps we should,
with tongue in cheek, reply that it is the scientific
naturalists who demonstrate the most “faith”
in order to believe the plausibility of macro-evolution.
DO
MIRACLES STILL HAPPEN?
When it comes to apologetics, the primary concern regarding
miracles are ones that occurred in the past. Given that
God gave the prophets and apostles miraculous attestation
for their revelations, the apologist seeks to confirm
that the miracles connected with that revelation actually
occurred. Nevertheless, there is a secondary issue of
great importance to the Christian community.
Some
Christians believe that the miraculous sign gifts described
in Ephesians 4:11 and 1 Corinthians 12-14 continue in
the church today and will continue until Christ comes
again. These Christians are called continuationists.
Other Christians believe that those miraculous gifts
were designed to function only during the foundational
period of the Church (cf. Eph. 2:20) and ceased with
the death of the apostles. These Christians are called
cessationists. Both groups of Christians agree that
God can and does manifest miracles today, but they disagree
on whether God endows contemporary Christians with miraculous
gifts as he did the biblical prophets and apostles.
Closely related to this question is whether or not prophets
and/or apostles exist today as well.
Given
the significance of this debate in the church today,
we have decided to include a point/counterpoint exchange
between two theologians on the question of the continuation
of miracles. Dr. Sam Storms represents the continuationist
position, arguing that God does still bestow miraculous
gifts on his people today. Dr. Sam Waldron represents
the cessationist position, arguing that the miraculous
gifts are no longer given. Each presenter also provides
a response to the other’s article.
The
main concern of the cessationist is that continuationism
undermines the sufficiency of Scripture and opens the
door for people to be deceived and misled in life decisions.
Continuationists, on the other hand, assert that to
not seek after and exercise the miraculous gifts quenches
the Spirit and hinders the advance of the Kingdom.
Regardless
of one’s stance on the continuationism/cessationism
debate, we can all agree that the greatest miracle of
all is that God had mercy on you and me, overruled our
rebellion towards Him, suffered an awful death on the
cross, and was miraculously raised for our salvation.
Amazing grace, how sweet the sound that saved a wretch
like me! Amazing love, how can it be, that Thou my God
would die for me!
Craig
Branch is director of the Apologetics Resource Center,
Birmingham, Alabama.
NOTES
1 - Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia
of Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids: Baker Books:
1999), 450.
(top) |