MIRACLES (IN THE BIBLE)

There is no term in the Bible that corresponds to miracle in its strict theological meaning. The Latin word

miraculum is absent from the Vulgate New Testament and occurs only six times in the Vulgate Old Testament for a number of Hebrew terms for wondrous acts or events, not necessarily miraculous in the ordinary sense. After considering the various terms used in the Bible for events of a marvelous nature, this article considers the historical value of accounts in which these events are narrated and the miraculous nature of these Biblical wonders.

Terms. The Hebrew word môpet (wonder), used in an exclusively religious connotation, may stand for a symbolic act not necessarily beyond nature's power (Ez 12.6), a sign of God's power and goodness [Ps 70 (71).7], an omen for the future (Is 8.18; 20.3), or a warning portent to keep the people away from evil [Ex 11.9; Ps 104 (105).5]. The Septuagint (LXX) translates this term by τέρας (prodigy); in classical Greek this denotes any divine sign (Homer) and later a purely natural wonder (Polybius and Plutarch), but combined with σημε[symbol omitted]ον (sign) it often signifies a divine sign, especially in the LXX. This combination is used in the New Testament to describe the wonderful works of Christ (Mt 12.38;16.1–4; Mk 8.11; Lk 11.16–17; Jn 2.11, 18, 23; etc.). The Hebrew word 'ôt (sign, mark, or token) is frequently added to môpet, e.g., in Ex 7.3; Dt 4.34; 6.22; 7.19; 34.11; Jer 32.20; Ps 47 (48).23, to which the Greek idiom σημε[symbol omitted]α καὶ τέρατα corresponds. The word 'ôt may also be used in a profane sense; its religious sense is therefore to be determined by the context. The Hebrew word nês (signal) occurs once (Nm 26.10) in the meaning of miraculous sign. This term, like g^ebûrôt (mighty deeds), is very common in post-Biblical literature in combination with môpet or 'ôt.

God's power is often seen in everything that appears wonderful, mysterious, surprising, awe-inspiring or astonishing. Actions manifesting such power are called nifla'ôt (wonderful deeds) of God (Ex 3.20; 34.10; Josh3.5; Jgs 6.13; Jer 21.2; Ps 9a.2), or p^elā'ôt (marvels) of God [Ex 15.11; Ps 76 (77).15; Jgs 13.18]. When these terms are used in regard to men, they indicate something beyond them, a notion that the LXX expressed by ἀδύνατον or ἀδυνατε[symbol omitted]ν (Gn 18.14; Dt 17.8; Zec 8.6; Prv 30.18). God's wondrous deeds are also nōrā'ôt (awe-some deeds), which is rendered in the LXX by ταυμάδια (marvelous deeds) or ἔνδοξα (glorious deeds) and in Symmachus by παράδοξα (astonishing deeds), as in Jgs 13.16; Ex 34.10; Ps 65 (66).3; Dut 10.2; 2 Sm 7.23. They are the works (ma’ăśîm) of God's power (Ex 34.10; Dt 11.7; Jos 24.31; Jer 51.10), His g^e bûrôt (mighty deeds), as in Ex 3.24; Ps 19 (20.7; 104 (105).2, His g^e dôlôt (great deeds), as in 2 Kgs 8.4; Ps 70 (71).19; 135 (136). 4; Job5.9; 9.10; 37.5, corresponding to the New Testament terms ἐργα (works, i.e., of God: especially in John) and δυνάμεις (mighty deeds: so especially in Matthew and Mark). Miracles are thus placed in the grand design of God, the Creator and savior of mankind (Jn 4.34; 17.4; Rom 1.16; 15.19; Gal 3.5; 1 Cor 12.1; 1 Thes 1.5).

This terminology shows that the wondrous acts of God fall within the category of prophetic symbolism intended to draw attention to something beyond themselves that confirms the word of God. They are not isolated gestures on the part of God but play an important part in the execution of the grand design of the Creator for the redemption of His creatures.

Historical Value. Vatican Council I declared that Biblical miracles are not to be rejected as so much mythical or legendary matter (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion symbolorum, 1813); Moses, the Prophets, the Apostles, and Jesus did really perform miracles to attest to their respective messages and draw the attention of their listeners (Enchiridion symbolorum 1790). There is still freedom to discuss particular cases (and modern literary-historical criticism is exacting in the matter) in the light of the principles laid down in the encyclical divino afflante spiritu (Enchiridion Biblicum [Rome 1961] 558).

All miracle narratives are held to be legendary and mythical by the independent schools of comparative religion and literary criticism. Literary features common to Biblical and pagan narratives should not blind one, however, to the radical divergencies between them pointing to the great religious value of the former. The crucial difference arises from the intervention of God in human affairs for the salvation of humankind. The method of Biblical form criticism has the merit of bringing to the fore the literary form and qualities of the text, but is unable by itself to lead one to a decision as to its historical value.

The wondrous acts of Jesus are one with the texture itself of the New Testament: they form an integral part of his story and provide a solid basis for Christian belief and Apostolic preaching (Lk 7.22; Mt 11.5; Acts 2.22;10.38; 2 Cor 12.12; 1 Thes 1.5) and authority (Mk 16.17; Acts 3.12; 2.43; 5.15; 14.3; 1 Cor 2.4; Heb 2.4).

In the case of the Old Testament miracles, the literary form of the book containing a miracle story must first be determined. A miracle narrative may be found in larger works with different literary forms. The wisdom form of literature makes full use of fictional devices; in such an instance the wonder narrative may be a purely literary artifice. This is generally admitted with respect to the Book of Job (Dictionnaire de la Bible, 4.1082) and, to a lesser extent, to the Books of Jona and Tobit. The Book of Daniel is a mixture of prophetic, apocalyptic, and wisdom forms. Sir 44–49 and Wis 10–19 manifest how freely the sapiential writers treated historical facts; exaggeration and artificial devices are harnessed to press home the writer's point.

The fictional element is not missing in some historical writings: the talking serpent in Gn 3.2 may be taken figuratively [Acta Apostolicae Sedis 40 (1948) 47]. The history of the Exodus puts one on guard lest too much be rejected or accepted (see plagues of egypt). The critical examination of the various traditions handed down from generation to generation to keep alive the faith of the people bears unanimous witness to basic miraculous events at the start of the whole deliverance; they differ, however, as to the details and particular circumstances accompanying these events: the separation of the sea for the advance of the people (Ex 14–15), the sending of the manna (Ex 16.1–18), and so on. The compiler, no less than the writer, of Deuteronomy, the Psalmists, and the wisdom writers juxtaposed these traditions to emphasize the miraculous nature of the whole adventure; as to details, each case must be assessed by itself. The miracles in the historical and prophetical books respectively are less in number and better attested by contemporary witnesses and form part of a normal historical record. Miracle narratives tend to increase in the biographies of elijah and elisha; this calls for caution and inclines one to admit literary exaggeration. In view of well-attested modern miracles of this type one should not be over hasty to put them aside as legendary folk tales.

Miraculous Nature. The Israelite, having no idea of a fixed unchangeable natural law governing the physical universe, was not interested in the intimate nature of a miracle; for him it was a sign of God's merciful providence for some specific purpose, which he tried to grasp and understand. Christian theology attempts to discover the nature of a miracle defined as an event inconsistent with the constitution of nature, that is, with the established course of things. Or, again, it is an event in a given system that cannot be referred to by any law or accounted for by the operation of any principle in that system. [J.H. Newman, Essays on Miracles (London 1890) 4.] Do Biblical miracles conform to this definition? An outline of basic principles suffices for the present; each specific case should be examined on its own merits.

Some, interpreting the miracle narratives in a strictly literal sense, strive to find natural explanations; others cast serious doubts on their historical value; and still others, accepting their historical value, explain them as magical practices or empirical curative treatments or gestures common in those days. Some of these attempts to understand miracle stories are vitiated by the basic prejudice that miracles are theologically and philosophically impossible.

It is, nonetheless, legitimate to search for scientific or natural explanations provided that things are not stretched too far. Frequently events are much too summarily described for us to establish their miraculous nature with any degree of theological precision; in such cases it is better to confess our ignorance for lack of evidence. It must be kept in mind that miracles were first and foremost, although not exclusively, intended to awaken in their immediate beholders an interest and trust in God, the Prophets, the Apostles, and Jesus Christ. For moderns, the church itself is a fundamental miracle, a sign raised among the nations (Is 11.12). The value of particular miracles lies in their being carriers of the word of God and witnesses of the power of the Spirit for the Redemption of humankind and the establishment of the eschatological kingdom.

Theological Significance. For the Israelite, the importance of the miracle lies not so much in its being a break in the laws of nature as in its purpose. The modern study of miracles has moved in this direction, seeking to define the theological significance of these wonders. In this way the miracle, far from being considered as an isolated display of God's power over the laws of nature, finds its place and function in the execution of the overall design of divine Providence for the Redemption of Israel and all humankind. The terms examined above unmistakably show that the miracle is a sign going beyond itself to draw the attention of the beholders (Exod 3.2–3); it is an invitation to faith in God and is understood only by the well-disposed, drawing them to a decision (Nm 14.11–12; Dt 4.34; 7.19; 29.2; Mt 12.22–50). The marvelous signs reveal the attributes of God and His will (Ex7.5, 17), especially with regard to Israel's election (Ex 11.7; 34.10–11; Dt 6.22; 10.14–15; Wis 11.5); through them God's fidelity to His own promises is made manifest [Ex 3.7; Dt 7.8–10; Psalm 135 (136); Is 46.3–4; Hos9.10; 11.1], and His justice is made public to all the world (Leviticus 26, 45). A miracle is a guarantee for the future and its foreshadow (Dt 7.9–19; Is 11.15–16; 43.16–21; 51; Hos 2.14–15, 17; 11.1; 13.4; Mt 4.23–25; 12.28; Lk6.17–19).

Miracles also provided an effective instrument for the religious education of Israel [Dt 9.26; Psalm 76 (77); 81 (82); 104 (105)–107 (108)]; they awakened fundamental religious feelings and attitudes through concrete symbolical representation of the truth. By itself a miracle is insufficient to confirm or authenticate the truth; the message must conform to the word of God (Dt 13.2–6; Mt8.17; 9.35; 11.2–6; 24.24; Rv 13.11–18; 16.13–14;19.20).

In the New Testament. The Acts of the Apostles says that wonders and signs were done by the apostles (Acts 2.43) and by Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14.3). Thus miraculous activity was part of the witness that the church bore to the kingdom of God among Jews and Gentiles. Luke enhances his pictures of Peter and Paul as, respectively, the bearers of God's word to Jews and Gentiles by telling stories of miracles worked by each of these Apostles. Similar stories are told about each of these two key figures in the history of the early church (Acts 3.1–16 and 14.8–10; 5.1–11 and 13.6–11; 9.33–35 and 28.7–9; etc.). Paul writes about the signs, wonders, and mighty works that are the signs of a true apostle (2 Cor 12.12) without describing any individual signs and wonders.

Preaching in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost, Peter described Jesus as a man attested by God with deeds of power, wonders, and signs that God did through him (Acts 2.22; Lk 24.19). Stories about Jesus' miracles appear in each of the four Gospels. The Gospels attest to several controversies that arose because of the wondrous deeds that Jesus had effected, particularly Jesus' curing on the sabbath.

In describing the miracles of Jesus the four evangelists follow the standard pattern used in the ancient world—the literary form of a miracle story—to describe the activity of wonder-workers. This literary form consisted of three elements: 1) a description of the situation, so narrated as to highlight the difficulty of the miracle that was to happen; 2) a simple ritual consisting of an authoritative word (Mk 5.34) and/or a ritualized gesture (e.g., Mk 7.33); and 3) some demonstration of the reality of the miracle. This last element sometimes consisted of a narrative element, illustrating that the miracle had happened, e.g., the blind man who regained his sight and followed Jesus was calm (Mk 10.52); those fed had more than enough to eat (Mk 8.8). This narrative "proof" was sometimes accompanied by or even replaced by a choral response in which the bystanders express amazement at what had happened (Mk 4.39 and 41; Le 18.43). These choral responses are particularly important in Luke's account of Jesus' miracles.

Many of the miracle stories recounted by Matthew and Luke come from Mark, the first of the Synoptic Gospels. A very large part of Mark's gospel consists of stories about Jesus' miracles and exorcisms. These stories show that the kingdom of God is present in Jesus ministry. Through these wonderful activities of Jesus, God's power is at work conquering the power of evil in individuals and even in nature, a foreshadowing of the ultimate conquering of evil that will come when the Kingdom of God is fully and finally manifest.

Occasionally Mark intimates that Jesus' miracles should be seen in the light of the biblical hope. Thus the choral response of Mk 7.37 alludes to Is 35.5–6 and shows that Jesus' miracle of the man whose hearing and speech were impaired was a partial realization of Isaiah's dream. What is implied in Mark becomes clearer in the later Synoptic gospels. Thus, Matthew who collects a number of miracle stories together in chapters 8 and 9 interprets Jesus' miracles by means of a fulfillment citation (see Is 53.4 in Mt 8.17). Later on in his narrative, Matthew describes Jesus's miracles as "what the Messiah was doing," that is, the deeds of the Messiah. Jesus' response to John the Baptist as to whether he was the one to come was a rehearsal of his miraculous activity described in the language of Is 29.18–19; 35.5–6; 42.18.

In Luke's Gospel, the importance of the Old Testament for understanding the miracles of Jesus is present from the very beginning of the story of Jesus' public ministry. In his "inaugural address" (Luke 4.19), Jesus described the reason why the Spirit had descended upon him. His brief discourse uses passages from Is 61.1–2 and Is 58.6 and includes a reference to the recovery of sight by the blind. Defending himself against the hostile natives of Nazareth, Jesus told the story of miracles attributed to Elijah and Elisha (Lk 4.25–27). Empowered by the Spirit as he was, Jesus performs similar miraculous acts. Like Elijah (1 Kgs 17.17–24), he raised a widowed mother's dead son (Lk 7.11–17).

Only seven stories of miracles are told in the Fourth Gospel. These are concentrated in the first part of the book (Jn 1–12): water become wine (2.1–11), the cure of the royal official's son (4.46–54), the healing of the paralytic (5.1–14), the feeding of the large crowd (Jn 6.1–14), the walking on water (6.16–21), the healing of the blind man (9.1–7), and the raising of Lazarus (11.1–44 [+12.1–2]). While the Fourth Gospel has fewer miracle stories than do the Synoptics, the Fourth Gospel has its own theological idiom to describe Jesus' miracles. They are "signs" (semeia). In a characteristic note, the Fourth Evangelist describes the water become wine as "the first of his signs" (1.11). The theology implicit in the evangelist's use of "sign" is dense. Essentially the cipher points to the christological meaning of Jesus miracles. This is most evident when after the feeding of the crowd the Johannine Jesus describes himself as "the bread of life"(6.48, 51) or before raising Lazarus from the dead says "I am the resurrection and the life" (11.25).

Bibliography: a. lefÈvre, Dictionnaire de la Bible, suppl. ed. l. pirot, et al. (Paris 1928–) 5:1299–1308. Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Bible, tr. and adap. by l. hartman (New York 1963) 1538–40. l. cerfaux et al., L'Attente du Messie (Paris 1954) 131–138. s. v. mccasland, "Signs and Wonders," Journal of Biblical Literature 76 (1957) 149–152. l. j. mcginley, Form-Criticism of the Synoptic Healing Narratives (Woodstock, Md. 1944). b. maggioni, "Miracoli e rivelazione nell'A.T.," Bibbia e Oriente 6 (1964) 49–59. e. c. messenger, "The Miraculous Element in the Bible," Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, ed. b. orchard et al. (London-New York 1957) 87–91. y. zakovitch and h. e. remus, "Miracle (NT)," Anchor Bible Dictionary 4:845–869.

[c. sant/

r. f. collins]