Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

thing, and with some another. Sometimes it is used to denote whatever is wonderful, as prodigies, portents, matters inex plicable, the mirabile of the Latins, the repas of the Greeks. Others, again, restrict the term within much narrower limits, understanding by it some contradiction or violation of the laws of nature. By others, it is regarded as a suspension, rather than a contradiction, of those laws; while yet others would prefer to call it a deviation from, rather than either a contradiction or suspension of, natural laws. A miracle, according to some, is a departure from all law; with others, a departure not from all, but merely from all known law.

What, then, is a miracle, and how much shall we include under it? Is it any and every wonderful, apparently inexplicable thing? Is it a direct violation or contradiction of the laws of nature? Is it a suspension of those laws? Is it simply a deviation from them? Is it a thing without and above all law, or has it laws of its own?

If we seek for that which is essential to a miracle, in distinction from what is merely incidental or occasional, we shall find the ultimate idea to be that of divine interposition to accomplish, by special and supernatural agency, a specific end, not otherwise attained. Whether the result be a violation of the laws of nature or not, whether it be a suspension of those laws or not, it must at least be something beyond the power of mere nature to accomplish; something supernatural, requiring for its accomplishment divine interposition and agency. Whether this agency be immediately exerted, or mediately, through human or other instrumentality, the power must be ultimately divine power, and that not according to the ordinary course of divine operations in nature. Where we have this, we have all that is essential to a miracle, — Deity interposing to accomplish, by special agency, an effect not to be reached in the natural course and order of events.

This is accordant with the definitions given by standard authorities. Thus Webster-"an event or effect contrary to the established constitution and course of things, or a

deviation from the known laws of nature; a supernatural event." The term miraculous he defines as" performed supernaturally, or by a power beyond the ordinary agency of natural laws; effected by the direct agency of almighty power, and not by natural causes."

Johnson gives the following: "miracle-1. a wonder; something above human power (Shakspeare); 2. [in theology] an effect above human or natural power, performed in attestation of some truth (Bentley); miraculous - effected by power more than natural (Herbert); miraculously — by power above that of nature (Dryden).”

The essential idea, as expressed in these definitions, is that of divine interposition and agency-not necessarily involving any contradiction or suspension of natural laws; but only a power working above and beyond those laws; praeter, but not of necessity contra, ordinem naturae. Whether the latter idea is really involved in the true notion of a miracle, we shall presently inquire.

As the subject relates particularly to the miracles recorded in scripture, a brief examination of the terms used in the scriptures to denote miraculous events may cast light on the question before us. The terms most frequently employed in the New Testament to denote miracles, are δυνάμεις, σημεία, and τέρατα. When the idea prominent in the mind of the writer or speaker is that of the divine power, or source, from which the miracle emanates, the term 8vváμis- Hebrew strength, power, is δυνάμις employed; plural, mighty works. Thus the miracles of Christ are designated in Matt. xi. 20, 21, 23; xiii. 58; Mark vi. 5, 12; Luke x. 13; and those of Paul in Acts xix. 11. The term is also used by Paul himself, in his epistles, as 1 Cor. xii. 10; Gal. iii. 5.

גְבוּרָה

Where the prominent idea is not that of the power employed in working the miracle, or the source whence it emanates, but rather the object to be accomplished by it, its evidential force on the mind of the spectator, the term employed is onμeîov- Hebrew is sign, by which anything may be known, and specifically, by which the

σημείον

divine power and presence may be recognized. Miraculous events are onμeîa, inasmuch as they indicate or evince the presence and power of the supreme Being. Thus 1 Cor. xiv. 22, the gift of tongues is called "a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not ;" and, i. 22, the Jews are said to require a sign. So Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, Luke xi. 30; and the child Jesus was to be a sign spoken against, Luke ii. 34. In all these cases, the miracle is designed as a token by which the unbelieving world may be convinced and so, is on peîov, a sign. Accordingly the various miracles wrought by or required of our Lord and his apostles, in proof of his divine mission, are termed onμeîa. Thus, Matt. xii. 38 and Mark viii. 11, 12, the Pharisees seek a sign from him; that is, something miraculous, to prove that he was divine. So Luke xi. 16. So also John ii. 18 and vi. 30: What sign showest thou? and ii. 23: Many believed on him, seeing the signs, or miracles. The miracle at Cana, John ii. 11, is spoken of as the beginning of miracles (signs), on the part of Christ. So also Nicodemus, John iii. 2: No man can do these miracles (signs) which thou doest, except, etc. See also John vi. 2, 14, 26; vii. 31; ix. 16; xx. 30. The term is also applied to the miracles wrought by the disciples, in proof of their divine mission, after the ascension of their Lord. Thus Mark xvi. 17, 20: These signs shall follow them that believe; The Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. In these and the like passages, we have the clue, if we mistake not, to the true significance of the miracles of the New Testament. They are tokens or evidences of the divine commission of the person who performs them. The cases above cited, under the term onμcîa especially, seem to refer to miracles as evidences producing conviction and belief in the mind.

Where not so much the end or object of the miracle is the idea prominent in the mind, but rather the effect of it in exciting astonishment or fear, the term Tépas — wonder, prodigy is employed; always, however, in connection with onμeîov. Thus, Acts ii. 19: Wonders in the heaven above,

and signs in the earth beneath, — τέρατα — σημεία; vii. 36 : Wonders and signs in Egypt and the Red sea; John iv. 48: Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe; Acts ii. 43: Many wonders and signs, done by the apostles. See, also, iv. 30; v. 12; vi. 8; xiv. 3; xv. 12, where the same expressions are used with reference to the miracles wrought by the apostles. The terms are sometimes employed, also, with reference to the miracles, or pretended miracles, of false prophets, as in Mark xiii. 22, and Matt. xxiv. 24, and 2 Thess. ii. 9.

The use of τέρας in connection with σημεῖον, in this manner, is evidently borrowed from Hebrew usage, which in like manner connects the corresponding words-ninis and

. מוֹפְתִים

A miracle, then, so far as the scripture use of terms can guide us, is some wonderful event, such as requires divine power to perform, and which may therefore be regarded as a sign or indication of divine presence and agency.

That a miracle is not any and every wonderful or even inexplicable thing, we need hardly pause to affirm. All miracles are wonderful, but not all wonders are miracles. Everything is wonderful on its first occurrence. The first observation of an eclipse, of the eruption of a volcano, of an earthquake, or even a thunder-storm was, doubtless, very wonderful to the observers, and may very well have passed for something miraculous, as such events still do among the savage nations.

It is necessary to the idea of a miracle that the event should be not merely wonderful, but that it occur not in the ordinary course of nature's operations; that the power which produces it should be the special interposition of divine agency. This

1 We say such as requires divine power to perform; for the idea that miracles may be performed by created beings, or even by evil beings, whether men or angels, other than as mere instruments of almighty power, finds, as it seems to us, no countenance in the scriptures.

2 The definition by Augustine: "Miraculum voco quidquid arduum aut insolitum supra spem vel facultatem mirantes apparet" (De utilitate cred. c. 16), is certainly faulty in this respect. It is, as Trench has well observed, a definition of the mirabile rather than of the miraculum.

cannot be said of the eclipse, the storm, or the volcanic eruption. Such events, however remarkable, however fearful, and even unusual, they may be, are still within the range of natural events, and to be accounted for on natural principles. But should the order of nature be reversed, or set aside; should some event occur clearly beyond the power of natural causes to produce, and requiring, beyond reasonable doubt, the divine interposition and agency for its accomplishment, we should properly call such an event a miracle.

Now it may be difficult to decide, in many cases, what is, and what is not, a natural event; whether a given result lies within or without the range of natural causes; in other words, to prove a miracle. That is not now the point under discussion. All that we say is, that when it is once clearly settled that the phenomenon under consideration is not merely some wonderful and unusual, but still natural event, but, on the contrary, is really supernatural, and has been brought about by some special divine interposition, working to accomplish this specific result; then, and not till then, are we warranted to call that event a miracle.

On the question whether a miracle involves a suspension or violation of the laws of nature, or is merely something above and beyond nature, there is room for greater difference of opinion. According to the definitions already given, the latter would seem to be all that is essential. On this point, however, theologians are by no means agreed.

Neander, in his chapter on Miracles,' says: "Although from their nature they transcend the ordinary law of cause and effect, they do not contradict it, inasmuch as nature has been so ordered by divine wisdom as to admit higher and creative agencies into her sphere; and it is perfectly natural that such powers, once admitted, should produce effects beyond the scope of ordinary causes." Similar is the view of Olshausen, who affirms " that we cannot adopt that idea of a miracle which regards it merely negatively as a suspen

[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinua »