Do You Believe The Almighty Performs Miracles?

 I could've asked if you believe in miracles at all. But I decided to bring God into the equation. He is the issue, not nature.  If you say that you do not  believe the sun stood still for Gideon or that Moses parted the Red Sea or that God provided manna in the Wilderness for Israel, or that Jesus calmed the storm and walked on water or particularly healed the sick, those are other questions. The whole point is miracles per se.  Are they defined by the laws of nature? Are they violations of the laws of nature? Who can perform miracles then? How common are they? What are they defined as? 

First things first: miracles are supernatural or unusual events that happen contrary to the natural order of things and are not producible by what is naturally occurring and present at the time and place of the event. It is not a miracle that you found that parking spot at the shopping mall, or some Hail Mary pass won the game, though you may feel that way. Therefore, miracles must be supernatural, but all supernatural events are not miracles; we see the supernatural every day if we look for it.  

No supernatural powers were needed for some events for that and no laws of nature suspended, it was just timing!   Sometimes, it's just seems coincidental that makes it a miracle.  We should not use the term loosely to include spectacular or unusual events that require no act of intervention by God.  As far as the laws of nature go, the law of gravity says that if an apple falls from the tree and you catch it, you have suspended the natural order of things that it should hit the ground.  Don't you realize that the Almighty God who is the Lawgiver of the laws of nature has every right to suspend his own rules? 

Science cannot forbid miracles then. It merely describes what happens according to what normally and customarily occurs. Science depends upon the uniformity of the laws of nature and if miracles happened all the time they'd be called "regulars" and science would be impossible!   David Hume described miracles as violations of the laws of nature as if nature itself is sovereign and controls events, not God. What he is doing is personifying and deifying nature, not God. What I'm saying is that the belief in miracles is necessitated if one believes in God Almighty.

If you believe in a Creator, for example, it is no leap to believe God can do the lesser miracles of the Bible narratives. Secular Humanists deny any supernaturalism and will not let a Divine Foot in the door but adhere strictly to materialism or that only matter/energy exists and there is no spirit and in particular no soul of man to be "saved." To believe in miracles is a profession of faith then. It is the logical conclusion when one believes in God Almighty.  You cannot profess faith in God and deny His miracles or take them out of the Bible narratives. 

Of the views on miracles: that they do not occur; that they only happened in the biblical times; and that they still occur even today, or that they happen by other forces, all depend upon one's belief in the God of the Bible and how to interpret it. They occurred for certain reasons in the Bible at three basic times: Moses and Joshua; Elijah and Elisha, Jesus, and the early church period. If you remove miracles from other religions, they remain intact, but if you remove the miraculous from the Bible, it is disemboweled and neutralized and of not consequence.  

They were performed for basic reasons too: to give authority and credentials to the prophet, priest, or apostle;  to be a sign from God; to intervene in human affairs; and for merciful reasons to show pity.  The basic reason is that miracles are supernatural or even unusual events caused by God directly to bring glory to God and to attest to God (Heb. 2:3-4) .  We must realize that faith doesn't come from miracles, but miracles from faith! 

Jesus did perform miracles and they were well-known in His time and not denied; the skeptics just attributed them to Satan!  He never did a biggie or showy miracle though to force belief by some "smoking gun" evidence. He never did them on demand.  They were not for show!  Jesus did not want to be known merely as a miracle worker but if you remove the miracles, His story has little credence, and if He had never performed them, He would've been but a footnote in history, even forgotten. 

In sum, God performed miracles for His people and they did not believe, except the remnant: Psalm  78:32; John 12:37 say that although God performed multiple miracles, they would not believe and kept sinning (note that it doesn't say "could not") but became hardened and stubborn in their hearts. Soli Deo Gloria!

God's Miracle Worker

"... 'This man certainly performs many miraculous signs.  If we allow him to go on like this, soon everyone will believe in him...'" (John 11:47-48, NLT).  

BY DEFINITION: A MIRACLE IS AN EVENT NOT PRODUCIBLE BY THE NORMAL FORCES AND CAUSES ACTING IN THE TIME AND PLACE THE EVENT OCCURS AND  SUPERNATURAL, BUT UNEXPLAINED BY NATURAL SCIENCE OR NATURE LAWS.

The story of Helen Keller was portrayed in the movie, The Miracle Worker, and this only proves that miracles happen if our eyes are open to them.   Most people that have heard of Christ know that He's famous for turning "water into wine" or even "walking on water."  They also ridicule these "signs" as ludicrous examples of Christian "myth."  Paradoxically, Jesus never intended to be known as a miracle worker, for He came first to be our Savior and He didn't want to get off message.

After raising the daughter of Jairus, Jesus admonished the people not to tell anyone, for He knew that such an event, if publicly known, would merely attract the wrong element or crowd.   He didn't just have talking points about salvation but came with the purpose of dying--He was a man on a mission par excellence!

Jesus could've attracted crowds and masses of disciples had He not warned of the cost of discipleship and that one must die to self and take up your cross in following Him--a cost no other religion requires. Jesus did miracles not for selfish reasons, but out of compassion and to be "signs" of authenticity to His deity as John's gospel portrays.

It should be pointed out that miracles don't make a person believe against their will but bolster and support a faith that is already there.  Faith doesn't come from miracles, but miracles from faith.  It is a fact that, even though Jesus had done many miracles, the Pharisees "would not believe" (cf. John 12:32; Ps. 78:18) in Him, not could not.  No miracle will convince a person who doesn't want to believe, but miracles will strengthen the faith of the willing.  A MAN CONVINCED AGAINST HIS WILL IS OF THE SAME OPINION STILL, SAYS THE PROVERB.  

Jesus told His disciples that they shall do "greater things."  We are told we can "move mountains" and "walk on water" by faith and that it only takes the faith of a mustard seed to accomplish. We must realize that miracles are just unusual events caused by God--all things are caused by God in a sense and if miracles happened all the time, they'd be called "regulars."  Jesus did not oblige the skeptics with miracles on-demand or with some biggie miracle that would make it impossible to deny, but His signs always took faith to accept. The church can get sidetracked by losing focus of God's priorities and turning stones into bread instead of fulfilling the Great Commission, to keep the main thing the main thing.  When Jesus performed miracles, the skeptics weren't convinced--for miracles only give the desire or appetite for more miracles.

In sum, if you want to see a miracle, look in the mirror! and realize that you, too, can be God's miracle worker:  "Expect great things from God; attempt great things for God" (William Carey). "He does great things too marvelous to understand. A miracle is by nature "fixed." Look at the sunrise--It's fixed!   He performs countless miracles" (Job 9:10, NLT). The Bible is a miracle in itself, being God-breathed and accurately portrays many miracles, signs, and wonders of God to bolster faith.     Soli Deo Gloria!

Miracles On Demand

Why didn't the Lord do a show for King Herod to demonstrate His authority?  Jesus never did a showy or biggie miracle to impress people, in fact, He stated that the only "sign" that evil generation would get was the one of Jonah!  The miracles of the Lord are consistent with His teachings and not meant to be attention-getting, or to force belief, though they do elicit faith in some--but in others evoke only skepticism.  If you took out the miracles of the Lord in the Bible, or if He had never done any, He would've only been a footnote in history, and we would've only heard of a humble teacher or martyr. But the "signs" He did were for a good reason--to be an illustration of His deity in some dimension (e.g., raising the dead to show He is the life, or feeding the hungry to show He is the bread of life).

In other religions, you don't have skeptics or doubters present to witness the event, but Jesus feels free to do them in the open, so that no one can deny them--even the Pharisees admitted that, if He had gone on, the whole world would believe in Him.  There is a vast difference in His miracles; if you take the miracles out of other faiths, they remain basically intact in their teachings, but not so with Christianity. What Jesus knew was that faith produces miracles and not vice versa.  You cannot force someone to believe by a miracle!  Jesus refused to oblige the mockers at His crucifixion who demanded that He get off the cross--He could've done it, but we'd all be lost.  The Scriptures point out in John 12:37 and Ps. 78:32  that though God performs miracles the people "would not" believe--note that it doesn't say "could not."

Miracles don't give faith, but only a desire for more miracles--that's why God refrains Himself.  God is the cause of all events, and miracles are just unusual ones caused by Him; if miracles happened all the time we'd call them "regulars."  Miracles can evoke faith in the believing, but skepticism in others. The question of whether miracles can occur is not scientific, because it's out of its domain, but is a philosophical question.

Ultimately, it depends upon whether God exists.  You cannot disprove God because that would be a universal negative, and all philosophers know you cannot prove a universal negative--like the fact that there are no little green men or Earth-like planets in the entire cosmos; you would have to know all and be everywhere, or be God yourself!  You can choose not to believe due to lack of evidence, but you cannot disprove. 

Jesus' miracles were different in that they were not helter-skelter, for prestige, money, or power; He never used His powers for personal advantage, gain, or relief.  None of them were capricious, nor fantastic, so as to force faith.  Also, His miracles were unique, in that they proved and illustrated lessons.  Jesus is the Lawgiver and has the authority to overrule His own laws of nature.  The miracle of miracles, of course, was His resurrection, and this is the ultimate verification of His power of death, hell, and Satan, and the proof that He's the Son of God in the flesh.

For this event, Luke writes, "there are many infallible proofs"  (cf. Acts 1:3).  What we need to determine, is whether the records of His resurrection are historically reliable and test the veracity of the witnesses (who were willing to lay down their lives for their testimony)--you will find that the evidence would stand up in a court of law verifying His resurrection as fact by an impartial jury. If the resurrection is true, it's the most fantastic and wonderful fact of history, if not, it's the cruelest hoax perpetrated on mankind.    Soli Deo Gloria!

Are You A Sabbatarian?

Sabbatarian is defined as one who religiously and strictly keeps the Sabbath holy (defined as making separate or consecrating to the service of) as unto the Lord per the fourth commandment. There is no hard-and-fast rule as to what a Sabbath should be and Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath--it is His day. According to the law of Moses, breaking the Sabbath was a capital offense. Sabbath doesn't mean "seventh" but "rest." We owe our concept of a weekend to our Judeo-Christian heritage. Going to church every Sunday doesn't make you a Sabbatarian. Deciding that you need one day a week to rest is not being a Sabbatarian unless you keep it holy. Going to the ballgame or mowing your lawn on Sunday is not a violation for non-Sabbatarians.

My pastor has gone to games on Sunday. If you work on Sunday and you're taking another day off does not make you a Sabbatarian. Ministers, who work on Sunday often take Mondays off are by my definition not Sabbatarians. Taking a break is not necessarily keeping the day holy. Jews were forbidden from pursuing "pleasure" on the Sabbath (Isa. 58:13). The principle of "rest" is in effect still and God warns in Hebrews that Israel failed to enter into His rest.

The Sabbath day was given as a sign to Israel ( Neh. 9:14; Ezekiel 20:12,20). Christians are not to be judged as regards a Sabbath (Col. 2:16). The only one of the Ten Commandments or the Decalogue not repeated in the New Testament is the fourth about the Sabbath. The principle of rest still applies but "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27). We owe our concept of the weekend to our Judeo-Christian heritage. Christians enter into His rest (Heb. 4:3). Rom. 14:5 makes it clear that we are to be convinced in our own mind and not to judge some who consider one day more sacred than another. To some, all days are equally holy.

Seventh-Day Adventists consider the Sabbath still in effect and insist that this implies that it should be Saturday which the Jews keep holy and that the earliest Christians actually didn't change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday or the Lord's Day as John calls it in Revelation. It is reported in Didache 14:1 that early Christians met on the Lord's day by the end of the first century A.D. We do have a day set aside to worship and gather together to break bread and collect offerings (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. l6:2). This is circumstantial evidence and there is no command in the New Testament to observe the Lord's Day. In conclusion: you have the freedom to be a Sabbatarian or not one if you will, but not to judge others.   Soli Deo Gloria!