Miracles and the Revelation of God – Part 2

In the previous article we noted that, according to the biblical narrative, there have been relatively few periods (or epochs) of human history when miraculous works were performed by God-empowered men. We identified three such periods, the description ‘God-empowered men’ embracing the person of our Lord Jesus, of whom the apostle Peter declared that ‘God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him’.¹

The evidence is that, in each of these periods of history, the cluster of miracles called attention to a new revelation from God, and attested the authority of those who performed the miracles. That is, that one major function of the burst of miracles and signs was to accredit a God-inspired revelation given at the time. This was true of the three great divine revelations: the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel.

In the case of the first epoch (that of Moses and his successor), we note that, at the outset, God enabled Moses to perform three miracles to convince the Israelites that the God of their fathers had appeared to him. Of the first, we read, ‘Moses answered and said, “But suppose they will not believe me or listen to my voice; suppose they say, ‘The Lord has not appeared to you'”. So the Lord said to him, “What is that in your hand?” He said, “A rod”. And he said, “Cast it on the ground.” So he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from it. Then the Lord said to Moses, “Reach out your hand and take it by the tail" (and he reached out his hand and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand), “that they may believe that the Lord God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has appeared to you”’² It is significant that it is recorded later that ‘Israel saw the great work which the Lord had done in Egypt; so the people … believed the Lord and his servant Moses’.³ Moses, the man chosen by God to deliver His law to the nation of Israel, was the first prophet empowered to perform miracles. The many miracles associated with Moses, and his immediate successor Joshua,⁴ affirmed the divine authority of the law.

As regards the second epoch (that of Elijah and his successor), we note the words of the widow of Zarephath to Elijah, following the miraculous healing of her son: ‘Now by this I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the Lord in your mouth is the truth’.⁵ That is, the miracle served the dual purpose (i) of providing Elijah with his credential to be accepted as God’s messenger, and (ii) of confirming the truth of God’s message through him.

We should note, also, the way in which the supernatural fire which fell on Mount Carmel to consume Elijah’s burnt offering (together with the stones of his altar, the wood, and the dust) served to accredit Elijah as God’s servant. We hear him pray beforehand, ‘Let it be known this day that you are God in Israel and I am your servant’.⁶

Although there had been several notable prophets before their time,⁷ Elijah and Elisha can be said to have ushered in the prophetic era – coming in advance, as they did, of the writing prophets.

It is true that Elijah left no book, and, indeed, that the historical narrative contains very little that he said which was extraordinary. Yet no other Old Testament prophet, apart from Moses, looms anywhere near as large as Elijah. By way of example, we can note the near-final words of Malachi, ‘Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet …’,⁸ thereby presenting him as the very last man to be mentioned in the Old Testament.

With reference to the third epoch (that of our Lord and His ‘successors’), it was to be expected that any thoughtful Jew of the day would refer back to the previous occasions when major revelations from God had been ushered in by a flurry of miracles, and to demand equally compelling miraculous evidence to confirm, and validate, the divine origin of what they claimed and taught. And that, not only for the truth and authority of the message heralded by the Lord Jesus Himself, but also of that brought by His apostles, and the New Testament prophets.⁹

In this case, we need to consider separately the claims of the New Testament concerning the Lord Jesus, and the apostolic church.

First, we think of testimonies given to the Saviour. We begin with the connection which Nicodemus made between our Lord’s signs and His teaching, ‘Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him’.¹⁰ We turn to the words of the Lord Himself to the unbelieving Jews during the feast of Dedication (Hanukkah), ‘If I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe me; but if I do, though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him’.¹¹ Then, we hear the apostle Peter’s declaration on the Day of Pentecost to his multi-national Jewish audience, ‘Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through him in your midst’.¹² Scripture makes it clear, then, that the cycle of miracles which surrounded the person of our Lord were the authenticating evidences of His divine mission and message.

Second, we ponder that which is said concerning the apostles and the New Testament prophets. It is clear that these men played an altogether unique role in the history of the church,¹³ and that, as those who received and transmitted God’s revelation by way of their preaching and teaching,¹⁴ they constituted ‘the foundation’ of the church, which is God’s house(hold), building, and holy temple.¹⁵

It was to be expected, therefore, that they would perform miraculous signs to accredit both (i) themselves as God’s servants and messengers, and (ii) the message which they declared.

And so we read, for example, of ‘the apostles’ Paul and Barnabas¹⁶ that ‘they stayed there (Iconium) a long time, speaking boldly in the Lord, who was bearing witness to the word of his grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by their hands’. That expression ‘bearing witness to the word’ links well with the closing sentence of Mark’s Gospel, where we read of the original disciples that ‘after the Lord had spoken to them, he was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs’.¹⁷

I referred, towards the close of my previous article, to what the writer to the Hebrews says concerning the ‘great salvation’ enjoyed by believers; namely, that ‘at the first’ it ‘began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard him, God also bearing witness (‘with’ them, literally) both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will’.¹⁸ I understand this to mean that those who had heard the Lord personally testified to what they had heard, and that God verified their testimony by the signs and wonders which accompanied their ministry.

In summary, we read in scripture of miracle-working men only during three very special periods in human history, each of which represented a significant development in God’s revelation of Himself and of His truth. And I suggest that this casts light on one important feature of that which took place on the so-called ‘Mount of Transfiguration’.

It was, of course, Moses and Elijah who there appeared in glory with the Lord Jesus, and who conversed with Him.¹⁹ That is, for a short time one night²⁰ the three men who represented fresh revelations from God ‘stood’ together.²¹ This would explain why Moses and Elijah appeared there, and not any other of the Old Testament worthies²² – not even Abraham and/or David.²³

It is clear from that which God said to the three apostles who had been selected to witness²⁴ the event, that the key issue raised by the presence of Moses and Elijah on the mountain was that of God’s ‘revelation’ to men. Note carefully the last two words²⁵ which came out of heaven²⁶ according to all three accounts:

1. ‘Behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.²⁷ Hear him!”’²⁸
2. ‘A cloud came and overshadowed them; and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my beloved Son. Hear him!”’²⁹
3. ‘A voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my beloved Son. Hear him!”’³⁰

And these words ‘hear him’ stand out the more starkly when we contrast that which had been said by the same ‘voice’ when it had earlier sounded out of heaven at our Lord’s baptism:

1. ‘Suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased"’³¹
2. ‘A voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”’³²
3. ‘A voice came from heaven which said, “You are my beloved Son; in you I am well pleased”’³³

We can hardly miss the point that there was no suggestion on the banks of Jordan that men should ‘hear’ the Lord Jesus.

Furthermore, I believe a case can be made for regarding Moses as the representative of the law of God, and Elijah as the representative of the Old Testament prophets. I have in mind (i) our Lord’s words, ‘The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached’,³⁴ and (ii) the fact that Moses and Elijah are not only the last men mentioned in the closing chapter of the Old Testament revelation,³⁵ but that Moses is introduced there in connection with ‘the law’ (‘Remember the law of Moses’), whereas Elijah is characterized there as ‘the prophet’ (‘Elijah the prophet’).³⁶

In connection with the Lord’s words ‘until John’,³⁷ I note also that what Malachi said of Elijah (‘he will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers’)³⁸ is linked by Luke directly to the ministry of John the Baptist. For Luke records the declaration of the angel of the Lord to Zacharias concerning John that ‘he will also go before him (the Lord) in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children’.³⁹ Again, it is in that very context that Luke characterizes John as a ‘prophet’, recording the prophetic words of Zacharias, ‘and you, child, will be called the prophet of the Highest’.⁴⁰

But the Father’s stated requirement on the mountain was that Peter and his companions should now attend only to the revelation brought by the Lord Jesus.⁴¹ For the two great Old Testament worthies associated with God’s former revelation of Himself and His ways must take a back seat in the presence of our Saviour.⁴² Because, in contrast with every mere prophet, our Lord, being God’s Son, brought God’s full-orbed revelation and final word to men.⁴³

The first book of the Old Testament told how, after two angelic visitors from heaven had left Abraham by the oaks of Mamre, he was found in the presence of ‘the Lord’ alone.⁴⁴ Now the first book of the New Testament tells how, after two human visitors from heaven left the disciples on the mountain, they were found in the presence of the Lord alone; ‘When they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only’.⁴⁵

I suggest that the evidence both of scripture, and of common sense, is that there was (and is) no need to repeat continually the miraculous evidences which were necessary at first to confirm the truth of an altogether fresh revelation from God. For this reason, it was not necessary, for example, for the remarkable miracles performed by Moses to be repeated throughout later centuries; the law had been fully accredited, and established as having come from God.

For a similar reason, I do not expect to find that miracle-working men (such as functioned during the apostolic era) have continued throughout the subsequent history of the church.

It is well known that several of the so-called ‘Apostolic Fathers’⁴⁶ and ‘Early Church Fathers’ claimed that miracle-working powers continued in the church through the centuries following the days of the apostles. For a scholarly assessment and critique of such claims, I would point to B. B. Warfield’s classic work, Counterfeit Miracles.⁴⁷

In his article, ‘Does God want Christians to perform miracles today?’, J. C. Whitcomb asked pertinently, ‘If God is indeed giving to certain men the power to perform healing miracles today, why are there so few of them, and why are their powers so limited, and why are the results so doubtful?’ Good question, Dr. Whitcomb. For I state the blindingly obvious when I say that miracles either (i) of the magnitude we find performed during the three eras we have noted (such as parting the waters of the Red Sea, shutting up heaven that it gave no rain, raising the dead, walking on water, feeding vast multitudes with very small provisions etc.) or (ii) of the quantity we find then (when, for example, every sick person in a whole village or town was healed, regardless of his or her ailment or condition)⁴⁸ are simply not occurring today. For such to happen nowadays would indicate that someone had come with a fresh revelation from God to surpass that which was made known by our Lord Jesus! Perish the thought!

Dr. Whitcomb then added, ‘By contrast, the miracles of Christ and His apostles were fantastically abundant, utterly spectacular, and totally undeniable … The question we must ask … is not whether God still has the power to perform those kinds of miracles today, but whether it is His plan’.⁴⁹ The issue isn’t what God can do, but what He wills to do. I do not question the truth of John the Baptist’s statement to the Pharisees and the Sadducees that ‘God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones’.⁵⁰ But if somebody asks me to believe that, with God’s help, he has the power to turn pebbles into people, I reserve the right to be cynical, and to challenge his claim! And in so doing I would not be doubting God’s ability to do that very thing if He willed to do so. In other words, it is not a question of God’s power (for He is all-powerful), or His authority (for He is sovereign), but of His will and purpose.

Let me make it clear that I am not denying that God Himself does ‘perform miracles’ today, if by ‘miracles’ we mean ‘miracles’ in the broader sense of (i) extraordinary providences and/or (ii) occurrences which defy natural explanation. For He most certainly does work such ‘miracles’, and often in gracious response to the prayers of His people.⁵¹ But I do not accept that in our day we have miracle-workers and faith-healers able to perform divinely-given miraculous signs, such as God used in biblical times to authorize a new revelation from Him.⁵²

We do well to consider the definition of ‘miracle’ offered by the 18th-century Baptist theologian Augustus Strong, ‘A miracle is an event in nature,⁵³ so extraordinary in itself, and so coinciding with the prophecy or command of a religious teacher or leader, as fully to warrant the conviction on the part of those who witness it, that God has wrought it with the design of certifying that this teacher or leader has been commissioned by Him’.⁵⁵ Dr. Strong continued, (i) ‘Since only an act directly wrought by God can properly be called a miracle, it follows that surprising events brought about by evil spirits or by men, through the use of natural agencies beyond our knowledge, are not entitled to this appellation. The scriptures recognize the existence of such, but denominate them “lying wonders" (2 Thessalonians 2. 9) … not all supernatural occurrences are divine’, 55 and (ii) ‘Miracles, therefore, do not stand alone as evidences. Power alone cannot prove a divine commission. Purity of life and doctrine must go with the miracles to assure us that a religious teacher has come from God’.⁵⁶

In summary, there have been three periods of history when clusters of miracles were performed by God-empowered men; namely, the days of Moses and his successor, the days of Elijah and his successor, and the days of our Lord Jesus and His ‘successors’. In each case the miracles served to accredit both (i) a fresh God-inspired revelation (whether the Law, the Prophets, or the Gospel) and (ii) the one who brought that revelation. The Father’s words ‘Hear him!’ which sounded on the so-called Mount of Transfiguration directed the attention of the disciples who were present there away from the two men who had been associated in Old Testament times with God’s former revelation of Himself, and focused their minds and gaze on Him who brought God’s full and final word to men. ‘They saw no one but Jesus alone’.