- Wayne Grudem
Thomas Jefferson said they can't happen ever. This is why he took a razor blade and cut out all the miracles and references to supernatural occurrences in the Bible and republished it as The Jefferson Bible. For those who don?t believe in miracles, their reasoning basically boils down to this: ?I?ve never seen a miracle. Miracles defy the laws of nature, so there must never have been a miracle. And therefore there must be a natural explanation for all miraculous claims.? Or you can simplify their reasoning further as: ?Miracles don?t happen because they can?t happen.?
But what really affects your conclusion is what you believe about God. If there is an all-powerful (omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient) God who is present everywhere (omnipresent) and it is He who created the universe, then miracles are possible.
A miracle is when God temporarily and as an exception, suspends or supersedes the laws of nature which He as the creator put in place, to accomplish his will. But when God works through natural processes to accomplish his will, that is providence.
Let?s take healing as an example. When God works through medicine, doctors and the body's natural healing process to heal, that is an example of providence. When God supersedes what normally and naturally occurs to heal, that is an example of a miracle. Either way, God gets the credit.
So should we pray for a miracle? Sure. After all
?You do not have, because you do not ask God? (James 4:2c).However, we should be careful to remember the very next sentence.
?When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with the wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures?(James 4:3).God answers when it is HIS will, not ours.
?This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us? (I John 5:14).However, just because miracles can happen doesn?t mean they do every time someone wants one. In fact, miracles are the exception not the rule. Some people expect miracles everyday. Or they get mad at God when something bad happens and God did not perform a miracle to prevent it. Think about this: God created the laws of nature and physics and put them in place. If he went around suspending them all the time, life would be chaos. For the most part, God allows things to take their natural course, although nothing is outside of his divine providence.
There are two important characteristics of every miracle in the Bible:
1. They are the exception, not the rule. The Bible is the record of God's intervention into human history. By definition, the Bible's mission is to record miracles. That's why the Bible is full of them, not because they happened every day.
2. Each miracle points people to God.
God chooses when and how he will answer prayer. Providence or miracle, God is no less sovereign in either case. We should want what brings honor and glory to God, and we should check our own motives when we pray for a miracle.
Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/1228.
The thing about miracles is that they're not common at all, by their very nature. If they happened every day, then we wouldn't really regard them as anything special, would we? But no, the fact that they transcend the laws of physics that are known to us makes them something very unusual. And supernatural, since God alone has the power to truly transcend the physical properties of things He created.
So, seeking miracles every day is somewhat foolish. They do happen--it's just not commonplace. :)
Kevin and Manders,
Thanks for your comments. I'm with you both. I think the three of us are all on the same page.
So Kevin, if you are not Assemblies of God anymore, what are you? And I'm curious, what did your church teach? That supernatural healings occurred every sunday in the church service?
I think Manders words serve as the necessary corrective for this kind of thinking. But I'd really love to hear more about the Assemblies of God teaching on this subject from a former insider if you are willing Keith.
Thank you both.
I'm all over the FOR side. I fully believe that miracles do still happen today. I guess this is one of those areas like the gifts of the Spirit where some would argue that they ended with the Apostles but I think there are to many recorded incidents that refute (imho) that position.
I think moreover what we see is a combination of Gods providence and his over abundent grace in our lives. I've come to recognize (yes in hind sight) the countless times God has put His people into my life when He has gotten tired of me no hearing Him directly. Not trying to make some theological argument here. But I've had 2 major times in my life, when I've been about as far away from God as a man can get, when He has put Christians into my life for implausible reasons, who have brought me crashing back onto my knees in repentance. Miracles - no, incredible providential grace - most assuredly.
(Shrode, Keith is my son, so you weren't far off.)
What was I taught? I was in the AoG starting at age 7 and leaving (all organized churches) when I was 18, with an interlude in a non-denom. It was not so much what I was taught, as what I watched. The pastor called people up for healing every week, and we all praised the Lord for the miracles He worked during the service.
Today I call it sin, and power lust (different only in degree from the Shariah-pushing terrorists in the Iraq thread.) I'm with Rong in believing that miracles are real today, but I never saw any (and what I saw called tongues was just a crying shame.)
What do I believe today? That has been a long journey, but I still believe in the gifts, and I still believe the organized church is an error, but I have been a Calvinist since about '83. Not a common combination, but I'm an American ... I expect to "have it my way!";"0
Thankfully, providence happens regularly--not to be taken lightly, but acknowledged as God working in our lives. When a miracle might not be His will, for whatever reason, we are blessed with providence.
Thanks for a very enlightening post. I had never really thought of what the word "providence" means. And I'd never really put a word to what happens when "God works through natural processes to accomplish his will." Providence. Remember the TV show? Took place in Providence, RI. Dummy me, I really liked the show and sometimes found some inspirational messages quietly woven in, but never picked up on the title having that double meaning. And I'm usually guilty of analyzing way too deep.
Yet again another good post Shrode. May I add to your statement : That God may also use the mechanisms in nature we have yet discovered and learned about.
For me there are no miracles, but providence. By definition a miracle can not be explained. Need I say more?
But if you went you whole life and never experienced providence or a miracle, how would it affect your faith?
I've begun to read about a method of storytelling used in the ancient Jewish tradition that encourages the insertion of magical happenings and general exaggeration, for the purpose of emphasizing a point. People - by my understanding - were not so caught up in whether it *happened* but what the story *means*.
I'll go with Jefferson on this one.
Hobo - that's an interesting point. But I think it can break down when discussing foundational miracles - for instance, the Resurrection.
Truly curious: do you believe Miracles don't happen because you are a materialist (i.e., don't believe in supernature or deity) or because you are more a deist (believe in deity but don't believe that deity interferes in the natural order)?
Bill,
I'm probably a deist (creation of the universe seems likely to have been purposeful) more than anything else.
However I would - and do - use the term 'miracle' to describe many natural things that happen. No subjectively arbitrary interferance from God is needed for my appreciation of what I call miracles.
In late 1991 I was in a car accident and hit from behind at high speed (I was stopped in traffic). My orthopedic specialist did evaluated the damage to my neck and upper body from the impact. That Sunday I did make it to church, strolling in slowing and wearing a heavy neck brace. I'm not much for medications so I was in some degree of pain. At the point in the service where they call people up if they want to pray with the elder, I went up and met with one of those stately old gentlemen of the faith and one other man I can't remember. He prayer any yes I, me, the skeptic-wanting-to-believe, was healed. No fanfare. No "seed faith" gifts. No publicly. But I did walk back to my seat with the neck brace in my hand. On my follow-up appointment with the orthopedic doctor (we were support to go over the complete damage evaluation, plan therapy and renew meds) I walked in and handed him the brace. I explained what happened and all he said (after a pregnant pause) was, "Um, I've heard of things like this before."
This is serves as a reminder to me that:
1) God still works miracles to His purpose and glory.
2) Even in AssembLIES of God church there are some humble followers of God.
3) See #1
PS: I actually can speak perfectly fine English. Sorry for the cut-edit-paste grammar errors. :-
Miracle, to me, seems to be a bit of a misnomer. If Dallas Willard is right, then the Kingdom of the heavens is all around us. That is a kingdom where it is not unnatural for wonders to happen because wonders, are a part of the nature of that kingdom. It isn't simply a matter of the laws of physics being suspended. Rather it is a matter of a process of physics whereby water becomes wine because the h20 takes on the molecular properties of wine - because God knows how to do that - and do it in a very short period of time.
Hobo, interesting thoughts. There are some pretty reputable scientists and philosophers today who would deny that deism is a reasonable option. Too many things that have happened post Big Bang to assume that some kind of intelligent intervention has not taken place. Glad you found this a place to discuss your thoughts!
Phil, thanks for sharing your story. My sister had a similar one, and it was an AoG pastor who prayed then as well. Looking back, I'm more inclined to wonder whether hers should not be classified as Providence, but I have never set a definite opinion. Yours sounds clear, and I hear God receiving the glory in it.
Praise the Lord!
Good article, Andwise. It just occurred to me that a man in my company was hit by lightning at the end of May ('hit' meaning the bolt struck his head, traversed his body, and left him through one foot) and it appears he will fully recover. No short term memory loss. No brain damage. Lots of burns, but he's healing well. Many extraordinary things happened to bring about this result. We're calling it a miracle.
Shrode:
Good post, however, one quibble. You write:
God created the laws of nature and physics and put them in place.
I know this is typically how we as Christians have been taught to speak about the laws of nature, but I suggest that this is misleading and actually more consistent with deism than the scriptures.
I think it is more accurate for us to say that what we describe as "laws of nature" are not actually laws. They are our observations of God's habits in continously upholding his creation by his providential hand. These laws have no independent existence. God does not "break" laws. As part of his ongoing act of sustaining the world, he occasionally, for various purposes, alters briefly his habits as to how he governs the world.
What you wrote can be taken to mean that laws of nature God has created allow the creation to operate without God, and that miracles are God's occasional intervention into the operations of the world which generally proceeds apace without this intervention. My point would be that God's miracles are no different from God's ordinary providence as to what is entailed from God's end-- both involve God actively sustaining the world and ordaining whatsoever comes to pass. The only difference is from our end-- how we observe that one or another providential act differs from God's regularly observed habits.
Alan, I think you are right. I was speaking phenominologiccally (sp!) and was thinking from kind of a human perspective there. ANd you have clarified my thinking on this a bit. (At least you made it easier for me to put the idea of God sustaining us into words. Thanks.)
Do you think it's possible though to speak of the "laws of physics" (but mean what you said), so that people can understand us in our current societal context?
Alan,
I understand your quibble, but I don't understand what evidence you bring to bear to support it. "In Him all things consist" seems a little weak on which to hang such an argument. I'm not sure I'm antagonistic to the idea, but it is very foreign to me.
Do you mean that God providentially determines every random fluxuation of every quark in the universe (multiverse?)
Shrode and Alan, the reason why scientist use the word law or laws is not because they are unbreakable, not unlike our any law we know, be it God's or man's, but to categorize predictable behavior of elements that are governed by certain conditions, events, etc. I know you understand this, I just didn't want to get bogged down in symantecs. Regardless of whether you are talking about Newtonian or quantum physics, dark matter, the big bang, or Darwinism, we shouldn't impede our understanding of the universe we live in. Even if some people believe it all happens because of entropy.
So far ALL the evidence we know points to the creation of the Universe as providence...........
Kevin: To rehearse the evidence:
The scriptures tell us that God has ordained all things. He works out all things according to the counsel of his own will (Eph 1:11).
The LORD works out everything for his own ends- even the wicked for a day of disaster. Proverbs 16:4
This extends to things that we think of as chance– such as the roll of dice.
The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD. Proverbs 16:33
This pertains to even the minute details of our lives and our inmost thoughts and desires.
In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps. Proverbs 16:9
The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases. Proverbs 21:1
So, since we are told that God ordains all things, I take it that he ordains all the physical events and activities of the universe. Elsewhere in scripture we are instructed that this occurs on the basis of God’s ongoing activity in the world, not merely as a result of the earlier act of creation working itself out over time.
I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things. Isaiah 45:7.
Saying that God now forms the light and creates darkness shows that his providential hand is active and current. Individual expressions of light and darkness are his works of art, not the bare results of his prior creative acts. He uses the sun and moon as tools for this (cf. Jeremiah 31:35), but they are not on autopilot.
Similarly, in Jeremiah 31:35, we are told that God stirs up the sea to make the waves roar. This is not a miraculous event. The sea is always churning and roaring. And this scripture tells us that God is there orchestrating every clash of the waves.
None of this really speaks of atoms or quarks directly, but I think that those sorts of things are included when we talk about God ordaining all things; plus, the light, the waves, and other things are composed of atoms, waves, particles, or whatever else makes the list of the constituent parts of the universe. In light of this, the notion that the laws of physics are things which exist and
which God must break in order to accomplish miracles seems not only foreign to the conception of providence outlined in these scriptures, but also superfluous in their light, as well as an undue hindrance in the case for miracles.
But to stress again, in response to Cos, I have no problem speaking of the laws of physics/etc., so long as we are clear that we are talking about our observations of the habits of a faithful God, not things which have an existence apart from the continuous sustaining work of the creator.
All of this to me has great pastoral value. We frequently talk about how God can call us home at any time, yet I think we miss some of the force of that without this understanding of providence. God actively keeps me in existence at every moment. If he stopped willing that I exist, then I would vanish. To me he makes an active gift of every successive breath, and moment to moment, I serve at his pleasure. As for evangelism, we should remember the same is true of the ungodly. This view of providence– that it is the active hand of God which keeps sinners alive and temporarily safe above the pit of hell– is what undergirds Jonathan Edwards’ classic sermon, Sinners in the Hands
of an Angry God. For an amusing introduction, check
Thank you, Alan.
I will have to cogitate on this for a couple days.
I agree with everything you have said, but am not sure that your conclusion is valid. I agree that the Lord ordained from before creation each lot cast in the lap, and that He alone turns each heart. I also believe, however, that the earth orbits around the sun as opposed to the other way around.
It might be rational to conclude that the earth does that because God happens to be in the habit keeping it doing so, but that is not satisfying to me. It might also be irrational. A few hundred years ago most other people, and very dedicated people, were willing to declare on the basis solid scriptural analysis that God was in the habit of keeping the sun going around the earth.
If I already believe that God ordains and intervenes, and that He brings evil and good, then what benefit is it to me to discard science?
Kevin:
I am emphatically not saying that you should discard science. It is God's fidelity and consistency in sustaining the world that allows us to do science.
I take it your concern is what I have said appears to reduce the work of God to a description about him and not about creation, which renders our observations purely contingent on God's continuing habit and not grounded in anything about creation. Thus your example of the earth revolving around the sun. My response is that God's pattern of making the earth revolve around the sun is entailed by a number of other patterns to which he has committed himself. Therefore, this fact is not arbitrary. It is necessary to make sense of his other observed patterns. There is a beauty and symmetry to the patterns we find in creation. God's habits can be studied to reveal an order to his work. These patterns fit together, and form the backdrop against which a discontinuity-- a miracle-- can be seen. But neither a tiny, neglected part of the pattern, nor the miraculous discontinuity is any more independent from God's ongoing work than the other.
What I am saying is that God's resurrection of Lazarus is, from his end, not any different than his act of ordaining the decay of another man's body. It is a temptation for us to think that when God resurrects a body, he intervenes in creation, whereas, when a body decays, God is standing by, letting the law of entropy take its course. I say no; God is active in both cases; in the latter, less startlingly so, because it the act is typical of how God acts and not a miracle.
Alan,
Your points are well made, but I don't think I can go with you all the way to the apparent conclusion. I think that a universe without laws eventually impinges on moral agency. Even in Edwards' Strict Analysis of that Freedom of the Will supposed ...&c I don't remember him arguing against agency, only against contingent agency. I looked through it briefly last night, but didn't find any directly relevant passages (but I did find a couple of sermons I had forgotten I wanted to read.)
In the end, I am probably overreacting because I was raised to be a dogmatic young earth creationist by people who were unable to look at both sides of the creation argument. To be more exact, they were too ignorant to evaluate the scientific side of the argument. Unfortunately, they considered themselves so steeped in bible truth that they did not need to evaluate the science. Knowing the Saviour of the world, however, did not qualify them to talk about dating mechanisms.
I think you and I agree on the points that matter. It is God, in His grace and apart from our wills, Who saves us, and His salvation is to the end. Maybe there's a predestination thread somewhere where we can discuss mechanisms, but it's hardly necessary. I worship with you the Glory of God in ordering all things to His own perfect and compassionate end.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

I was converted Assemblies of God, so this subject resulted in a huge crisis of faith for me. I thought my pastor was "doing" miracles every week. It was years before I noticed that even though I was in his church, I never heard about any of them after the service was over.
That miracles never happened for me was a crushing disappointment. When the lack of miracles was combined with my personal lack of holiness, I was driven to the brink of suicide (there was also a girl in the mix, but it was my religion that drove me to the brink of madness.)
I cannot see anywhere that God has limited Himself, so I fall on the "for" side of the discussion, but I have no personal evidence for or against.