Gordon Clark: Do Miracles Occur Today? (The Reformed Presbyterian Advocate)

1966. Do Miracles Occur Today? The Reformed Presbyterian Advocate. Aug-Sep. pgs. 6-7

A study of Biblical miracles is stimulated by three interests. First, one naturally wonders about Roman Catholic and Pentecostal claims to work miracles. Second, some scientists assert that no miracles could even have happened because they would be violations of natural law. Third, Christians wish to appeal to miracles, particularly to Christ's resurrection, in order to establish Christianity and in so doing must formulate some general theological viewpoint.

First, Romanists claim the occurrence of many medieval and even contemporary miracles. Pentecostalists mail out a paper urging the readers to send for a cloth that has been blessed, so that when one has a headache, one can put the cloth on his head and the headache will go away. Most Protestants look askance at such claims and question whether a modern preachers can continue to exercise the authority of the apostle Paul. A satisfactory conclusion must be based on the Biblical material.

Second, the scientific question is too intricate to discuss here. Hume, whose chief delight it was to attack Christianity, defined miracle as a violation of the laws of nature, and as these, so he says, are based on a firm and unalterable experience, miracles have never been observed in any age or country. This type of argument leads to the philosophy of science, and since Hume's day not only have the laws of science been radically altered - not a single one of the Newtonian laws remains - but even the concept of law has been drastically revised. Since not even an outline of a college course in scientific philosophy can be given, suffice it to say that the denial of the possibility of miracles cannot be made without a prior proof that there is no God. If God actually rules the universe, miracles are obviously possible.

Third, some very good Christian theologians have defined miracle as "an immediate act of God in the visible world." Since most scientists in the past have held that all events occur subject to prior conditions, this definition of a miracle seems to imply that a miracle is a violation of natural law.

Not much progress can be made on any of these points without taking into account the Biblical material. An exhaustive study would be best, but here only a sample can be made.

The original creation of the universe was accomplished without means. It is of necessity an immediate act of God. But most people are inclined to limit the concept of miracle to some particular act within the world, in which case creation would not be called a miracle.

The formation of Eve from a rib of Adam and the escape of the Israelites across the Red Sea would usually be called miracles. But in both cases God used means. In the second case the Bible very explicitly describes the means. God sent a strong east wind to blow the water back. Now, of course, the wind blew just when the Israelites needed it. Does this make the miracle a coincidence? At any rate either the crossing of the Red Sea was not a miracle or a miracle is not an immediate act of God.

In the New Testament we read about the Virgin Birth, the star of Bethlehem, the earthquake that rent the veil of the temple and raised some saints from the dead. In these no human agent had a part. Then there are the many healing miracles of Jesus. But Jesus also performed some, just a few by comparison, so-called nature miracles, such as the stilling of the storm, walking on the water, and the multiplication of the loaves and fishes on two occasions.

When the Romanists and faith healers make their claims to perform miracles, I would like to ask them to still a storm, walk on the sea, multiply loaves, or raise the dead. If they did something like this, it would be easier to believe that they had apostolic authority.

For whatever may be the truth concerning the laws of science and that type of question, the miracles in the Bible are most often said to be for the purpose of attesting a spoken revelation. Of course Christ was motivated in his healing miracles by compassion; but he also wanted to show that he was the promised Messiah. As this had been the case with Moses, so also was it with the Apostles: their miracles had the purpose of attesting their authority to speak the word of God.

We may conclude therefore that whatever else* needs to be added about miracles, there are no miracles today nor is there any further revelation beyond the Bible.

* "Whatever else includes the miracles of false prophets and Satan; and also the not-too-important question as to whether regeneration is a "miracle" of grace.