of the good and^ "beautiful acts of others (xaXov ipyov, Mk 14*5). He makes no great distinction between His ordinary works of mercy and the extraordinary, regarding them all alike as wrought simply and naturally in the way of His life and vocation. The miracles were 'not the highest Avorks ; they belong to a bwer level of manifesta- tion as compared Avith Hfe moral and spiritual revelation of God (Jn 14").J But He also qualifies ^pya: 'the works that no/e other man did' (Jn IS--*), probably including under that category the healing and other mighty deeds. Utility was the
chief element in His view of all His deeds and actions. (3) He al.so calls them oifdMf'S (' powers' or 'mighty works"), em])hasizing the striking manifestation of Divine Power overpassing all Iniman capacity (Mt 11-'). Tlie Evangelists al.so commonlv employ this term (Mt 13**, Mk 6*). (4) He also speaks of His works as ^T/Mfja, 'signs' l.Jn 6-'"), carefully .separating Himself from the iKtpular estimate of what constituted a Divinely significant .act (see art. SIOX). The Pourtli (;u>peU consistently apiilies tliis word to the works of Jesus. Probablj- we must see in the fact a feature due to prolonged reflexion on the events in tlie light of after-history. But llie tcrni is siii^Milaily ! fittin-^todescril>e the Divinely si^aiilitant woikrof j our Lonl as signs of another and liTglier order of tliiii;^s. leading on the thou-^dit ami imagination
tomirher sl'liyms nt l»illi;r fnlli-r linWfls of MHllr
T^ . • ^ ■ • , • ri — ' ~ 'r 1^ • .^" * » ■ — orr ,
I DiviQcr iK»»i^M.iUitU"i iu:_lium;iiiitv. (ol 1 he wonl I Tipara ( ' prodi;^ies ) is never aiiplie<l by Jesus to \ His own working. Only once He uses the word, and then to disjivow the idea involved in it and to sever His action from it (Jn4*'). In the .\iKMa- lyptic discourse the.-e ripara are a.s.sociated with false Christs ami fal.se prophets (Mt *24-^ Mk 13-). (6) The jHipular use oi (njfiftoy was most akin to tlie Wpaj. With this the English wonl 'miracle' has most aflinity. It is not tlie equivalent of any wonl used by Jesus. The -W ii.ses it to translate (TTjpidov and Si'vafui. The UV practically abandons it. The idea of the word * supernatural ' also is not fouml in the NT or in the whole Bible, and the term sliouhl U- relegated to the region of the obsolete. Tlie word ' sjiiritual ' is an excellent sul>- .stitute, conserving the idea exprosseil l>y it witii- out committing the mind to any untenable and indefensible i»liilosophy.
2. < '/utrurtrri.stirs ofuur Lord's min'rlcs. — Briefly, the features of the miracles which co/ninend them to our jutlgnient and all'ection may Ik' stated as — (1) SiKJiitaneity. They ariM- out of the occa.sion — are never delil)eratetl, unless the raising of Lazarus l»e an exception (Jn ID), but spring from the present practical imimlse of conipri-ssion and desire to help man, and the prompting of t he Divine Spirit (Jn •i*''-, Lk IS*"*' etc.). (•-') High moral purpose. The miracles of Jesus ever sought the Iiigliest and Divinest ends, and were never ends in themselves. In all His works there wen; no signs of anj' ostentatious exercise of power. Slernly He forl)iide any public a<lvertisenieiit of His bealings, etc., wliicii might rouse the jKtpular exci'tenient.
(3) Strong restraint in u.se of supernormal power. The Tem|>tation of the wilderness witne'sses to what was cliaracteristicof all His life, His constant refu.sal to u.se His jiower for personal ease, gf ratifi- cation, or convenience. Nothing was done by ex- traordinary wliicli could be done by ordinary n leans.
(4) Moral dignity and congruity with the '.viiole snirit and life of Jesus. His miracles spring out of His innermost nature, and reveal the moral har- mony and winsomeness of His Person. Hen in lies a mo.st fruitful comparison with other all«''ged miracles, ecclesiastical and media-val and nio<.lcrn. The vast majority of these latter fail to comi-nenil themselves to us as worthy exercises of a Divine power. The criterion must not, however, be^ un- duly pressed, for natures differ widelj' in 'what they regard as morally fitting and suitabfe for Divine action. But, employed broadly, if may help us to discriminate between alleged mirac ulous events as to how far they are worthy of cre«lence.
(5) Helpfulness to mankind was the abidin;'^ char- acteristic of our Lord's miracles. In mujjjj, cases they were wrought for the immediate sr^ccour- ?^ suttering humanity, and for the revelati/'on, in and* through this, of the Divine love an(\' pity. In His works on the non-human world al»,jo the need
Mir.ACLES
MIRACLES
189
of man was continually served, more especially his need for vision of tlie higher facts of existence. His action never issued in meaningless marvels or needless wonders and in those that seem farthest removed from the requirements of mankind a revelation was given of the kind of power which animated and sus.tained all nature, and ordered its course.
3. The whole texture of the Gospel narratives is complicated with the siipcrnonnal. Tliej' pre- suppose a unique relation to God in Jesus, and His possession of a miracle-working poAver. ' In most of the rei)orts the action of Jesus is so interwoven with unmistakably authentic words, that the two elements cannot be separated"* (A. 13. Bruce, art. ' Jesus ' in Enryc. Bibl.). If excision be made from the Evangelic records (1) of all that directly nar- rates His uniijue action as a healer and wonder- worker, (2) of all that presupposes the possibility and actualit}' of such unique action, (3) of all that testifies to His autliority and power due to a unique relation to God — the Gospels are left bald and bare and mutilated beyond description. The very warp and woof of the fabric is destroyed.