But we shall understand their connection better when we have a clearer idea of the true scriptural doctrine of miracles. The current idea of a miracle is that it is a violation of the laws of nature, and as the laws of nature are the laws of God, a miracle would thus signify the violation by God of his own laws. This is not the teaching of the Bible itself, but an idea that has grown out of the Latin word which has supplanted the more thoughtful terms used in the Hebrew and in the Cireek Scriptures. A '• miracle," miraculiim, is something won- derful— marvellous. Now no doubt all (iod's works are wonderful; but when the word is applied to his doings in the Bible, it is his works in nature that are generally so described. In the Hebrew, esjiecially in poetry, (iod is often described as doing "wonders," that is, miracles. But the term is not merely applicable to works such as those wrought by him for his people in Egypt and the wilderness (Exod. xv, 11; Psa. Ixxviii, 12), but to a thunder-storm (Psa. Ixxvii, 14), and to his ordinary dealings with men in providence (Psa. ix, 1 ; xxvi, 7; xl, 5), and in the government of the world. But this term wonder is not the word in the Hebrew properly applicable to what we mean by miracles, and in the New Testament our Lord's works are never called "mir- acles" (iai'iiara) at all. The people are often said to have "wondered" (^latt. ix, 33; xv, 31) at Christ's acts, but those acts themselves were not intended sim- ply to produce wonder; they had a specific purpose, in- I dicated by the term properly applicable to them, and that term is sif/n.
This is the sole Hebrew term for what we mean by miracle ; but there are other words applied to our Lortl's doings in the New Testament which we will previously consider. And, first, there is a term which approaches very nearly to our word miracle, namely, Ti-f)ar,p(irl<iit, defined by Liddell and Scott, in their (ircek Lexicon, as a "sir/n, wonder, tnarrel, used of any a)ipearance or event in which men believed that they could see the finger of God." But, with that marvellous accuracy which dis- tinguishes the language of the Greek Testament, our Lord's works are never called ri-parn in tlie (Jospels. The word is used of the false Christs and false prophets, who by great signs and portents shall almost ilcceive the very elect (Matt, xxiv, 24; ^Slark xiii. 22\ The populace, however, expected a )>rophet to disjilay these portents (John iv, 48), and Joel had predicted that such signs of (Jod's presence would accomiiany the coming of the great and notable day of Jehovah (Acts ii. I'.M.
In the Alts of the Apostles our Lord is said to have been approved of God by jmrtents as well as by ])ower3 and signs, the words literally being "Jesus of Nazareth, ^ a man displayed of (iod unto you by powers, and por- tents, and signs;" but the portents refer to such things as the star which appeared to the magi, and the dark- ness and earthquake at the crucifixion. Exactly jiar.-il- lel to this place are the words in Ileb. ii. 4. wliere (Jod is said to have borne witness to the truth X)f the apos- tles' testimony "by signs, and portents, and manifold
MIRACLES
311
MIRACLES
powers, and diversified gifts of the Holy Ghost," the description being evidently intended to include every manifestation of^ God's presence with the first preachers of the Gospel, ordinary and extraordinary, in provi- dence and in grace, and not merely the one fact that from time to time they wrought miracles.
But the term portents is freely applied to the miracles wrought by the apostles, being used of them no less than "eight" times in the Acts, and also in Kom. xv, 19, and 2 Cor. xii, 12. In every case it is used in connec- tion with the word signs, the Greek in Acts vi, 8 ; xv, 12, being exactly the same as that in Acts ii, 43 ; iv, 30 ; v, 12; xiv, 3, though differently rendered. The two words, however, express very different sides of the apos- tles' working, the term sign, as we shall see hereafter, having reference to the long-previous preparation for the Jlessiah's advent, while jjortents were indications of the presence with them of the finger of God.
In the Synoptic Gospels, the most common term for our Lord's miracles is ovvc'ifittg, powers. Full of mean- ing as is the word, it nevertheless is not one easy to adapt to the idiom of our language, and thus in the Gos- pels it is usually translated " mighty works" (Matt, xi, 20, 21, 23, etc.), but miracles in Acts ii, 22 ; viii, 13 ; xix, 11 ; 1 Cor. xii, 10, 28, etc. Really it signifies the very opposite of miracles. A ^vvajjuv. is a faculty, or capac- ity for doing anything. We all have our faculties — some physical, some mental and moral — and these are all strictly natural endowments. "We have also spirit- ual faculties, and these also primarily are natural en- dowments of our inner being, though heightened and intensified in believers by the operation of the Holy Ghost. Yet even this is, by the ordinary operation of the Spirit, in accordance with spiritual laws, and not in violation of them. The teaching therefore of this word Swaiing, powers or faculties, is that our Lord's works were perfectly natural and ordinary to him. They were his cajiacities, just as sight and speech are ours. Now in a brute animal articulate speech would be a miracle, because it does not lie within the range of its capacities, and therefore would be a vi- olation of the lav/ of its nature ; it does lie within the compass of our faculties, and so in us is no miracle. Similarly, the healing of the sick, the giving sight to the blind, the raising of the dead — things entirely be- yond the range of our powers, yet lay entirely within the compass of our Lord's capacities, and were in ac- cordance with the laws of his nature. It was no more a " miracle" in him to turn water into wine than it is with God, who works this change every year. Nor does John call it so, though his word is rendered miracle in our version (John ii, 11).