Some examples of the miracles from the Bible, seem to be performed for the good of the people, others seem to be performed due to God’s will and several seem to be have been performed in order to prove a point. For example, when Daniel is not eaten by the lions (Daniel 6:16-23) this shows God’s concern for his people and portrays his kindness and intervention when people are in need. However, it could be said that God’s intervention is selective, as the question could be asked, where was God during the Holocaust? Or, why didn’t he stop the atom bomb being dropped on Hiroshima? In Exodus, chapter 14, the parting of the red Sea is described. This is another key example of God being selective or arbitrary in his intercession, as he saved the Israelites but drowned the Egyptians. Surely they were people too? Some might argue that they were against God and therefore they were the advocates of the devil, but what happened to God being forgiving?
Often, particularly in the Old Testament, Gods motives are brought into question, particularly in the book of Joshua when the fall of Jericho takes place. It could be said that God is condoning war. However, the New Testament describes a reformed view of God. This brings into question the view that God is omniscient and omnipotent, as he changed his mind. Miracles also contradict this view, because if God made his world perfect and in his image (imago deo) why is it necessary for him to make alterations and intervene with his perfect world, despite the fact that he knew what was going to happen anyway?
Due to the wide description of miracles and their seemingly arbitrary reasons for occurrence in the Bible, it is difficult to find a precise definition for a miracle. Therefore, how can we know whether one is possible or not? The Bible attempts to describe them as happenings performed by God that defy the laws of nature for the good of mankind. However, those that are performed and seem pointless such as the turning water to wine. Is this an attempt to prove Gods existence as a deity?
No matter what, the miracles are a key factor of Judeo-Christian beliefs, so if miracles were “de-mythologised”, like Bultmann suggests, then they’d be left with a weak basis of faith. This is due to the fact that the existence of Jesus depends upon miraculous events – i.e. the Virgin birth, the miracles in his life, the resurrection and so on. Additionally, the Gospels are full of accounts of miracles and, as Vardy says, “If one is going to take the Gospel writers at all seriously, then the miracle stories cannot be too quickly dismissed”. Though, the Bible doesn’t provide a clear starting point and scholars believe that miracle stories may have been added later to the New Testament, with some existing as exaggerated accounts. Even if these accounts are true then who is to say that miracles of this type occur today? God may have foreseen that people of today’s society would have improved medical care etc so miracles of the healing sort (such as that of the woman with the haemorrhage) wouldn’t be necessary.
It is quite clear that miracles can only be defined according to an individual’s understanding of God, and, in conclusion, it is clear to see that varying definitions of miracles are depicted in the Bible that may be questionable to Gods existence and intentions. Though, on the other hand, Judeo-Christians would have the view that the miracle stories strengthen their faith and covenant with God, as a protector of His people.
b) “Miracles suggest an unpredictable, changeable God”. Discuss.
As an important part of the Judeo-Christian faith it is vital that one considers the effect miracles have on the way one may portray God, depending on their initial point of view. For example, it could be asked – why would one have this view that God is this way? Someone might reply that God is seemingly biased towards certain sects of his people but the effects do not always act in favour of one particular group, which appears that he is unpredictable. An example of this is that God made the covenant with Abraham to watch over the people if they were faithful, but what about the suffering that happens in the world today? Why have the Jews suffered so severely over the centuries, despite their special relationship with God? It is understandable that people may take this view. However, some might say that God still helps us today, as he did in Biblical times, but he does it more subtly in order for us to grow as beings. If He intervened at every opportunity then would we appreciate life as it is today? Also, he might help in ways that are unapparent to us e.g. the Battle of Britain may have been lost by the Allies, as they were outnumbered but still they prevailed. This may be described as a miraculous event, though it depends on your viewpoint, as the Germans would probably not have seen it as a “miracle”.
If God is changeable then this rules out Plato’s theory of the Demiurge, which could be further criticised by arguing that miracles show that God changes his mind about his “perfect” world in which case he must be changeable. However, if one doesn’t believe in the existence of miraculous events then it brings us back to square one. On the other hand, maybe humans simply do not have the capacity to comprehend the basis on which God acts. Therefore, this would be another test of faith that is vital for religion.
As for God being unpredictable, it is obvious that Natural Law is regular, as everything happens according to certain “rules” otherwise everything would happen randomly, which is why miracles are thought to be the way they are, as they are a breach of this law. Nevertheless, according to Wiles everything is a miracle of God, which means Natural law is too. Therefore, God is predictable in this sense. Though, if one were to disagree with Wiles’ theory, such as David Hume then the hypothesis is lost. Hume believes that miracles are “such unlikely explanations of events that it is unreasonable to believe them”. This may be counteracted by a Judeo-Christian who may argue that if we limit God, i.e. claim that miracles do not happen, then this loses the effect that he is all-powerful. Though, of course, this depends upon whether one believes in the existence of God in the first place.
In conclusion, God can only be seen as unpredictable if he were changeable, which would support the existence of miracles, as He would have to alter his world despite the view that He is omnipotent and omniscient. However, if He were viewed otherwise, then the existence of miracles would come into question, as God would not need to intervene at all. This creates further complications due to the religious opinion that God is loving, caring and has a covenant with his people. Therefore, the statement is made purely on an individual opinion and viewpoint because, as John Macquarrie would argue, there will always be some people that see blatant “miracles” as an act of God and others that refuse to.
