Greentree Community Church

Those words, made famous by Al Michaels when the U.S. Hockey team beat the Soviets in the 1980 Olympics, give us some insight into how we currently understand the word ‘miracle.’  In the case of the U.S. hockey team, they had been blown out by the Russian team earlier that year and it made no sense to think that the larger, faster, more experienced Soviets had any chance to lose this contest.  Thus, when the U.S. team, a collocation of fairly inexperienced college kids, pulled off the upset, it was deemed a ‘miracle.’  Nobody claimed God’s intervention or supernatural causes or violation of ‘natural laws’—it was simply the natural occurrence (coincidence or lottery chance) of an unlikely outcome.  In Scripture ‘miracles’ are much different in that they involve the power of God manifested in a way we don’t normally see it—blind eyes opened, calming storms with a word, feeding 5,000 with a few loaves of bread, and a dead man rising to life.

Modern people often look at the miracles in the Bible, especially the Resurrection, and laugh at how superstitious people were to believe such things.  While people of yesterday supposedly attributed anything out of the ordinary to ‘God’s work,’ modern people today believe that science (which has shown that nature operates by ‘fixed’ laws) has proven that miracles cannot and do not occur, and so laughter and scorn is poured on the Biblical narratives on this basis.  However, C.S. Lewis, in his essay on miracles (can be found as essay #2 in God in the Dock, and in my opinion is the best 12 pages you could read on the nature of miracles) has an important quote that will instantly cure us of our ‘chronological snobbery:’[1] 

“There is one thing often said about our ancestors which we must not say.  We must not say ‘They believed in miracles because they did not know the Laws of Nature.’  This is nonsense.  When St. Joseph discovered that his bride was pregnant, he was ‘minded to put her away.’  He knew enough biology for that.  Otherwise, of course he would not have regarded pregnancy as a proof of infidelity.  When he accepted the Christian explanation, he regarded it as a miracle precisely because he knew enough of the Laws of Nature to know that this was a suspension of them.  When the disciples saw Christ walking on water, they were frightened:  they would not have been frightened unless they had known the laws of Nature and known that this was an exception.  Complete ignorance of the laws of Nature would preclude the perception of the miraculous just as rigidly as complete disbelief in the supernatural precludes it, perhaps even more so.  For, while the materialist would have at least to explain miracles away, the man wholly ignorant of Nature would simply not notice them.”

Lewis’ point is well-taken.  The Biblical stories are just as in awe over what happened to Jesus as we would be if we saw the same events today.  When the disciples hear about the resurrection, they do not sigh in relief as if what they expected to happen actually came to pass; rather, they doubt and must be convinced by sound proof that anything like this could have actually happened.  Mark 16.11 says that when the disciples were told Jesus was alive, “they would not believe it.”  In Matthew 28.17 we hear that “some doubted.”  In Luke 24.11 the words about resurrection seem to the apostles as “an idle tale and they did not believe.”  In John 20.25, Thomas says he will not believe unless he can touch Jesus’ hands, feet, and side.  Yet despite their initial disbelief, they all witness the risen Jesus, come to believe in Him, make the resurrection the centerpiece of their theology/preaching, and give their lives to that truth, all radical reversals. 

Therefore, any rival theory of the Resurrection must be able to explain 1) How the unique doctrine of the Resurrection arose among Christians, 2) Why the stories are the way they are, 3) Why the Resurrection took center stage 4) Why the disciples literally died for this belief; 5) How the muddled, frightened disciples with their Messiah defeated became the bold proclaimers of faith in Christ and literally conquered the Roman Empire.  Next time, we’ll ask if any other explanation can explain these agreed upon facts.

[1]  Chronological snobbery refers to the modern man’s assumption that his current historical and cultural era are determinative across history as the ‘right way’ to look at things.