Lewis makes a case for the reality of miracles by presenting the position that something more than nature, a supernatural world, may exist, including a benevolent creator likely to intervene in reality after creation. In The Miracles of Jesus, H. Van der Loos describes two main categories of miracles attributed to Jesus: those that affected people (such as Jesus healing the blind man of Bethsaida), or "healings", and those that "controlled nature" (such as Jesus walking on water). The three types of healings are cures, in which an ailment is miraculous remedied, exorcisms, in which demons are cast out of victims, and the resurrection of the dead. Karl Barth said that, among these miracles, the Transfiguration of Jesus is unique in that the miracle happens to Jesus himself. [11]

Bonus Post Out of Left Field: Jim Palmer, John Pavlovitz, and my Irritation with Such Bile (ah yes, you're intrigued, aren't you?) Historian Will Durant attributes Jesus's miracles to "the natural result of suggestion—of the influence of a strong and confident spirit upon impressionable souls; similar phenomena may be observed any week at Lourdes". [68]According to the three Synoptic Gospels, Jesus performed many exorcisms of demoniacs. These incidents are not mentioned in the Gospel of John and appear to have been excluded due to theological considerations. [29]

The real reason why I can accept as historical a story in which a miracle occurs is that I have never found any philosophical grounds for the universal negative proposition that miracles don’t happen. Jesus healing in the land of Gennesaret appears in Matthew 14:34–36 and Mark 6:53–56. As Jesus passes through Gennesaret all those who touch his cloak are healed. The curing of a bleeding woman appears in Mark 5:21–43, Matthew 9:18–26 and Luke 8:40–56, along with the miracle of the daughter of Jairus. [25] The Gospels state that while heading to Jairus's house, Jesus was approached by a woman who had been bleeding for 12 years and that she touched Jesus's cloak ( fringes of his garment) and was instantly healed. Jesus turned about and, when the woman came forward, said, "Daughter, your faith has healed you, go in peace".My inveterate hatred of magazines began during my sophomore year of college. I was at a friend's apartment, waiting for him to get out of the shower, when I noticed a TIME magazine on his coffee table. It had a big picture of Jesus on it, with the headline "What Do We Really Know About Jesus?" So, miracles do not have the same place and significance—the same fitness in pantheism or paganism as in theism. It is particularly in Christianity that miracles have decisive significance converging on Christ. Prophecies, miracles, and the resurrection all demonstrate that He is one sent by God. In the Old Testament, miracles are present around agents of revelation or as a deliverance of God’s people (i.e. Red Sea) but do not have the same focus as in the New Testament (on Christ). In the Koran, Mohammed does not do any miracles—except the revelation of the Koran; whereas, Jesus is reported there to have done 16 miracles. Only in later Islamic tradition are there reports of miracles done by Mohammed. Boa, Kenneth; Bowman, Robert M. (1997). An Unchanging Faith in a Changing World: Understanding and Responding to Critical Issues that Christians Face Today. Oliver Nelson. ISBN 9780785273523 . Retrieved September 28, 2014.

William Thomas Brande, George William Cox, A dictionary of science, literature, & art London, 1867, also Published by Old Classics on Kindle, 2009, p. 655 At the time I was an atheist or, more accurately, an agnostic. But I'd spent quite a bit of time in class that year reading and discussing significant portions of the Old and New Testaments, as well as translating parts of "Matthew" from the Greek. I was interested to see what the world of thoughtful people in the modern world did really know about Jesus. it would have destroyed its own credentials. It would be an argument which proved that no argument was sound—a proof that there are no such things as proofs—which is nonsense. If I were ever two write a paper on miracles, this would be my best friend. If I were ever to write on exorcism/possession, his appendix on the subject is excellent. It won’t get much use in my preaching or teaching however. A miracle similar to the miraculous catch of fish, also called the catch of 153 fish to distinguish it from the account in Luke, is reported in the Gospel of John but takes place after the Resurrection of Jesus.The Making of American Liberal Theology: Imagining Progressive Religion 1805–1900, edited by Gary J. Dorrien (Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), passim, search miracles. Unless you are absolutely certain that there is no supernatural power such as God in the universe, it would be hard to be so dogmatic as to say that every instance of claimed miracles is false. Granted, miracles are rare and might seem strange given our everyday experience, but that does not mean they ought to be automatically excluded. Why should we assume that what we have experienced is all there is to reality? Improbable Mr. Keener set out to erase the foundation of academic prejudice against acceptance of the immaterial realm. Though he knows his task is difficult, he lays out a strong case, researching high and low, near and far to gather the strongest evidence he can find. Readers will draw their own conclusion about the validity of his arguments, but Mr. Keener has done a fine job of stating a case for the existence of the immaterial realm. There are stories in late Buddhism about the Buddha doing miracles. But since he held that nature is illusory, why would he be concerned with miraculous demonstrations on the level of nature? One early story contains a discussion of Buddha with a man who was sitting by a lake meditating so that he could walk across on the water. Buddha’s advice was to take the ferry. Lewis comments: The original version of Miracles contained a different version of chapter 3 entitled "The Self-Contradiction of the Naturalist". In it, Lewis made the same argument but referred to atomic motions in the brain as "irrational". In a Socratic Club debate, Catholic analytical Thomist G.E.M. Anscombe criticized this, prompting Lewis to revise the chapter. The revised chapter presents a more detailed elucidation of the argument and distinguishes between "non-rational" and "irrational" processes. Anscombe commented on the process after Lewis's death that the rewrite showed "honesty and seriousness" on the part of Lewis. [4] See also [ edit ]

Andrew Breen on A Reflection: Disappointment, Divorce, Teaching, and Biblical Studies…and Why I Don’t Like May/June Twelftree, Graham H. (1999). Jesus the Miracle Worker: A Historical and Theological Study. IVP Academic. ISBN 978-0830815968. For many Christians and Muslims, the miracles are believed to be actual historical events. [4] [5] [6] Others, including many liberal Christians, consider these stories to be figurative. [a] Lewis asserts that by this logic, the statement "I have reason to believe naturalism is valid" is self-referentially incoherent in the same manner as the sentence "One of the words of this sentence does not have the meaning that it appears to have", or the statement "I never tell the truth". [2] In each case, to assume the veracity of the conclusion would eliminate the possibility of valid grounds from which to reach it. To summarize the argument in the book, Lewis quotes J.B.S. Haldane who appeals to a similar line of reasoning. Haldane states "If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true ... and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms." [3] Revisions [ edit ] Contemporary liberal Christians may prefer to read Jesus's miracles as metaphorical narratives for understanding the power of God. [65] Not all theologians with liberal inclinations reject the possibility of miracles, but may reject the polemicism that denial or affirmation entails. [66]Jesus healing an infirm woman appears in Luke 13:10–17. While teaching in a synagogue on the Sabbath, Jesus cured a woman who had been crippled by a spirit for eighteen years and could not stand straight at all. If you throw the dice to get the solution to your math problem, how likely do you think that the first or second throw would give you the right answer? The complexity of the universe is far greater than 2 + 2 = 4. It would always be more likely that you would come up with an erroneous result than the true one. Lewis is dealing here with something much more than a math problem: the whole validity of our reasoning shaped by the cosmic dice roll. Even if perchance these reasoning powers were valid, we would never know or have an adequate basis to know that they were valid. Thus, on a naturalistic foundation, all our confidence in the reason used to establish naturalism is undermined. The only slim hope is that one in a billion rolls of the dice has produced the correct result.