The miracles of Jesus, if they are true, represent powerful evidence for the existence of God. But are they true? Or are they simply mythical embellishments? This episode provides significant corroborating historical evidence for the miracles of Jesus.
VIDEO & AUDIO LINKS
VIDEO EPISODE 17: THE MIRACLES OF JESUS
AUDIO PODCAST 17: THE MIRACLES OF JESUS
………………………………………………
TRANSCRIPT
Welcome to Episode 17 of Evidence For Belief, a series which examines the evidence for the existence of God. In these next two episodes we have finally reached what is arguably the most convincing evidence for the existence of God – the miraculous life, death and resurrection of Jesus.
In the previous episode we examined the historical evidence that proves that Jesus was a real person in history. No serious historian disputes the historicity of Jesus’ existence in the first century.
But in this episode, we are going to examine the extraordinary accounts of his miraculous life. Because if these accounts are true, if Jesus really did work these miracles and ultimately rise from the dead, these events represent extremely convincing evidence for the existence of God. The four Gospels (the biblical accounts of the life of Jesus) recount a stunning catalogue of at least 37 miracles including:
21 miracles of healing (blindness, leprosy, quadriplegia, withered limbs, undefined paralysis, uncontrolled bleeding, fevers and general unspecified illnesses)
5 miracles of provision (turning water into wine, multiplying food to feed 4,000 and 5,000, two miraculous catches of fish)
5 miracles of exorcism
3 miracles of control over nature (calming a storm, walking on water and withering a fig tree)
4 miracles of resurrection (Jairus’s daughter, the widow’s son, Lazarus and himself)
As well as these explicitly detailed miracles, the biblical accounts indicate that Jesus performed many other miracles which went undocumented. For example, John records: “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.” (John 20:30)
Matthew also makes two oblique references to some of these “many” other miracles:
“Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people.” (Matthew 4:23)
“A large crowd followed him, and he healed all who were ill.” (Matthew 12:15)
What are we to make of these claims? Many sceptics argue that these accounts are mythological embellishments, fabricated by his early followers in order to perpetuate their new religion. According to this argument, Jesus was just an ordinary man who said some wise things and developed a popular following. After his death, his followers supposedly deified him (declared him to be God), concocting stories of supposed miracles and fabricating the myth of his resurrection. This view was expressed and popularised by the liberal Episcopal Bishop, John Spong, who claimed that the miracles recorded in the four biblical Gospels were “a late-developing part of the Jesus story”.[1]
The problem with this view is that it is overwhelmingly refuted by the Criteria of Historical Reliability.
The Criteria of Historical Reliability
In assessing whether an ancient document is historically reliable, historians apply multiple tests. These tests are commonly referred to as Criteria of Historical Reliability. The most commonly employed criteria are the following:
- The Criterion of Time Gap
- The Criterion of Embarrassment
- The Criterion of Multiple Attestation
- The Criterion of The Absence of Protestation
- The Criterion of Corroboration by Hostile Critics
- The Criterion of Author Credibility
Time does not permit a full explanation of each of these, but a brief overview of several of the criteria will help you to understand why we cannot lightly dismiss these miraculous accounts as fabrications.
Let’s look at two of them together: The Criteria of Time Gap and The Absence of Protestation (Criteria 1 and 4)
In historical terms, “time gap” refers to the amount of elapsed time between the actual historical event and the time of writing (when that event was eventually written down). In order for successful embellishment to occur, a significant amount of time has to elapse, so that there would be very few, if any, eye-witnesses left alive who could refute the embellishment.
Professor A. N. Sherwin-White (1911-1993) was a world-renowned Greco-Roman historian who, among his many scholarly works, analysed ancient historical embellishments. He concluded that minor embellishment required a time gap of at least two generations, while major embellishment required at least 200 years.[i] This is because, mythical embellishment within the lifetime of eyewitnesses would result in overwhelming protestation and refutation.
Let me give you an example. At the time I am recording this episode, it is about 80 years since Winston Churchill led the Allies to victory over Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.
Now, just suppose I decided to write a biography of Winston Churchill and in that biography I concocted all kinds of fanciful stories of him working miracles, raising people from the dead, walking on water and ultimately rising from the dead himself.
I would very quickly be shut down as a fool and my written account would be overwhelmed by a flood of literary rebuttal – instant protest giving factual corrections. And in another 2,000 years time, anyone investigating my ridiculous claims would uncover a veritable sea of indignant literary refutation. Even though more than 80 years has elapsed since the historical event, I still could not get away with embellishing the life of Winston Churchill!
In the case of the life of Jesus Christ, the first three Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) were written only 30-35 years after Jesus’ death, and the Gospel of John was written another 25 years later. And these Gospels drew upon even earlier written accounts of the life of Jesus (that are no longer extant), some of which historians believe were written within the first few years of Jesus’ death and resurrection. In other words, the Gospel stories were written within the lifetime of the eye-witnesses to the events of Jesus’ life.
So what was the response of the ancient world to these stories as they were written and circulated?
The response of the ancient world to the Gospels was remarkable; the Gospels were met with RESOUNDING SILENCE. No refutation. No protest. The reason for this is quite simple.
No one could refute the Gospel accounts because there were still thousands of eyewitnesses alive who had witnessed Jesus’ miracles. Hundreds had witnessed him raise people from the dead. Thousands had witnessed him heal the sick, the blind, the paralysed. Thousands had witnessed him multiply food in order to feed the hungry. Even Jesus’ death and resurrection from the dead was witnessed by thousands – but we’ll save a discussion of the resurrection for the next episode.
Both the extremely short time gap and the complete absence of protestation are two vital criteria in establishing the historical veracity of the Gospel accounts of the life of Jesus.
Let’s Now Examine the Criterion of Multiple Attestation (Criterion 3)
This criterion simply means that the more independent sources there are that report the same event, the more likely that event is to be historically true. This principle applies in many areas of life today. For example, when emergency services hotlines are contacted by multiple people reporting the same incident – perhaps a fire or an accident – they can have great confidence that the event is real and not a hoax.
In the case of the biblical account of Jesus’ miracles, there is both internal and external multiple attestation.
In terms of internal multiple attestation, 15 of the 27 books of the New Testament refer to the miracles and resurrection of Jesus, and these were written by 8 different authors. This is not to be undervalued, because these 8 writers wrote from a position of geographic and temporal dislocation from each other. Their books were written hundreds of kilometres distant from each other and often many years apart, and this makes their corroborating testimonies particularly impressive.
Now, you might not be particularly impressed with this argument because, after all, these eight writers all had skin in the game. They were followers of Jesus, so of course they are going to confirm his miracles!
So let me turn now to a couple of external sources that confirm the miracles of Jesus – and these are writers who definitely DON’T have any skin in the game. I mentioned these briefly in the previous episode, but they are worth repeating in a little more detail now.
The first one is a general reference by Thallus, a first century Greek historian. He described the supernatural darkness and the earthquakes that accompanied the crucifixion of Christ (recorded in all three synoptic Gospels – Matthew, Mark and Luke). His reference is quoted in the early second century by the historian, Africanus;
“On the whole world there pressed a fearful darkness, and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse of the sun in the third book of histories, without reason it seems to me.”[ii]
Although this is only a brief reference, it is significant in describing the extraordinary supernatural events that surrounded Jesus’ crucifixion including Africanus’s comment that the darkness can’t adequately be explained as a mere eclipse of the sun.
The Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, provides another source of corroboration when he described Jesus as “a worker of wonders” (Antiquities of the Jews, 18.3.3), which was a first century phrase for ‘miracle worker’.[2] His book also includes a comment about Jesus’ resurrection which I won’t bother quoting because it is widely believed to be a later insertion by a Christian copyist. But this statement about Jesus being a worker of wonders is widely regarded as authentic; originating from Josephus himself. And that is significant, because Josephus was a Jew, not a Christian.
An even more impressive external corroboration of Jesus’ miracles is found in the Babylonian Talmud. And this is where we overlap with another of the criteria of historical credibility:
The Criterion of Corroboration by Hostile Critics
The underlying idea of this criterion is that hostile critics, (people who are hostile to the issue being reported), are the least likely to affirm or validate any aspects of that viewpoint.
In our legal system, when a hostile critic or witness DOES confirm something that they are naturally disinclined to want to confirm, it’s considered to be a very powerful and persuasive form of evidence. In our case, in assessing whether Jesus really did perform miracles, both the previous quote by Josephus and the quote we are about to look at in the Jewish Talmud represent corroboration by hostile critics – by Jews whose religious beliefs kept them opposed to Jesus, and yet they could not deny the reality of his miracles.
The Talmud is a Jewish sacred text that was being written at the time of Jesus – and it mentions Jesus on several occasions, even referring to his miracles. The Jewish rabbis who were writing the Talmud could not deny His miracles, because Jesus’ supernatural acts had been witnessed by hundreds, in some instances, thousands of people! Instead, they attributed them to the power of the devil and accused Jesus of “sorcery”. For example, The Babylonian Talmud (BT, Sanhedrin, 43a) states:
“On the eve of the Passover, Yeshua the Nazarene was hanged. Before the execution took place, a herald cried, “He is going forth to be executed because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy.” (Sanhedrin 43a).
This is an extremely significant reference. The accusation of sorcery is a reference to Jesus’ miracles. Even Jesus’ enemies, the very ones who crucified him, could not deny the reality of his miracles. The only way they could discount them was to attribute them to evil sorcery.[iii]
This is why they eventually crucified him. Jesus’ claims to be God and his regular miracles were a major thorn in the side of the Jewish authorities who considered him to be a blasphemer. Ultimately, they could neither silence him nor staunch the constant flow of miracles, so they executed him. This is EXTREMELY strong historical corroboration by HOSTILE CRITICS for the miracles of Jesus. Even the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem did not deny Jesus’ miracle-working power.
Thus, Frank Morrison, in his landmark book, Who Moved the Stone?, states;
“The fact remains that the personal ascendancy and repute of Jesus during his own lifetime was immense. The stories of his cures of the blind, the paralytic and the possessed were widespread. They came from all parts of the country and were apparently implicitly accepted even in high quarters in Jerusalem.”[3]
The acknowledgment of Jesus’ miracles by the Jewish authorities is also evident in their interaction with Jesus in an incident prior to his crucifixion.
The Gospel writer, John, records a dramatic exchange between Jesus and the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem, shortly before his arrest. Jesus had arrived in Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Dedication and was preaching in the outer courts of the Temple. John writes:
“His Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?” They rplied, “We are not stoning you for your miracles, but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” (John 10:31-33, NIV)
The incident concludes with John’s statement, “Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.” (John 10:39).
What is intriguing about this incident is the lack of denial by the Jewish authorities regarding Jesus’ miracles. It would have been the perfect opportunity to deny the miracles of Jesus if they were mere fiction – stories concocted by his followers. The authorities could have said, “Don’t be ridiculous! There have been no miracles!”. But instead they replied, “We are not stoning you for your miracles …” This represents explicit confirmation of Jesus’ miracles by the Jewish authorities! The most logical explanation for the lack of denial by the Jewish authorities is that they simply could not refute the miracles because too many people had witnessed them. This confrontation with Jesus took place in a public courtyard with a large crowd of onlookers, many of whom would have already witnessed Jesus’ miracle-working power. The authorities would have looked foolish denying them.
CONCLUSION
If we are looking for evidence of God’s existence, the miracles recorded in the Bible and corroborated by external sources must surely rate as compelling. The miracles of Jesus provide us with extremely convincing evidence of the hand of God at work in our world and clear corroboration of God’s existence.
The evidence for the historical veracity of Jesus’ miracles is so strong that even the famous liberal scholar, Rudolf Bultmann, conceded:
“But there can be no doubt that Jesus did such deeds, which were, in his and his contemporaries’ understanding, miracles, that is, deeds that were the result of supernatural, divine causality. Doubtless he healed the sick and cast out demons.”(Rudolf Bultmann, Jesus, Berlin: Deutsche Bibliothek, 1926, p. 159.)
If these biblical accounts of the miracles of Jesus are true, as I believe they are, then we have solid historical evidence confirming the existence of God. And that brings me to a final point.
You can’t dismiss Jesus as merely a good moral teacher. His miracles won’t allow you to do that. Jesus did not merely wander around the countryside uttering nice platitudes and coining wise sayings. His miracles are extremely confronting. And so are his claims that accompanied them.
Throughout his brief ministry he made a series of extraordinary claims:
- He claimed to have existed eternally prior to his appearance on Earth (John 8:48-59; John 17:5)
- He claimed to be able to forgive sin (Matthew 9:5; Luke 7:48)
- He claimed that he would judge all mankind at the end of history (Matthew 25:31; Luke 18:8)
- He claimed to be God (John 8:58; John 10:30)
Of course, merely claiming something does not make it so. Psychiatric wards are full of people who believe they are all kinds of things. But there are two factors that cause us to sit up and take notice of Jesus’ claims: his obvious sanity and his extraordinary miracles. In regard to the latter, one must ask “What further actions would we expect God to perform if he manifested himself to us in human form?” The miracles of Jesus and, as we shall see in the next chapter, his resurrection from the dead, force us to seriously consider his claim of divinity. We can’t simply dismiss his claims as the ravings of a mad man.
C.S. Lewis wrote:
“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice.”
He continues:
“Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”[4]
For more information, you can check out my books, along with a whole bunch of other resources, on my website, smartfaith.net, where you can also subscribe to my weekly blog.
………………………………………….
FOOTNOTES:
[1] John Shelby Spong, “Jesus for the Non-Religious”, Harper Collins, 2007, p.69
[2] Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 18.3.3.63
[3] Frank Morrison, “Who Moved the Stone?”, Authentic Lifestyle, Great Britain, 1983, p.29
[4] C.S. Lewis, “Mere Christianity”, 1952, republished 1980, Harper Collins, London. Kindle Edition, p.32
[i] “Myth Growth Rates and The Gospels”, http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/2013/kom378030.shtml
[ii] Africanus, quoting Thallus (96 AD), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thallus_(historian)
[iii] BT, Sanhedrin 43a, quoted in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshu#Yeshu_the_sorcerer