According to the canonical Gospels, Jesus worked many miracles in the course of his ministry. The large bulk of them are various cures, though there are also a large number of exorcisms, three instances of raising the dead, and various other miracles that do not fit into these categories.
Many scholars argue that miracles cannot be historically proven, and therefore are not falsifiable, and consequently discussion of them is inherently unscientific, and so does not belong in a discussion of any possible historical Jesus. The Jesus Seminar, a critical study by major theologians of what aspects of the Gospel accounts are likely to be factual, held that while the various cures for diseases are probably true, since there were many others in the ancient world credited with healing power, most of the other miracles of Jesus are unfactual, at least in their literal interpretation from the Bible.
The veracity of exorcisms carried out by Jesus is particularly questioned among critical scholars, as according to modern science there is no evidence whatsoever for demonic possession, while there is a large amount of evidence that what ancient peoples attributed to demonic forces were actually the result of psychological disturbances and mental illness.
Sometimes scientists speculate that the appearance of a miracle could have occurred, but that there is a naturalistic explanation for it. For example, a recent study has suggested that the miracle of Jesus walking on water could have been the result of a freak ice formation that is thought by climatologists to have occurred on the Sea of Galilee during that time *.
Aside from literal interpretations, and assumptions of it being pure fiction, numerous other explanations of the events have been put forward throughout history. Beginning with the Gnostics, it has been suggested that the reports of alleged miracles were actually intended just as allegories, not as factual events. Healing the blind has been argued to be a metaphor for people who previously could not, or would not, see the truth being shown it; healing the deaf has been interpreted as simply meaning that people who could not, or would not, listen to true teachings were made to; similarly, healing paralysis has been interpreted as an allegory for rectifying inaction; and healing leprosy for removing the societal stigmatism associated with certain stances. It has also been argued that bar-Timai is a direct reference to Plato's Timaeus, a literary work, and that bar-Timai symbolises the hellenic audience of Mark's gospel, and that curing his blindness is a metaphor for the Gospel giving a revelation to the audience.
Other scholars have suggested that the Bible is more literal than that, but that the events can be scientifically explained by arguing that Jesus had a high knowledge of herbalism, as was common amongst the teachers of many mystery religions, and aescetic groups like the essenes, and simply applied quite ordinary and scientific cures for the symptoms described. Though things like blindness and deafness may seem incurable without very modern medicine, it has been argued by these scholars that it is not true blindness, deafness, etc., being referred to, but more easily curable illness such as conjunctivitis, and glue ear. Out of the Canonical Gospels, Matthew adds several other episodes of Jesus healing people who are blind, deaf, mute, lame, or some combination of these four; many scholars see this as an example of the common trait of Matthew trying to portray Jesus as fulfilling an Old Testament prophecy, in this case . Those who believe the miracles happened as literally stated also sometimes think there is a reference to this part of Isaiah, though in their case, these believers argue that Jesus was fulfilling the prophecy, rather than the author editing Jesus to fit it.
Belief in supernatural creatures was very common in first century palestine, especially due to certain preachings of the Pharisees. According to a literal reading of the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus was present at multiple examples of demonic possession, while these incidents are not mentioned whatsoever by the Gospel of John. Most modern scholars dismiss these as simply being cases of mental illness and afflictions such as epilepsy, which provides the same external symptoms without requiring the need for a supernatural force, and hence is favoured by Ockham's razor.
The accounts in the Synoptic Gospels are, at face value:
Scientifically, while many of these cases have an uncertain explanations, due to the minimal description of the possessions themself, the possession of the man at Gerasenes could be explained as simply being a case of schizophrenia, while the possession of the boy, brought forward after the transfiguration, has symptoms more scientifically explainable by epilepsy. Critical scholars typically see these exorcisms of such illness as allegorical, representative of Jesus' teachings clearing even the most troubled mind. Some critical scholars, however, have suggested that the events could have been real, though with the scientific explanation of the illnesses, and that the cures given were really just psychological drugs that Jesus, like many others in the era, would have been aware of; for example, Sage and Mistletoe were used in early times to treat epilepsy, and Snakeroot was used to treat schizophrenia.
Nonetheless, many Christians accept these exorcisms as having really happened as actual evictions of real demons. The Roman Catholic Church maintains a detailed protocol of what is to be done to perform an exorcism, and most local denominations have an exorcism 'specialist' at hand, as does the Anglican Church of England, which maintains an exorcist in each diocese.
To these, some Christians, predominantly Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglo Catholics, would add Transubstantiation during the last supper meal, though this is not clear in the narrative, and requires taking Jesus' words in this part of the Gospels extremely literally. Most Protestants reject this instance of transubstantiation, as do most non-Christians. It is worth noting, however, that not all schools of non-Christian philosophy rule out the possibility of transubstantiation in general; in Aristotelian schools of metaphysics the possibility is considered quite mundane rather than indicative of divine power - indeed Aristotle allowed the possibility of transubstantiation but rejected the possibility that God could intervene in the world.
The Canonical Gospels, as they currently stand, report three cases where Jesus calls a dead person back to life:
If the Secret Gospel of Mark is to be considered genuine, then there is a fourth case in the Canonical Gospels, in which Jesus brings back to life a rich man who is loved by Jesus, and lived in Bethany. The rich man in question is implied by the Secret Gospel to be the almost naked individual that Mark states followed Jesus during his arrest, and the individual that Mark states was found in the otherwise empty tomb.
While the raising of the daughter of Jairus is in all the Synoptic Gospels (but not in the Gospel of John), the raising of the son of the widow of Nain appears only in the Gospel of Luke, and the raising of Lazarus appears only in the Gospel of John. It has been argued by several scholars and commentators that the story of the raising of Lazarus and that of the Nain widow's son really refer to the same event, and amongst those scholars also taking the Secret Gospel of Mark to be genuine, these two events are considered to derive from the raising of the youth in the original Mark (i.e. the event that was later excised from Mark, but survives in the Secret Gospel). That the story of the daughter of Jairus does not appear in the Gospel of John, despite the story clearly stating that John the Apostle was one of the only three people that Jesus took with him to witness it, is one of the reasons that most scholars doubt the Authorship of John.
To these must be added Jesus' own resurrection from the dead, if the Gospels are to be taken completely literally rather than allegorically. Most Christians accept this as fact without question, indeed almost defining being a Christian with a belief in the resurrection. Others, like Rudolf Bultmann, argue that the resurrection was not a historical event, as did a large number of early Christians, known as Gnostics, at one point almost a majority. Most non-Christian scholars point to the paucity of evidence, as well as the lack of evidence and scientific plausibility for other people having come back from the dead, and so reject the resurrection's historicity.
To the Gnostics, death had a profoundly allegorical meaning; people who had renounced their lack of knowledge and their carnality, becoming gnostics, were referred to as having died, since they had metaphorically escaped the prison of the body. The Gnostics viewed resurrection as an allegory for people attaining gnosis, and not as something that had to literally have happened, hence viewing these miracles as metaphors, and teaching devices, not actual events. According to those who see Gnosticism as the original version of Christianity, this is how the events were intended to be interpreted, and hence they were non historic, never really having been meant to be seen as historic.
It is not always clear when two reported miracles refer to the same event. An attempt has been made to indicate those that probably are related.
| Miracle | Matthew | Mark | Luke | John | Other sources |
| Water controlled and purified | Infancy Gospel of Thomas | ||||
| Clay pigeons brought to life | Infancy Narrative of James, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Qur'an | ||||
| Healing of a woodcutter's foot | Infancy Gospel of Thomas | ||||
| Holding water in cloth | Infancy Gospel of Thomas | ||||
| Playmate killed and raised from dead | Infancy Narrative of James, Infancy Gospel of Thomas (different playmates) | ||||
| One grain of wheat feeds many | Infancy Gospel of Thomas | ||||
| Stretching a board | Infancy Gospel of Thomas | ||||
| Turning water into wine | |||||
| Cure of royal official's (centurion's) son (servant) | |||||
| Miraculous catch of fish | |||||
| Cure of a demoniac | |||||
| Cure of Peter's mother-in-law's fever | |||||
| Cure of a leper | Qur'an | ||||
| Cure of a paralytic at Capharnaum | |||||
| Cure of a sick man at Bethesda | |||||
| Healing of a man's withered hand | |||||
| Raising of the son of the widow of Nain | |||||
| Healing of a blind and dumb demoniac | |||||
| Calming a storm at sea | |||||
| Expulsion of demons in Gadara | |||||
| Raising (curing) of Jairus' daughter | |||||
| Healing of a woman with a hemorrhage | |||||
| Restoration of two men's sight | |||||
| Healing of a mute demoniac | |||||
| Feeding the 5000 | |||||
| Walking on water | |||||
| Exorcism of a Canaanite (Syro-Phoenecian) woman | |||||
| Healing of a deaf-mute | |||||
| Feeding the 4000 | |||||
| Restoration of a man's sight at Bethsaida | |||||
| Transfiguration | |||||
| Exorcism of a possessed boy | |||||
| Payment of temple tax with a shekel taken from a fish's mouth | |||||
| Healing of large numbers of crippled, blind and mute | |||||
| Healing of a woman on the Sabbath | |||||
| Raising of Lazarus (from the dead) | Qur'an | ||||
| Healing of a man with dropsy | |||||
| Healing of ten lepers | |||||
| Healing of Bartimaus, a blind beggar | Qur'an | ||||
| Cursing of a fig tree to never bear fruit | |||||
| Transubstantiation of bread and wine | |||||
| Healing of High Priest's servant's ear | |||||
| Resurrection of himself | |||||
In the canon, there are 44 miracles of Jesus during his life-time which were recorded in the New Testament, 37 of them are recorded in the canonical Gospels and 7 were recorded in other parts.
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"Miracles of Jesus".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world