I just read to you seventeen verses from the gospel of Matthew. Seventeen verses and literally countless miracles. Jesus cleansed a leper. Then he healed a Centurion’s servant. Then he healed Peter’s mother-in-law. Then he cast out demons of many who were possessed. Then he cured all who were sick. Seventeen verses and literally countless miracles. So what’s up with Jesus’ miracles? I’d wager most of us have never come to terms, precisely, with what we think about them.
So what if I put you on the spot? What if I asked you point blank, “Do you believe that Jesus’ miracles really happened just as they’re written?” You’d probably answer yes. But you’d probably answer yes because you figure it’s the “right answer,” and you don’t want to come off as faithless, or skeptical, or cynical, or doubtful, or impious. What if instead I allowed you to answer by secret ballot? You might well answer differently. You might well answer, “No.”
Because we live in a scientific and secular age after all; a scientific and secular age, that, if it can’t quite disprove miracles, certainly puts no stock in them. It may surprise you that one of the most influential theologians of the twentieth century put no stock in them either. His name is Rudolf Bultmann. To the question, “Do you believe that Jesus’ miracles really happened just as they are written?” - He answered an emphatic “No.”
His most famous account of what really happened had to do with Jesus’ multiplication of five loaves of bread and two fishes into enough food sufficient to feed a multitude of 5,000. What really happened, Bultmann theorized, was that Jesus inspired everyone to share the food they already had. But there’s a problem with this. The problem is the gospels - all four of them. They don’t record that Jesus’ inspired everyone to share the food they already had. They record that Jesus performed a miracle. If it really happened the way Bultmann theorized, why didn’t they just record it that way? Why didn’t they just record that Jesus was an inspiring man?
In fact, the gospels don’t record that Jesus was particularly inspiring. His own disciples tripped over themselves his entire ministry. He was continually correcting and rebuking them. And talk about correcting and rebuking, think of the religious authorities. All he ever did was correct and rebuke them. He was so “inspiring” to them that they killed him.
So to return to the question at hand, why would all four gospels engage in subterfuge? Why would they engage in subterfuge, not just with regard to the loaves and fishes, but with the countless miracles throughout them? That seems rather far fetched. No, you can’t really get around the fact that all four gospels record that Jesus performed miracles. And they go beyond this. They explain how it could be so.
It begins with the fact that Jesus was the Son of God. This is to say he was possessed of God’s own essence. This is to say he was possessed of the essence that called creation into being. This is to say that he could command creation’s function.
Now that’s a bold claim, but the entire Bible makes bold claims. Don’t get me started on the apostle Paul. But it’s a bold claim that makes perfect sense if you think about it. If the supernatural realm can not intervene in the natural realm, then what in the world are we Christians playing at? If the supernatural realm can not intervene in the natural realm, then there’s no resurrection. Then Jesus has changed absolutely nothing, and that’s demonstrable. The whole point is that the supernatural realm has intervened in the natural realm -- that God has entered into time and history, into your life and into mine.
So the gospels explain how it could be so, and they also explain why it was so. Jesus performed miracles to show what God stands for. In the case of the miracles I just read, he performed them to show that God stands for healing, wholeness, restoration, restitution -- for abundant life, abundant life that we experience proximately in the here and now and abundant life that we will experience ultimately in the hereafter.
Makes sense to me. Sounds intellectually defensible. So maybe the gospel writers actually know what they are talking about. Maybe there’s a reason that the Bible is the most influential book in human history, and it formed and sustained Western Culture before Western Culture became so worldly wise that it turned on it.
That brings us to coronavirus, because all roads lead to coronavirus these days. All of this has application to our own times. It has to do with what I just said; it has to do with the fact that God stands for healing, wholeness, restoration, restitution, for abundant life, abundant life that we experience proximately in the here and now and abundant life that we experience ultimately in the hereafter. Because from this we can extrapolate a rule: What we ultimately anticipate, we presently approximate. Let me repeat that: What we ultimately anticipate, we presently approximate.
And as we look around us, who do we see during these times of coronavirus, that is presently approximating? Precisely the doctors, nurses, health care workers, and all those on the front lines of this disease. They are more than brave, selfless, dutiful, and skillful. They are advancing the divine cause. They are performing miracles.
But this disease is more than physical. It has a spiritual component as well, because it is attended by fear, loss, anxiety, and despair. That’s where the rest of us come in. That’s where we can advance the divine cause. That's where we can perform miracles. We can tender support, encouragement, comfort, hope, service, and love.
It’s nothing more than what the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews wrote. We can, all together, see the things promised and welcome them from afar. Amen.