NOTES ON SET MIRACLES

Miracles - OT = ‘oth’ (Hb) Mighty works where God acts decisively on behalf of his people to accomplish deliverance for his people. Classic example is the Exodus event. Synoptics - ‘dunameis’ (Gk) = mighty works - acts which reveal God’s purpose in Christ for the world. Signs of the Kingdom of God. As well as miracles, the Birth Narratives and Passion/Resurrection narratives can be seen as the ‘mighty works to which the other ‘mighty works’ point.

Stilling the Storm - Form Critics

Note 3-fold form of miracle

Mainly concentrate on Marcan version, assuming that it’s the earliest. Some form critics (Bultmann and Dibelius) see this as an early church invention, (created by storytellers - M Dibelius) from OT texts. E.g. Ps 104 Vs 6-7, where the vocabulary is similar to story.

Many people will find this suggestion unpersuasive, but may feel that this is a dramatised event recorded by evangelist in terms that deliberately evoke the words of the psalm.

D Nineham - Storm represents demonic forces. Therefore about Jesus/God’s victory over evil. Jesus’ ‘sleep’ = the perfect trust and security in God that Believers ought to have! Sitz in die Kirche was one of exhortation to persevere under suffering?

Bultmann - pericopae - like tale of a Jewish child in a pagan ship, who prays for deliverance during a storm, which is then stilled, causing the pagan sailors to turn to God. Also like Jonah and the Whale. ‘Srange wonder-story is carried over to Jesus, who is the centre of the story, NOT the miracle.’

Dibelius - story an ‘epiphany’ (a demonstration of the lordship of God). Early Church may have used the story to demonstrate Jesus’ Lordship over nature and show his superiority to other miracle workers. Such a person demands a response.

But V Taylor, draws attention to the restrained way in which the story is told in contrast to the stories mentioned above. Suggests authenticity.

Redaction Critics - Bornkamm addressed in seminal paper in 1947. Matthaen redactions, seem (a) to sharpen the focus to the relationship between Jesus and Disciples. (B) to Soften the rebuke to the disciples. (C) to reveal divinity of Jesus (they call Him Lord) (d) to show the necessity of faith for salvation. Matthaen redaction ‘An illustrative picture of what following Jesus means.’ Story has become a paradigm of discipleship.

Feeding of 5,000 and Walking on the Water - Form Criticism

Again, note 3-fold form.

Bultmann and Dibelius see origin of story in OT, or suggest Early Church dramatisation of some event in Jesus’ ministry. ‘Oral tradition has turned into miracle what was originally an impressive act of prophetic symbolism’ G Caird. Possibly, Jesus’ example encouraged people to share what they had, or perhaps (as Schweitzer suggests) it was a symbolic meal, like the Eucharist, which caused the crowd to feel satisfied sprititually but not physically.

Source? - miraculous feedings from OT - Moses in wilderness, description of Messianic Banquet in Isa 25 and 35. Prophetic sign e.g. Elisha in 2 Kings 42-44. Jesus becomes the fulfilment of the Law and the Prophets.

Sitz in die Kirche - teaching/apologetic - confirms Jesus’ messiahship. Mission to introduce God’s kingdom; teaching about Eucharist; assurance of nurture in ‘wilderness’ periods of life (e.g. persecution?).

Redaction Critics

Marcan version - follows on from stilling of storm and confirms Jesus’ power and authority. Highlights lack of faith from disciples. Jesus’ claims supported by Messianic miracle. ‘Hundreds and fifties’ may refer to Moses organising the Children of Israel in the desert (Ex 18), disciples distribute food, as leaders distributed justice. Jesus founding the New Israel? 12 baskets represent new Israel?

Mt - ‘sheep without a shepherd’ - From OT God is shepherd of His people (Ps 23; Ps 95; Ezek 34(?): vs20 ‘and were satisfied’ possibly ref. To Sermon on the Mount ‘Blessed are they that hunger & thirst for righteousness ...’. Jesus head of the Messianic household, dispensing bread as the head of the family. Disciples uncertainty is softened (again).

CONTEXT of the miracle because the ‘Walking on Water’ which immediately follows, mirrors Crossing of the Red Sea, from Passover/Exodus narrative. (John actually places incident at Passover.)

Lucan version - proclamation of Kingdom of God accompanied by signs of the Kingdom - healing - the compassionate, welcoming Jesus. Luke does not include the Walking on the Water, possibly because not interested in the Messianic/New Israel symbolism which engages Mt and Mk.

Walking on the Water

A Nature Miracle - but not with a traditional 3-fold form.

Form critics see importance that Jesus could perform such a miracle - he is a powerful wonder worker. Possibly a dramatised incident, or an Early Church creation, maybe based on the final chapters of Job, where God walks through the paths of the deep.)

Redaction Critics would note the context (see above)

Possibly a sign which confirms Jesus’ divine right and ability to feed 5,000. Also, the allusions to crossing the Red Sea/baptism.

Peter incident only in Mt . Maybe another microcosm of what will happen to him later (Like the Sower), as he professes his desire to follow Jesus, but is let down by fear, and almost sinks under it (his betrayal of Jesus during the trial). Of course, he is restored to faith by Jesus (as he will be later).

Mt highlighting Peter because of his importance in Church in Mt’s time.

Centurion’s Slave Mt 8vv5-13, Lk 7vv1-10

Probably a Q miracle - it appears in John too.

Form Crit - Note the 3-fold structure, which Dibelius would attribute the existing pagan miracle story-forms.

Church preserved/created this story which seems to support Gentile mission. As Jesus seems to see his mission only in terms of Jews, some Form Crits would doubt that the event goes back to Jesus, being rather an attempt by the Early Ch to explain its Gentile mission. However, the other theme - need for implicit faith in Jesus - appears often enough elsewhere to have a plausible Sitz in Jesu.

NB Mt version includes the passage about the exclusion of the Jews from the messianic banquet here. Luke has a parallel passage but in a different context, suggesting that the context of the pericopae in both Gospels is artificial - placed to suit the needs of the Churches. This supports the Form Critical theory that pericopae originally survived independently, and that Gospel contexts have been created to suit church needs. In Mt’s case, there is the contrast between the acceptance of the faithful Gentile before the unbelieving Jews.

Redaction Crit - Lk - adds the praise of the Centurion coming from the Jewish leaders - showing the Centurion’s humility and good works, emphasising the universality of Jesus’ appeal.

Mt adds the verse already mentioned. According to Redac. Crits, this placing stems from the Evangelist looking back over 40 years of history in which the Temple has been destroyed and the Jews have continued to reject Jesus.

The 10 Lepers Lk 17:11-19

Form Critics - cite the ‘double response’ of Jesus as an example of Church expansion to make the story about gentile faith as opposed to Jewish lack of gratitude. This comment does not appear to fit in with the story . Did not the others act with faith by obeying Jesus’ instruction to show themselves to the priest?

Redaction Critics - would point to Luke’s interest in social outcasts (lepers and Samaritans!) responding in faith to Jesus. This fits in with the ‘Good Samaritan’ also found only in Luke.

NB The word used by Jesus which is translated ‘has made you well’ can also mean has saved you - possibly linking healing faith with saving faith.

Boy with the evil spirit Mk 914-29; Mt 17:14-21; Lk 9:37-42a

Form Critics - like this classic 3-fold form story. Mt and Lk have omitted much descriptive detail. Dibelius would argue that the Markan version had come from story-tellers, who have embellished the basic story. Mark has Christianised the story by adding vs 19 and possibly vs 23. Mt and Lk emphasise faith aspect by removal of details. Q passage included by Mt at end further emphasises need for faith. (Again, Lk has this saying - but includes it at Lk 17 vs 6 - a very different context)