227. What Christ’s miracles taught
227. WHAT CHRIST’S MIRACLES TAUGHT
What are we supposed to learn from Christ’s miracles?
Our Lord said (Jn 5:36): The works which the Father hath given Me to perform . . . themselves . . . give testimony to me. . . . The miracles which Christ worked were a sufficient proof of His Godhead in three respects. First, as to the very nature of the works, which surpassed the entire capability of created power and therefore could not be done save by divine power. For this reason the blind man, after his sight had been restored, said (Jn 9:32,33): From the beginning of the world it has not been heard that any man hath opened the eyes of one born blind. Unless this man were of God, he could not do anything.
Secondly, as to the way in which He worked miracles, namely because He worked miracles . . . of His own power, and not by praying (petitioning), as others do. . . .
Thirdly, from the very fact that He taught that He was God; for unless this were true it would not be confirmed by miracles worked by divine power. . . (III,43,4).
The Greek word for “miracle” (semeion) means literally “sign”. They are meant to be looked-along, not just looked-at.
The main thing these miracles are designed to teach is Christ Himself, His divine identity. They are “sufficient proof of His Godhead”.
Lesser minds would leave it at that, but St. Thomas explores three different aspects of this:
(1) The inference that since only the supernatural God had supernatural power that exceeded all the power of nature, and since Christ had this power, that this logically proved that Christ was God;
(2) That His miracles showed not merely that supernatural power was at work from God but that He was the very source of this power, not merely its instrument, as is the case when a man prays to God for a miracle because he cannot perform one himself (e.g., Elijah on Mount Carmel confronting the priests of Baal: 1 Kings 18:20-40).
(3) The clearest and most direct argument of all is not just His deeds as thought-about by our words and thoughts (= points (1) and (2)), but His own words, i.e., the match between His deeds and His words. He said He was God, in many ways and at many times in the Gospels. If this was not true, that would make Him either an insane fool, if He believed it, or a blasphemous liar, if He didn’t. His miracles, like His holiness, His love, and His wisdom, make it impossible to call Him a lunatic or a liar; therefore we must call Him Lord. This is the “Lord, liar, or lunatic” argument made famous by C. S. Lewis and Josh McDowell. It goes back to St. Thomas, to the early Christian apologists like St. Justin Martyr, and, as St. Thomas shows here, implicitly to Christ Himself.
We can only marvel at the power and completeness of His teaching strategy, and at St. Thomas’ penetration into this power and completeness. The argument He gave us for the most important thing in the world (Himself) is also the strongest argument in the world. That was needed because this most important thing in the world is also the most startling thing in the world, and in that sense the hardest thing in the world to believe. You don’t need strong arguments or shocking miracles to prove that 1 + 1 = 2.