|
|
FULL BACKGROUND
TYPE — occurs only once in Scripture (1 Cor. 10:11, A.V. marg.). The Greek word is rendered “print†(John 20:25), “figure†(Acts 7:43; Rom. 5:14), “fashion†(Acts 7:44), “manner†(Acts 23:25), “form†(Rom. 6:17), “example†or “ensample†(1 Cor. 10:6, 11; Phil. 3:17; 1 Thess. 1:7; 2 Thess. 3:9; 1 Tim. 4:12). It properly means a “model†or “pattern†or “mould†into which clay or wax was pressed, that it might take the figure or exact shape of the mould. The word “type†is generally used to denote a resemblance between something present and something future, which is called the “antitype.†1
TYPOLOGY (Gk. ‘seal-impression’). A way of setting forth the biblical history of salvation so that some of its earlier phases are seen as anticipations of later phases, or some later phase as the recapitulation or fulfilment of an earlier one.
I. In the Old Testament
There are two archetypal epochs in the OT which are repeatedly presented in this way: the creation and the Exodus from Egypt. The Exodus is viewed as a new creation, or at least as a repetition of the original creative activity. He who in the beginning constrained the unruly sea within bounds, saying, ‘Thus far shall you come, and no farther’ (Gn. 1:9f.; Jb. 38:8-11), manifested the same power when he restrained the waters of the sea of reeds at the Exodus (Ex. 14:21-29). This parallelism is specially emphasized when the Creator’s overthrow of the primeval symbols of chaos, *Rahab and the dragon (Jb. 26:12f.), is taken up and applied to his victory at the Exodus (Pss. 74:12-14; 89:8-10). Rahab becomes a ‘type’ of Egypt (cf. Is. 30:7) and the dragon (Leviathan) of Pharaoh (cf. Ezk. 29:3).
The restoration of Israel from the Babylonian captivity is portrayed as both a new creation and a new exodus. The verbs which are used of the Creator’s workmanship in Gn. 1 and 2 are used of his activity in the restoration of the exiles (cf. Is. 43:7, where all three verbs appear together). The dragon-typology of creation, which had already been taken over as a picture of Yahweh’s victory at the Exodus, now became a means of describing this new victory. When the arm of Yahweh is called upon to ‘awake . . . as in days of old’, when it ‘cut Rahab in pieces’ and ‘didst pierce the dragon’ (Is. 51:9), God is being urged to repeat in this new situation the mighty acts of creation and Exodus. If at the Exodus he saved his people by making ‘a way in the sea, a path in the mighty waters’ (Is. 43:16), so he will be with the returning exiles when they pass through the waters (Is. 43:2), making ‘a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert’ (Is. 43:19). As the Exodus generation was led by a pillar of cloud by day and fire by night, which moved behind them when danger threatened from the back, so the exiles receive the promise: ‘The Lord will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard’ (Is. 52:12). Of the later generation as of the earlier it would be true that ‘they thirsted not when he led them through the deserts; he made water flow for them from the rock’ (Is. 48:21).
In the language of typology, the earlier series of events constituted a ‘type’ of the later; the later series was an ‘antitype’ of the earlier. Or it may be said that the successive epochs of salvation-history disclose a recurring pattern of divine activity, which the NT writers believed to have found its definitive expression in their own day.
II. In the New Testament
The typological relation between the two Testaments was summed up in Augustine’s epigram: ‘In the OT the NT lies hidden; in the NT the OT stands revealed.‘ In the NT the Christian salvation is presented as the climax of the mighty works of God, as the ‘antitype’ of his ‘typical’ mighty works in the OT. The Christian salvation is treated as a new creation, a new exodus, a new restoration from exile.
a. New creation. ‘It is the God who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness,‘ who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ’ (2 Cor. 4:6). The Fourth Gospel perhaps provides the clearest instance of creation typology, with its exordium ‘In the beginning . . .‘ echoing the opening words of Gn.: the divine Word which called the old creation into being has now become flesh to inaugurate a new creation. Those who are ‘in Christ’, according to Paul, constitute a ‘new creation’ (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15). Paul and the seer of Patmos join in seeing the curse of the primordial fall reversed by the redemptive work of Christ (Rom. 8:19-21; Rev. 22:1-5). The gospel establishes ‘new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells’ (2 Pet. 3:13; cf. Rev. 21:1).
b. New exodus. The exodus typology is particularly pervasive in the NT. Matthew seems to view the infancy of Jesus as a recapitulation of the early experiences of Israel, which went down to Egypt and came up again (Mt. 2:15). John, by the chronology of his Gospel and otherwise, implies that Christ is the antitypical Passover lamb (cf. Jn. 19:14, 36). Peter’s language points in the same direction (1 Pet. 1:19), while Paul makes the thought explicit: since ‘Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed’, the ensuing festival should be celebrated by his people ‘with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth’ (1 Cor. 5:7f.). As the Israelites passed through the Sea of Reeds, so Christians have been baptized into Christ; as the Israelites received bread from heaven and water from the rock, so Christians have their distinctive ‘supernatural food and drink’ (1 Cor. 10:1-4). As, despite all those blessings, the Exodus generation died in the wilderness because of unbelief and disobedience and so failed to enter the promised land, Christians for their part are exhorted to take warning lest they fall (1 Cor. 10:5-12; cf. Heb. 3:7-4:13; Jude 5). For these things befell the Israelites ‘as a warning , but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come’ (1 Cor. 10:11). This typology has an intensely ethical and paraenetic emphasis.
c. New restoration. The very word ‘gospel’ and its cognates are probably derived by the NT writers from their occurrences in Is. 40-66 to denote the ‘good tidings’ of return from Exile and rebuilding of Zion (Is. 40:9; cf. 52:7; 61:1). No stretch of OT prophecy has provided such a fertile ‘plot’ of gospel, from the ‘voice’ of Is. 40:3 through the ministry of the Servant in Is. 42-53 to the new heavens and new earth of Is. 65:17; 66:22.
d. Typical persons. In Rom. 5:14 Adam is called ‘a type of the one who was to come’ (i.e. of Christ, the last Adam). Adam, as head of the old creation, is an obvious counterpart to Christ, head of the new creation. All humanity is viewed as being either ‘in Adam’, in whom ‘all die’, or ‘in Christ’, in whom all are to ‘be made alive’ (1 Cor. 15:22).
No other OT character is expressly called a type of Christ in the NT. But other OT characters typify him in some degree, by comparison or contrast—Moses, as prophet (Acts 3:22f.; 7:37), Aaron, as priest (Heb. 5:4f.), David, as king (Acts 13:22). The writer to the Hebrews, taking his cue from Ps. 110:4, sees in Melchizedek a specially apt counterpart of Christ in his priestly office (Heb. 5:6, 10; 6:20ff.). He also hints that the details of the apparatus and services of the wilderness tabernacle might yield typical significance although, from what he says in Heb. 9:6-10, this significance would involve the difference rather than the resemblance between that order and the new order introduced by Christ. It is only in the light of the antitype that the relevance of the type can be appreciated.
III. Post-biblical developments
The post-apostolic age witnessed the beginning of a more unfettered Christian typology. From the first half of the 2nd century the Epistle of Barnabas or Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho illustrates the length to which the typological interpretation of OT episodes could be carried in the absence of exegetical controls. The result was that the OT acquired its chief value in Christian eyes as a book of anticipatory pictures of the person and work of Christ—pictures presented in words and even more in visible art. Perhaps the most impressive example in art is Chartres Cathedral, where the sculptures and windows on the N side depict a wealth of OT analogies to the NT story depicted by their counterparts on the S side. Thus Isaac carrying the wood is a counterpart to Christ carrying his cross, the sale of Joseph for 20 pieces of silver is a counterpart to Christ’s being sold for 30 pieces, and so forth. The whole OT is thus made to tell the Christian story in advance, but not on principles which the biblical writers themselves would have recognized.
What was spontaneous in the early Middle Ages tends to become studied and artificial when attempts are made to revive it at the present day. ‘If the appeal to Scripture is to be maintained in its proper sense, and Christian doctrine is to be set on a less unstable foundation than the private judgment of ingenious riddle-solvers, some attempt is urgently needed to establish a workable criterion for the legitimate use of the typological method, and so to smooth the path of biblical theology’ (G. W. H. Lampe, Theology 56, 1953, p. 208).
BIBLIOGRAPHY. A. Jukes, The Law of the Offerings, 1854; idem, Types of Genesis, 1858; P. Fairbairn, The Typology of Scripture6, 1880; C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures, 1952; H. H. Rowley, The Unity of the Bible, 1953; G. W. H. Lampe and K. J. Woollcombe, Essays on Typology, 1957; S. H. Hooke, Alpha and Omega, 1961; D. Daube, The Exodus Pattern in the Bible, 1963; A. T. Hanson, Jesus Christ in the Old Testament, 1965; G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2, 1965, pp. 319-409; F. F. Bruce, This is That, 1968; idem, The Time is Fulfilled, 1978; J. W. Drane, EQ 50, 1978, pp. 195-210. F.F.B. 2
MIRACLE — an event in the external world brought about by the immediate agency or the simple volition of God, operating without the use of means capable of being discerned by the senses, and designed to authenticate the divine commission of a religious teacher and the truth of his message (John 2:18; Matt. 12:38). It is an occurrence at once above nature and above man. It shows the intervention of a power that is not limited by the laws either of matter or of mind, a power interrupting the fixed laws which govern their movements, a supernatural power.
“The suspension or violation of the laws of nature involved in miracles is nothing more than is constantly taking place around us. One force counteracts another: vital force keeps the chemical laws of matter in abeyance; and muscular force can control the action of physical force. When a man raises a weight from the ground, the law of gravity is neither suspended nor violated, but counteracted by a stronger force. The same is true as to the walking of Christ on the water and the swimming of iron at the command of the prophet. The simple and grand truth that the universe is not under the exclusive control of physical forces, but that everywhere and always there is above, separate from and superior to all else, an infinite personal will, not superseding, but directing and controlling all physical causes, acting with or without them.†God ordinarily effects his purpose through the agency of second causes; but he has the power also of effecting his purpose immediately and without the intervention of second causes, i.e., of invading the fixed order, and thus of working miracles. Thus we affirm the possibility of miracles, the possibility of a higher hand intervening to control or reverse nature’s ordinary movements.
In the New Testament these four Greek words are principally used to designate miracles: (1.) Semeion, a “signâ€, i.e., an evidence of a divine commission; an attestation of a divine message (Matt. 12:38, 39; 16:1, 4; Mark 8:11; Luke 11:16; 23:8; John 2:11, 18, 23; Acts 6:8, etc.); a token of the presence and working of God; the seal of a higher power.
(2.) Terata, “wonders;†wonder-causing events; portents; producing astonishment in the beholder (Acts 2:19).
(3.) Dunameis, “might works;†works of superhuman power (Acts 2:22; Rom. 15:19; 2 Thess. 2:9); of a new and higher power.
(4.) Erga, “works;†the works of Him who is “wonderful in working†(John 5:20, 36).
Miracles are seals of a divine mission. The sacred writers appealed to them as proofs that they were messengers of God. Our Lord also appealed to miracles as a conclusive proof of his divine mission (John 5:20, 36; 10:25, 38). Thus, being out of the common course of nature and beyond the power of man, they are fitted to convey the impression of the presence and power of God. Where miracles are there certainly God is. The man, therefore, who works a miracle affords thereby clear proof that he comes with the authority of God; they are his credentials that he is God’s messenger. The teacher points to these credentials, and they are a proof that he speaks with the authority of God. He boldly says, “God bears me witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles.â€
The credibility of miracles is established by the evidence of the senses on the part of those who are witnesses of them, and to all others by the testimony of such witnesses. The witnesses were competent, and their testimony is trustworthy. Unbelievers, following Hume, deny that any testimony can prove a miracle, because they say miracles are impossible. We have shown that miracles are possible, and surely they can be borne witness to. Surely they are credible when we have abundant and trustworthy evidence of their occurrence. They are credible just as any facts of history well authenticated are credible. Miracles, it is said, are contrary to experience. Of course they are contrary to our experience, but that does not prove that they were contrary to the experience of those who witnessed them. We believe a thousand facts, both of history and of science, that are contrary to our experience, but we believe them on the ground of competent testimony. An atheist or a pantheist must, as a matter of course, deny the possibility of miracles; but to one who believes in a personal God, who in his wisdom may see fit to interfere with the ordinary processes of nature, miracles are not impossible, nor are they incredible. 1
MIRACLES. A number of Heb., Aram. and Gk. words are used in the Bible to refer to the activity in nature and history of the living God. They are variously translated in the EVV by ‘miracles’, ‘wonders’, ‘signs’, ‘mighty acts’, ‘powers’. Thus, for example, the Heb. word mopet, which is of uncertain etymology, is translated in RSV by ‘miracle’ (Ex. 7:9; Ps. 78:43), ‘wonder’ (e.g. Ex. 7:3; Dt. 4:34) and ‘sign’ (e.g. 1 Ki. 13:3, 5).
The words used by the English translators preserve in general, though not always in particular instances, the three distinctive emphases of the originals. These characterize God’s activity as being:
1. Distinctive, wonderful; expressed by Heb. derivatives of the root pl, ‘be different’, particularly the participle niplaot (e.g. Ex. 15:11, Jos. 3:5), by Aramaic tmah (Dn. 4:2-3; 6:27), and by Gk. teras (e.g. Acts 4:30; Rom. 15:19).
2. Mighty, powerful; expressed by Heb. gbura (Pss. 106:2; 145:4) and Gk. dynamis (e.g. Mt. 11:20; 1 Cor. 12:10; Gal. 3:5).
3. Meaningful, significant; expressed by Heb. ot (e.g. Nu. 14:11; Ne. 9:10), by Aramaic at (Dn. 4:2-3; 6:27), and by Gk. semeion (e.g. Jn. 2:11; 3:2; Acts 8:6).
I. Miracles and the natural order
A great deal of confusion on the subject of miracles has been caused by a failure to observe that Scripture does not sharply distinguish between God’s constant sovereign providence and his particular acts. Belief in miracles is set in the context of a world-view which regards the whole of creation as continually dependent upon the sustaining activity of God and subject to his sovereign will (cf. Col. 1:16-17). All three aspects of divine activity—wonder, power, significance—are present not only in special acts but also in the whole created order (Rom. 1:20). When the psalmist celebrates the mighty acts of God he moves readily from the creation to the deliverance from Egypt (Ps. 135:6-12). In Jb. 5:9-10; 9:9-10 the word niplaot refers to what we would call ‘natural events’ (cf. Is. 8:18; Ezk. 12:6).
Thus when the biblical writers refer to the mighty acts of God they cannot be supposed to distinguish them from ‘the course of nature’ by their peculiar causation, since they think of all events as caused by God’s sovereign power. The particular acts of God highlight the distinctive character of God’s activity, different from and superior to that of men and more particularly that of false gods, almighty in power, revealing him in nature and history.
The discovery of, say, causal connections between the different plagues of Egypt, a repetition of the blocking of the Jordan, or increased knowledge of psychosomatic medicine could not of themselves contradict the biblical assertion that the deliverance from Egypt, the entry to Canaan and the healing works of Christ were mighty acts of God. ‘Natural laws’ are descriptions of that universe in which God is ever at work. It is only by an unwarranted philosophical twist that they are construed as the self-sustaining working of a closed system or the rigid decrees of a God who set the universe to work like some piece of machinery.
It has been argued by some philosophers and theologians that the working of miracles is inconsistent with God’s nature and purpose. He is the Alpha and Omega, he knows the end from the beginning; he is the Creator who fashioned all things unhampered by any limitation imposed by pre-existent matter; he is the unchanging One. Why, then, should he need to ‘interfere’ with the working of the natural order?
This objection based on the character of God arises from a failure to grasp the biblical understanding of God as living and personal. His changelessness is not that of an impersonal force but the faithfulness of a person: his creative act brought into being responsible creatures with whom he deals, not as puppets but as other persons over against himself. Miracles are events which dramatically reveal this living, personal nature of God, active in history not as mere Destiny but as a Redeemer who saves and guides his people.
A fuller knowledge of the ways of God’s working may show that some supposedly unique events were part of a regular pattern. It can, however, never logically exclude the exceptional and extraordinary. While there is no such radical discontinuity between miracles and the ‘natural order’ as has been assumed by those who have most keenly felt the modern doubts on the subject, it is clear that Scripture speaks of many events which are extraordinary or even unique so far as our general experience of nature goes.
II. Miracles and revelation
If it be granted that a priori objections to miracle stories are invalid, it still remains to ask what precise function these extraordinary events perform in the total self-revelation of God in history. Orthodox theologians have been accustomed to regard them primarily as the authenticating marks of God’s prophets and apostles and supremely of his Son. More recently it has been argued by liberal critics that the miracle stories of OT and NT are of the same character as the wonder-stories told of pagan deities and their prophets. Both these views fail to do justice to the integral relationship between the miracle stories and the whole self-revelation of God. Miracles are not simply an external authentication of the revelation but an essential part of it, of which the true purpose was and is to nourish faith in the saving intervention of God towards those who believe.
a. False miracles
Jesus consistently refused to give a *sign from heaven, to work useless and spectacular wonders, simply to guarantee his teaching. In any case the simple ability to work miracles would have been no such guarantee. There is frequent reference both in Scripture and elsewhere to wonder-working by those who were opposed to the purposes of God (cf. Dt. 13:2-3; Mt. 7:22; 24:24; 2 Thes. 2:9; Rev. 13:13ff.; 16:14; 19:20). The refusal to do wonders for their own sake sharply marks off the biblical miracle stories from the general run of Wundergeschichten.
It is noteworthy that the word teras, which of all the biblical terms has most nearly the overtones of the English ‘portent’, is always used in the NT in conjunction with semeion to stress that only significant portents are meant. The only exception is the OT quotation in Acts 2:19 (but cf. Acts 2:22).
The mere portent or the false miracle is distinguished from the true by the fact that the true miracle is congruous with the rest of the revelation. It harmonizes with the knowledge which believers already possess concerning God, even where it also carries that knowledge farther and deeper. Thus Israel is to reject any miracle-worker who denies the Lord (Dt. 13:2-3) and thus also we may rightly discern between the miracle stories of the canonical Gospels and the romantic tales or ludicrous stupidities of the apocryphal writings and mediaeval hagiography.
b. Miracles and faith
The working of miracles is directed to a deepening of men’s understanding of God. It is God’s way of speaking dramatically to those who have ears to hear. The miracle stories are intimately concerned with the faith of observers or participants (cf. Ex. 14:31; 1 Ki. 18:39) and with the faith of those who will hear or read them later (Jn. 20:30-31). Jesus looked for faith as the right response to his saving presence and deeds; it was faith which ‘made whole’, which made the difference between the mere creation of an impression and a saving communication of his revelation of God.
It is important to observe that faith on the part of human participants is not a necessary condition of a miracle in the sense that God is of himself unable to act without human faith. Mk. 6:5 is often quoted to support such a view, but Jesus could do no mighty work in Nazareth, not because the people’s unbelief limited his power—Mark tells us that he healed a few sick people there—but rather because he could not proceed with his preaching or with the deeds which proclaimed his gospel in action where men were unready to accept his good news and his own person. Wonder-working for the crowds or the sceptics was inconsistent with his mission: it is in this sense that he could not do it in Nazareth.
c. Miracles and the Word
It is a notable feature—in some cases the chief feature—of miracles that even where the matter of the event is such that it can be assimilated to the ordinary pattern of natural events (e.g. some of the plagues of Egypt), its occurrence is predicted by God to or through his agent (cf. Jos. 3:7-13; 1 Ki. 13:1-5) or takes place at an agent’s command or prayer (cf. Ex. 4:17; Nu. 20:8; 1 Ki. 18:37-38); sometimes both prediction and command are recorded (cf. Ex. 14). This feature emphasizes yet again the connection between miracles and revelation, and between miracles and the divine creative Word.
d. The crises of the sacred history
Another connection between miracles and revelation is that they cluster about the crises of sacred history. The pre-eminently mighty acts of God are the deliverance at the Red Sea and the resurrection of Christ, the first the climax of the conflict with Pharaoh and the gods of Egypt (Ex. 12:12; Nu. 33:4), the second the climax of God’s redeeming work in Christ and the conflict with all the power of evil. Miracles are also frequently noted in the time of Elijah and Elisha, when Israel seemed most likely to sink into complete apostasy (cf. 1 Ki. 19:14); in the time of the siege of Jerusalem under Hezekiah (2 Ki. 20:11); during the Exile (Dn. passim); and in the early days of the Christian mission.
III. Miracles in the New Testament
Some liberal treatments of the question of miracles draw a marked distinction between the miracles of the NT, particularly those of our Lord himself, and those of the OT. Both more radical and more conservative critics have pointed out that in principle the narratives stand or fall together.
The contention that the NT miracles are more credible in the light of modern psychology or psychosomatic medicine leaves out of account the nature miracles, such as that at the wedding-feast in Cana and the calming of the storm, the instantaneous cures of organic disease and malformation, and the raising of the dead. There is no a priori reason to suppose that Jesus did not make use of those resources of the human mind and spirit which today are employed by the psychotherapist; but other narratives take us into realms where psychotherapy makes no assertions and where the claims of spiritual healers find least support from qualified medical observers.
There is, however, evidence for regarding the miracles of Christ and those done in his name as different from those of the OT. Where before God had done mighty works in his transcendent power and revealed them to his servants or used his servants as the occasional agents of such deeds, in Jesus there confronts us God himself incarnate, freely active in sovereign authority in that world which is ‘his own’. When the apostles did similar works in his name they acted in the power of the risen Lord with whom they were in intimate contact, so that Acts continues the story of the same things which Jesus began to do and teach in his earthly ministry (cf. Acts 1:1).
In stressing and direct presence and action of God in Christ we do not deny the continuity of his work with the previous course of God’s dealing with the world. Of the list of works given by our Lord in answering the Baptist’s inquiry (Mt. 11:5) it is the most wonderful, the healing of lepers and the raising of the dead, which have OT parallels, notably in the ministry of Elisha. What is remarkable is the integral relationship between the works and words of Jesus. The blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the deaf hear, and at the same time that the gospel is preached to the poor by which spiritual sight and hearing and a power to walk in God’s way are given to the spiritually needy.
Again, the frequency of healing miracles is far greater in the time of the NT than at any period of the OT. The OT records its miracles one by one and gives no indication that there were others unrecorded. The Gospels and the NT in general repeatedly claim that the miracles described in detail were but a fraction of those wrought.
Jesus’ works are clearly marked off from others by their manner or mode. There is in Jesus’ dealing with the sick and demon-possessed a note of inherent authority. Where prophets did their works in the name of God or after prayer to God, Jesus casts out demons and heals with that same air of rightful power as informs his pronouncement of forgiveness to the sinner; indeed, he deliberately linked the two authorities (Mk. 2:9-11). At the same time Jesus stressed that his works were done in constant dependence on the Father (e.g. Jn. 5:19). The balance between inherent authority and humble dependence is the very mark of the perfect unity of deity and humanity.
NT teaching on the virgin birth, the resurrection and the ascension emphasizes the newness of what God did in Christ. He was born of a woman in the genealogy of Abraham and David, but of a virgin; others had been raised from death, only to die again; he ‘always lives’ and has ascended to the right hand of power. It is, moreover, true of the resurrection as of no other individual miracle that on it the NT rests the whole structure of faith (cf. 1 Cor. 15:17). This event was unique as the decisive triumph over sin and death.
The miracles of the apostles and other leaders of the NT church spring from the solidarity of Christ with his people. They are works done in his name, in continuation of all that Jesus began to do and teach, in the power of the Spirit he sent from the Father. There is a close link between these miracles and the work of the apostles in testifying to the person and work of their Lord; they are part of the proclamation of the kingdom of God, not an end in themselves.
The debate continues over the contention that this function of miracle was of necessity confined to the apostolic age. But we may at least say that the NT miracles were distinct from any subsequent ones by virtue of their immediate connection with the full manifestation of the incarnate Son of God, with a revelation then given in its fullness. They do not, therefore, afford grounds in themselves for expecting miracles to accompany the subsequent dissemination of the revelation of which they formed an integral part.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. It is impossible to list here even a representative selection of the very extensive literature on the many aspects of the question of miracles. The following works represent points of view discussed above and will also provide references for further study: D. S. Cairns, The Faith that Rebels, 1927; A. Richardson, The Miracle Stories of the Gospels, 1941; C. S. Lewis, Miracles, A Preliminary Study, 1947; E. and M.-L. Keller, Miracles in Dispute, 1969; C. F. D. Moule (ed.), Miracles: Cambridge Studies in their Philosophy and History, 1965. M.H.C. 2
1. Easton, M. G., M. A. D. D., Easton’s Bible Dictionary, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1996.
2. The New Bible Dictionary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.) 1962.
|
|
