Question

Define a miracle, according to traditional Christian thought. Explain the relationship between ones worldview and ones interpretation of biblical accounts of miraculous events.

Answer 1

Ans.) According to traditional Christian thought a miracle is an astonishing and surprising work of God, for the most part however not perpetually,rising above the standard forces of Nature, created regarding the closures of disclosure, is represented by the terms used to depict miracles in the Old Testament and New Testament..

Not all miracles are the equivalent. It is critical to recognize Biblical marvels and philosophical supernatural occurrences. Scriptural marvels are stories advised to rouse miracle and conviction. The words frequently utilized in the Bible signify "sign," or "marvel." They could be classified "wonder stories." And in light of the fact that they are planned to pass on certainties identified with what we have come to know as religious philosophy, the Biblical supernatural occurrences are some of the time called "philosophical miracle stories." Few prepared scholars comprehend the Biblical supernatural occurrences to be exacting records of occasions as they truly occurred. This is the situation in most religious schools and theological colleges. In any case, most Christian churches demoralize the people from scrutinizing the exactitude of Biblical miracles. This is on the grounds that scrutinizing the strictness of Biblical wonders is seen as progressively unsafe to the confidence of the common people than is taking the Biblical supernatural occurrences actually.

The other sort of miracle, the theological miracle, has been characterized by the Church utilizing a portion of the reasoning of Thomas Aquinas. This is a miracle in which something like one known "law" of nature is repudiated. This is the sort of wonder the Church likes to see (yet unquestionably does not generally demand) when it is thinking about an individual for sainthood.

The Bible's creators did not theoretically know about the sort of supernatural occurrence that is called a "theological miracle." A fascinating bit of proof that Paul, at any rate, did not recognize supernatural occurrences contradicting a law of nature from those that don't can be found in Acts 26 where Paul talks about his change. While there are a few things in Paul's change story that you could sensibly contend contravened a law of nature, numerous individuals feel refrain eight demonstrates that Paul suspected that his transformation, itself, was a supernatural occurrence. Paul recounts the narrative of his transformation, inferring that his change is something like, or if nothing else can be contrasted and, a restoration of the dead. In this way, he is contrasting a supernatural occurrence (raising the dead) which practically nobody would question a law of nature with an occasion (Paul's change) that positively can't be exhibited to do as such. Yet, as I stated, Paul couldn't in any way, shape or form have had a similar comprehension of the laws of nature that we have today.