Chapter II
The Divine Origin of Revelation
§ II. The Divine Origin of the New Testament
C) The Miracles of Christ
1. Christ employed miracles and prophecies not directly in order to demonstrate the divine origin of His doctrine, but to prove His divinity or the divine character of His mission as the teacher of mankind.238 Once these truths are established, the divinity of His teaching follows as a matter of course.
2. In treating of His miracles and prophecies, we abstract for the nonce from His Resurrection, which, on account of its double importance as a miracle and a fulfilled prophecy, demands separate treatment.
3. We shall deal with the miracles of Christ not severally, one by one, but in their ensemble, paying attention mainly to those which He wrought Himself.
We assert that Christ demonstrated the divine character of His mission and teaching by means of miracles. We prove this thesis as follows:
Christ wrought true miracles and appealed to them as proofs of His divine mission. Now, miracles wrought under such conditions must be regarded as an immediate divine confirmation of the claims of the thaumaturgist. Therefore, Christ is a messenger sent by God, He is Himself true God, and His teaching is divine.
To establish this thesis we must demonstrate the historical, philosophical, and relative truth of the miracles of Christ; in other words, we must show the reality and the miraculous character of certain of His acts, and establish the fact that He appealed to them in confirmation of His mission.
1. The Historical Reality of the Extraordinary Deeds Performed by Christ
As regards quality, the miracles of Christ may be divided into two classes, viz.: (1) anthropological and (2) cosmological. Anthropological miracles are those which He wrought in connection with men; cosmological, those which He wrought in nature. The number of these miracles cannot be accurately ascertained, since the Evangelists often content themselves with a mere summary.239 Thirty-five miracles are described in detail. In twenty-three cases sick persons were miraculously restored to health (including seven possessed by demons), in three cases dead persons were recalled to life, and in seven cases the course of nature was affected.
The historical reality of these miracles is guaranteed by the Evangelists, whom we have shown to be trustworthy witnesses. The miracles recorded by them cannot be rejected as later interpolations, for they are intimately connected with the teaching of Christ and are woven, as it were, into the very texture of the Gospels.
The historicity of the miracles of Christ, according to the testimony of the Evangelists, was admitted even by His enemies.240
2. The Miraculous Character of the Extraordinary Deeds of Christ
The extraordinary deeds which we have just mentioned are genuine miracles, because they can be attributed neither to the forces of nature nor to the intervention of demons.
a) They cannot be attributed to the forces of nature. This applies first of all to
α) The cures which Christ wrought. The most various diseases, such as fever, leprosy, gout, paralysis, hemorrhages, blindness, dropsy, etc., are healed by a single word and a mere act of the will241 or by His merely touching the patients, laying His hands upon them,242 with which gesture He combined, in two instances, the application of spittle and water.243
The actions accompanying the Saviour’s words (laying on of hands, touching the patient, employing spittle and water) are altogether out of proportion to the miraculous effect and can no more explain that effect than the natural power of the human will and the words uttered by Jesus can explain it.
Our opponents point to the imposing personality of Jesus and represent the cures wrought by Him as the result of hypnotic suggestion. However, since suggestion can effect sudden cures only when the disease has its seat in the nervous system,244 but is absolutely powerless where vital organs of the body are diseased, the miracles of Christ, wrought mostly in connection with cases of the last-mentioned kind, cannot be ascribed to hypnotism; this applies especially to those cures which were wrought at a distance.245
The fact that Christ demanded faith of those whom He healed is cited as a proof that His cures were effected by means of suggestion. But He does not always demand an act of faith on the part of the patient;246 sometimes He is satisfied with a profession of faith on the part of the relatives,247 whence it may be inferred that faith was not a conditio sine qua non of the cure. Christ’s usual demand that the sick whom He wished to heal should have faith in Him, probably had for its object to induce the patient to meditate on His Person and work, since the cures, like all the other miracles of Christ, were intended to confirm His divine mission. It was for this reason, too, that He wrought few or no miracles in places where this purpose could not be attained because of popular unbelief.
Some Rationalist critics assert that the men and women whom Christ cured were victims of hysteria and, consequently, these cures were not miracles at all. But there are no symptoms of hysteria recorded in the Gospels, and if we compare these persons with real victims of that curious disease, we find no resemblances, but many important differences. “The conduct of the persons cured by Christ,” says a modern physician, “does not resemble that of patients afflicted with hysteria. Such persons like to approach great men; however, their object is not to be quickly cured, but to be treated by every possible method known to science, as they literally gloat over their disease. … The Master, after curing men, pays no more attention to them. Persons actually suffering from hysteria would probably have fallen into paroxysms and would have felt worse when they noticed this attitude. … Hysteric patients will rarely do the demonstrating physician the favor of letting him know that his treatment has benefited them, … and whether the cure of any one symptom will prove permanent or even mark progress, and will not rather be supplanted by some new symptom of this most variable disease, no doctor can predict with safety.”248 Hence it is plain that the persons cured by Jesus Christ cannot have been victims of hysteria, for neither their behavior nor the manner in which they were restored to health indicates that they suffered from this disease, and as Sacred Scripture says nothing on this head, there is no reason whatever for supposing that they were afflicted with it.
β) The cures of persons possessed by a devil are to be judged similarly. In all of these cases the Master healed the afflicted victim by commanding the evil spirit to leave him.249 This modus procedendi manifests superhuman power, since human authority per se is not able to influence the conduct of pure spirits. The necessity of postulating superhuman power remains, even if diabolic possession is denied and the condition of the sufferer is ascribed to lunacy, epilepsy, hysteria, or some other nervous trouble. For none of these diseases can be cured instantaneously by means of a mere command. Furthermore, the cures wrought by Jesus must have been permanent, for had they been merely transient, His enemies, who were intent upon discrediting Him, would surely have made the most of the Master’s failure.
γ) Besides healing many, Jesus raised three persons to life. The son of the widow of Naim250 and his friend Lazarus251 he resuscitated by a mere oral command. The daughter of Jairus he took by the hand, whereupon she arose.252 Human power cannot produce such marvelous effects by such inadequate means. In order not to be compelled to admit a miracle, our opponents either declare these three persons to have been not really, but only apparently, dead or wave the whole story aside as legendary. Both procedures are equally unjustified. The Jews may have been hasty in burying their dead, and this fact may have increased the danger of burying people alive, yet it would be attributing far too much to chance to assert, on the strength of this fact alone, that the three persons whom Jesus raised to life were not really dead. Nor are our opponents able to explain how a man like Lazarus, who had lain in his grave four days until he stank, could suddenly reappear alive and in perfect health.253 Finally, it would be incompatible with the wisdom and holiness of Jesus to assume that He raised up persons who were not really dead, and then made the public believe that their resurrection was a proof of His Messiahship. One would rather have expected Him to warn His hearers against the danger of burying people before making sure that they were actually dead.254
Those who regard the Gospel reports as mere legends, must, if they wish to be consistent, look upon all the miracles wrought by Christ, in fact upon all His works and words, nay, His very existence, as legendary and mythical. For the literary attestation is the same in all cases. Hence, we must either accept these occurrences as true miracles or deny that Jesus existed.
δ) The miracles wrought in connection with nature are also of a kind which transcends the natural powers known to us.255 Eight of them were wrought by means of a simple command or, in the case of the multiplication of loaves, by a blessing. It needs no argument to prove that the command or blessing of a mere man is not able to convert water into wine, to allay a storm, or to multiply bread. Where such effects are produced, a higher power is clearly at work.
In order to account for these phenomena without recourse to supernatural causes, our opponents try to explain them by purely natural means or represent them as mythical. But these attempts are vain in view of the plain text of the Gospels. Deception of the witnesses is excluded by the simple fact that these miracles represent easily perceptible events. Consequently, their supernatural character cannot be reasonably doubted.
To appeal to Occultism for an explanation of the miracles of Christ would be justifiable only if both the events themselves, as described by the Evangelists, and the manner in which they were caused, were manifestly occultistic phenomena. This, however, is decidedly not the case. As Bishop W. Schneider very truly observes: “The discoverers of the ‘mediumship’ of Christ took care to ignore those of His miracles which absolutely exclude comparison with the ordinary productions of Spiritistic mediums. They care not that He commanded the storms and walked upon the sea, that he fed thousands of people with a few loaves and fishes, that He cured all sorts of sufferers, the blind and the deaf, and raised to life a corpse that had lain four days in the grave. Where and when did a Spiritistic medium ever perform such marvels? … Mediums are never sure of success, they make elaborate preparations, experiment, invoke their spirit ‘controls,’ fall into convulsions, and conduct themselves as the weak-minded tools of a strange power which not seldom acts blindly. The photographic views of Spiritistic séances often show the medium in a state of trance, with horribly distorted features and staring eyes. Christ does not form a chain; He makes no preparations; He does not operate tentatively; He is not dependent upon the influence of the climate in the use of His power; He does not enlist darkness or semi-darkness as an aid; He does not await the arrival of the spirit control, and does not fall into convulsions while the séance is on. … He always employs His own innate power, invariably foresees what is going to happen, and what He wills to do is done at once, even at a distance, upon His mere word.”256
b) The miracles of Christ cannot be ascribed to evil spirits.
α) Such an assumption underrates the acumen of Satan and his minions. Jesus directed His whole activity towards promoting the honor and glory of God and the salvation of men. One of His chief aims was to break the power of the devil. The purpose of His life, therefore, is diametrically opposed to the interests of the evil one, and, as a consequence, the latter certainly cannot have been inclined to aid his most dangerous enemy by secretly cooperating with Him. This is clearly indicated by the answer which Jesus gave to the Pharisees when they accused Him of casting out devils by the aid of Beelzebub, the prince of devils. “If Satan cast out Satan,” he said, “he is divided against himself: how then shall his kingdom stand?”257
β) To assume that the miracles of Christ were wrought by the aid of evil spirits is incompatible with the sanctity of the Redeemer. He was all-holy, and to do the will of His Father was His daily bread, as it were. How could He have joined forces with God’s deadliest enemy and appealed in confirmation of His divine mission to miracles wrought by the aid of the devil? The very idea is too absurd to merit discussion.
γ) The hypothesis in question is equally incompatible with the veracity and wisdom of God, who could not possibly permit the devil to deceive the human race by means of pseudo-miracles. Christ expressly attributed the miracles which He wrought as the founder of a new religion to the spirit and power of God,258 and appealed to them as proofs of His divine mission. Never before or since have miracles been accompanied by circumstances which pointed so unmistakably to a divine cause. If deception were possible here, we should have no criterion by which to establish the authenticity of any miracle.
3. Christ’s Appeal to His Miracles
Christ, in confirmation of His divine mission, appealed partly to the ensemble of His miracles whose special purpose He mentioned.
a) Christ appealed to the ensemble of His miracles in a general way when the disciples of the Baptist came and asked Him: “Art thou he that art to come, or look we for another?” He answered: “Go and relate to John what you have heard and seen. The blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise again, the poor have the gospel preached to them.”259 The cures which He had wrought and the fact that He had raised dead men to life were a criterion by which John would be able to form a correct opinion of the Messias. Jesus also points to the miraculous testimony given to Him by His Father in Heaven: “I have a greater testimony than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to perfect; the works themselves which I do, give testimony of me, that the Father hath sent me.”260 And to the question: “How long dost thou hold our souls in suspense? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly,” He replies by saying: “I speak to you, and you believe not the works that I do in the name of my Father, they give testimony of me. … Do you say of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world: Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though you will not believe me, believe the works: that you may know and believe that the Father is in me and I [am] in the Father.”261 Similar expressions abound in the Fourth Gospel. For instance: “Believe you not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? Otherwise believe for the very works’ sake.”262 And again: “But all these things they will do to you for my name’s sake: because they know not him that sent me. … If I had not done among them the works that no other man hath done, they would not have sin; but now they have both seen and hated both me and my Father.”263
b) At times Jesus made a special appeal to certain particular miracles. Thus when He told the man sick of the palsy,264 “Thy sins are forgiven thee,” some of the Scribes said within themselves: “He blasphemeth.” He healed the sick man to prove to them that He was endowed with divine power and therefore able to forgive sins. “But that you may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then said he to the man sick of the palsy), Arise, take up thy bed, and go into thy house.”265 On another occasion266 He raised Lazarus from the dead after He had publicly asked God for His assistance and characterized the miracle which He was about to perform as a confirmation of His divine mission: “Because of the people who stand about have I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.”267
The disciples, too, regarded the miracles of Christ as proofs of His Messiahship and divine mission. “Many other signs also,” says St. John,268 “did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” Even those who did not believe in Him were of the opinion that if the Christ came, he could not do more miracles than this man.269 Nicodemus voiced the conviction of many when he said: “Rabbi, we know that thou art come a teacher from God; for no man can do these signs which thou dost, unless God be with him.”270
The conclusion from all these considerations is that Christ effectively demonstrated the divine character of His mission and teaching by His miracles.
Objections Refuted
Our opponents assert that Christ Himself attributed no special importance to His miracles. They argue as follows:
1. Jesus censures those who ask miracles of Him. As a proof for this assertion we are referred to Matt. XII, 38 sq. with the parallel texts, and to John IV, 48. But in the former passage it is not so much the desire for miracles that evokes the Master’s censure, as the wrong attitude of the Pharisees, who refused to accept the miraculous cure of the man possessed by the devil as a proof of the Messianic character of Jesus, and attempted to give it a different interpretation, in order that the people might not hail the wonder-worker as the promised Messias.271 Christ sharply rebuked them for this, and when they, who were not at all eager to know the truth, boldly demanded a spectacular demonstration of power (“a sign”) He said: “An evil and adulterous generation seeketh a sign.”272 Still He does not deny their request, but promises, after spending three days and three nights in the grave, to arise from the dead to prove His divine mission.273
The Master’s indignant declaration: “Unless you see signs and wonders, you believe not,”274 is not to be interpreted as if He regarded His miracles as of small importance. What He wished to inculcate is that the faith which is satisfied with the teaching and testimony of Jesus is more perfect than that which requires to be propped up by miracles. He expressed Himself in a similar manner on another occasion, when He said: “If you will not believe me, believe my works.”275 These words also contain a rebuke. The Lord wishes to say: The testimony which I give of myself merits your belief; but if you will not accept it, you will at least have to accept the testimony which my Father gives of me by the miracles which He enables me to perform. These miracles, therefore, according to Christ’s own declaration, so far from being purely ornamental, are the decisive factor in judging of His divine mission.
2. When He forbade the public announcement of His miracles,276 Jesus was not moved by the thought that they were of no value in demonstrating His divine mission. This is evident from His repeated appeals to them. The prohibition referred to was intended as a means of preventing unnecessary excitement among the Jewish people, who cherished a political idea of the Messias. Jesus did not wish His Messiahship to be prematurely divulged, lest the people would start a riot, proclaim Him king,277 and thus provoke the intervention of the Roman government. It was in the interest of His public ministry to avoid whatever might interfere with its success or bring it to an untimely end. Where this danger was excluded, as in the remote region of Gerasa, Jesus not only did not forbid, but positively commanded the people to spread the report of His miracles.278
On the other hand, the prohibition in question was intended to be an admonition to the disciples to practice humility, especially if, as was to be foreseen, the people would disregard the Master’s wish and spread the fame of His miracles.279 Jesus, who had proclaimed in the Sermon on the Mount, “Do not your justice before men, to be seen by them,” but give alms in secret, “otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven,”280 wished to show by His own example how this doctrine was to be applied in practice.
Note on the Miracles of the Father
The miracles wrought by God the Father in favor of Jesus must be at least briefly rehearsed in this connection. They, too, were calculated to confirm the divine mission of the Saviour. Among these miracles are: the appearance of the angels at the birth of Christ,281 the apparition of the miraculous star (miraculous at least in its movements),282 the preservation of the Divine Infant against the wiles of Herod,283 the voice from heaven at Christ’s Baptism in the Jordan,284 at the Transfiguration on the Mountain, and after His triumphant entry into Jerusalem,285 and the extraordinary occurrences at His death.286 All these events, which are as solidly attested as the miracles wrought by Christ Himself, were of divine origin and cannot be explained by natural means or as diabolic deception, and consequently form a direct divine attestation of Christ’s Messianic mission.
For further reading, see page 346.
D) The Prophecies of Christ
a) The prophecies of Christ have for their objects: (1) His own Person, (2) the fate of His disciples and that of the Jewish nation, (3) the preaching of the Gospel, (4) the development and duration of the Church, and (5) the end of the world. But not all of these prophecies can be utilized as proofs for our present purpose. Some of them have not yet been fulfilled; others, which occur in a similar form in the Old Testament, cannot be traced with certainty to Christ; others, again, are too vague and indefinite.
Hence, we may not appeal to the prophecies concerning the end of the world and the imperishability of the Church, for they have not yet been fulfilled. The prophecies concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and of the Temple, of Christ’s death on the Cross, and the flight of the Apostles, must also be omitted in this connection because they are already contained in the writings of the Old Testament. The same rule applies to the signs portending the destruction of Jerusalem, because it is not indicated with sufficient clearness whether they are to be applied to that catastrophe or to the end of the world.287
b) As in the case of Christ’s miracles, so also in the case of His prophecies, we have to demonstrate their historical, philosophical, and relative truth and reality. We must show that Christ actually predicted future events and that His predictions came true; that He could not possibly have foreseen these events by purely natural means, and that He employed prophecy to prove His divine mission.
We maintain that Christ proved His divine mission and the divine origin of His teaching by prophecies which actually came true.
Christ predicted future events, which really happened later on, and which He could not possibly have foreknown by purely natural means, and He appealed to these prophecies as incontrovertible proofs of His divine mission. Prophecies made under such conditions must be regarded as an immediate divine confirmation of the words of him who makes them. Therefore, Christ was an ambassador of God, Himself true God, and His doctrine is divine.
1. The Historicity of the Prophecies of Christ
a) Christ predicted future events in reference (α) to Himself, (β) to His disciples, and (γ) to the destruction of Jerusalem and the fate of the Jewish nation.
α) Christ predicted future events in reference to Himself. Thus He described in detail the circumstances of His Passion and death: “He began to tell them the things that should befall him, saying: Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man shall be betrayed to the chief priests, and to the scribes and ancients, and they shall condemn him to death and shall deliver him to the Gentiles; and they shall mock him, and spit on him, and scourge him, and kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.”288 The prophets of the Old Testament advert to the violent death of the Messias and the manner in which he was to be executed, but the details—that He was to be surrendered to, and condemned to death by, the Sanhedrin, that He was to be handed over to the gentiles, who would mock, scourge, and crucify him, and that He would arise again from the dead on the third day,—are not found in the Old Testament.
β) Christ predicted future events in reference to His disciples. On the night before His Passion He foretold that Judas would betray Him: “And whilst they were eating, he said: Amen I say to you, that one of you is about to betray me. … And Judas that betrayed him, answering, said: Is it I, Rabbi? He saith to him: Thou hast said it.”289 Soon afterwards He predicted that Peter would deny Him: “Jesus said to him [Peter]: Amen I say to thee, that in this night before the cock crow, thou wilt deny me thrice.”290 On the day of His Ascension into Heaven He told His Apostles that within a few days they would be inspired by the descent of the Holy Ghost with fresh courage and strength for the preaching of the Gospel: “And eating together with them, he commanded them, that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but should wait for the promise of the Father, which you have heard (saith he) by my mouth. For John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many days hence. … You shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost parts of the earth.”291
The first two of these prophecies were entirely new, whilst the third, though contained substantially in the Book of Joel,292 is more clearly defined by the statement that the Holy Ghost will descend upon the Apostles shortly after the Ascension.
γ) Christ predicted the destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersion of the Jewish nation. These events had already been foretold by Daniel;293 but the prophecy is developed in more than one respect by Jesus, who describes the siege and destruction of the city with considerable detail: “Thy enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and straiten thee on every side, and beat thee flat to the ground, and thy children who are in thee.”294 “There shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people; and they shall fall by the edge of the sword.”295 City and Temple will be completely destroyed: “And they shall not leave in thee [Jerusalem] a stone upon a stone.”296 “Seest thou all these great buildings? There shall not be left a stone upon a stone, that shall not be thrown down.”297 The Jewish people will be dispersed throughout the world, and Jerusalem will no longer be the capital of their country. “They shall be led away captives into all nations, and Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the gentiles; till the times of the nations be fulfilled.”298 The time when all this is to happen is clearly indicated: “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be done,”299 that is, within the span of one generation of men, i. e., in from thirty to forty years, all these things will come to pass; many of the present generation will live to witness them.300
b) All the prophecies of Christ have been fulfilled, (α) those that concerned His Person as well as (β) those that referred to His disciples and (γ) to the destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersion of the Jews.
α) As the history of the Passion is well known to all, we will only refer to the account in Matth. XXVI, 57–68 and XXVII, 1–31, and the parallel passages.
β) All four Evangelists report the betrayal of the Master by Judas and His denial by Peter.301 The descent of the Holy Ghost is related in the Acts of the Apostles.302
γ) We read in the History of the Jewish War by Flavius Josephus303 that Titus surrounded the city of Jerusalem with a stone wall in order to force the inhabitants to surrender. Tacitus confirms this report.304 The terrible consequences of the siege are thus described by Josephus: “During the entire time of the siege 1,100,000 human beings lost their lives. Of these the great majority was descended from the same people, but did not come from the same region. For those who had convened from all parts of the country to celebrate the Pasch, were suddenly surrounded by war, so that in consequence of the crowding of the city, first the plague and soon after famine broke out among them.”305 The Roman generals had decided in council to spare the Temple,306 but an undisciplined soldier threw a burning torch into it, and it went up in flames.307 The charred foundations were destroyed by an earthquake and a fire under Julian the Apostate, who had incited the Jews to rebuild the Temple. The church historian Socrates says on this head: “Julian … commanded the Temple of Solomon to be restored … In a short time everything necessary for the building had been brought together, when … a severe earthquake happened at night, which loosened the stones of the ancient temple foundation, raised them out of the ground, and dispersed them with those of the adjoining buildings.”308 This agrees with the description given by Ammianus Marcellinus, a secular historian, who says: “He [Julian] proposed to rebuild at a vast expense the once magnificent temple of Jerusalem, which after many deadly contests was with difficulty taken by Vespasian and Titus, who succeeded his father in the conduct of the siege. And he assigned the task to Alypius of Antioch. … But though Alypius applied himself vigorously to the work, and though the governor of the province co-operated with him, fearful balls of fire burst forth with continual eruptions close to the foundations, burning several of the workmen and making the spot altogether inaccessible; and thus the very elements, as if by some fate, repelling the attempt, it was laid aside.”309
Of the destruction of the city Josephus says: “… Cæsar commanded them [the soldiers] completely to destroy the whole city and the Temple.”310 Only the three towers of the Palace of Herod were to remain standing as monuments of the ancient fortifications and the western part of the city wall for the protection of the remaining garrison. “The entire city was leveled to the ground by the destroyers, so much so that a later visitor could hardly have believed that it was ever inhabited.” Of those who survived the fall of Jerusalem many were led captive to Egypt, others were destined for the gladiatorial combats or the triumphal march of the victors, still others were sold into slavery.311 Those who remained in Palestine revolted under the Emperor Hadrian, but were again defeated and dispersed all over the earth. Jerusalem itself was rebuilt by Hadrian and called Aelia Capitolina (the Arabs sometimes still call it Iliah).312
That Christ’s prophecy in regard to the time of the destruction of Jerusalem was accurately fulfilled may be gathered from the fact that the city was destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D., forty years after the Saviour had predicted its fate. There can be no doubt that many of His contemporaries were still alive when the Jewish capital fell.
2. The Supernatural Character of the Prophecies of Christ
From what we have said it is plain that Christ clearly and definitely foretold events which depended wholly upon the free will of God and of men. He could not have foreknown these things by natural means, since the prophecies involved many details that could not have been inferred with certainty by a created intelligence from the habits and customs of men (as the manner of His condemnation or the siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the city and the Temple), or from the character of the individuals concerned (as the denial of Peter or the betrayal of Judas), or from the ordinary operation of Divine Providence (as the descent of the Holy Ghost). Consequently, the prophecies of Christ were the result of supernatural, divine revelation.
Notes
Luke IV, 43.
↩Cfr. Matth. IV, 23 sq.; IX, 35; Mark I, 32 sqq.
↩Matth. IX, 34; XXVII, 42; Luke XXIII, 8; John XI, 47.
↩John IV, 46 sqq.; Mark II, 1 sqq. and the parallel passages; Mark III, 1 sqq.; Matth. VIII, 5 and IX, 20 sqq. and the parallel passages; John V, 2 sqq.; Luke XVII, 12 sqq.
↩Mark I, 29 sqq. and the parallels; Mark I, 40 sqq. and the parallels; Matth. IX, 27 sqq.; Mark VIII, 22 sqq.; Luke XIV, 1 sqq.; Matth. XX, 29 sqq.; Luke XXII, 49 sqq.
↩Mark VII, 32 sqq. and John IX, 1 sqq.
↩V. supra, pp. 57 sq. Cfr. Surbled-Eggemann, Catholic Moral Teaching in its Relation to Medicine, Vol. I, St. Louis, 1929.
↩John IV, 46 sqq.; Matth. VIII, 5 sqq.
↩Cfr. Mark I, 29 sqq., 40 sqq.; III, 1 sqq.; John V, 2 sqq.
↩Matth. VIII, 5 sqq.; John IV, 46 sqq.
↩K. Knur, Christus Medicus? Freiburg i. B., 1905, p. 28.
↩Matth. XII, 22 sq.; VIII, 28 sqq.; IX, 32 sqq.; XV, 21 sqq.; XVII, 14 sqq.; Mark I, 21 sqq.; Luke XIII, 10 sqq.
↩Luke VII, 11 sqq.
↩John XI, 1 sqq.
↩Matth. IX, 18 sqq.
↩Cfr. Knur, Christus Medicus? p. 72.
↩A. Schweitzer, Geschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung, Tübingen, 1921, p. 54.
↩Matth. VIII, 23 sqq.; XV, 29 sqq.; XVII, 23 sqq.; XXI, 18 sqq.; Luke V, 1 sqq.; John II, 1 sqq.; VI, 1 sqq.; XXI, 1 sqq.
↩Der neuere Geisterglaube, 3rd ed., by F. Walter, Paderborn, 1913, pp. 257 sqq.; cfr. J. de Bonniot, S.J., Wunder und Scheinwunder, pp. 227–255.
↩Matth. XII, 26.
↩Matth. XII, 28; John V, 36; X, 25, 37.
↩Matth. XI, 3 sqq.
↩John V, 36.
↩John X, 25, 36 sqq.
↩John XIV, 11 sq.
↩John XV, 21 sqq.
↩Matth. IX, 2 sqq.
↩Matth. IX, 6.
↩See John XI, 41 sqq.
↩John XI, 42.
↩John XX, 30 sq.
↩John VII, 31.
↩John III, 2.
↩Matth. XII, 22 sqq.
↩Matth. XII, 39.
↩Matth. XII, 40.
↩John IV, 48.
↩John X, 38.
↩Matth. VIII, 4; IX, 30; Mark V, 43; VII, 36; VIII, 26.
↩Cfr. John VI, 14 sq.
↩Luke VIII, 39.
↩Mark V, 43; Matth. IX, 26, 31; Mark VII, 36 sq.
↩Matth. VI, 1 sqq.
↩Luke II, 9 sqq.
↩Matth. II, 2.
↩Matth. II, 13.
↩Matth. III, 16 sq.
↩Matth. XVII, 5; John XII, 28 sq.
↩Matth. XXVII, 51 sq.
↩Cfr. J. Knabenbauer, S.J., Comment. in Matth., Paris, 1893, Part II, pp. 309 sq.
↩Mark X, 32 sqq.; cfr. Matth. XX, 18 sq.; Luke XVIII, 32 sq.
↩Matth. XXVI, 21 sqq.: “Edentibus illis dixit: Amen dico vobis, quia unus vestrum me traditurus est. … Respondens autem Iudas, qui tradidit eum, dixit: Numquid ego sum, Rabbi? Ait illi: Tu dixisti.” (Cfr. John XIII, 21 sqq.)
↩Matth. XXVI, 34: “Ait illi [Petro] Iesus: Amen dico tibi, quia in hac nocte, antequam gallus cantet, ter me negabis.” (Cfr. Mark XIV, 30).
↩Acts I, 4 sqq.: “Et convescens praecepit eis, ab Ierosolymis ne discederent, sed expectarent promissionem Patris, quam audistis (inquit) per os meum: quia Ioannes quidem baptizavit aqua, vos autem baptizabimini Spiritu sancto non post multos hos dies … accipietis virtutem supervenientis Spiritus sancti in vos, et eritis mihi testes in Ierusalem et in omni Iudaea et Samaria et usque ad ultimum terrae.” (Cfr. Luke XXIV, 49.)
↩Joel II, 28 sq.
↩Dan. IX, 26 sq.
↩Luke XIX, 43 sq.: “Circumdabunt te inimici tui vallo … coangustabunt te undique et ad terram prosternent te et filios tuos qui in te sunt.”
↩Luke XXI, 23 sq.: “Erit enim pressura magna super terram et ira populo huic. Et cadent in ore gladii.”
↩Luke XIX, 44: “Non relinquent in te [Ierusalem] lapidem super lapidem.”
↩Mark XIII, 2: “Vides has omnes magnas aedificationes [sc. templi]? Non relinquetur lapis super lapidem, qui non destruatur.”
↩Luke XXI, 24: “Captivi ducentur in omnes gentes et Ierusalem calcabitur a gentibus, donec impleantur tempora nationum.”
↩Matth. XXIV, 34: “Non praeteribit generatio haec, donec omnia haec fiant.” (Cfr. Mark XIII, 30; Luke XXI, 32.)
↩That the term generatio (γενεά) means all those now living, and not the Jewish nation, may be deduced from the fact that it could not be said of the Jewish nation, whose existence at the time of its being led into captivity is a matter of course, with such emphasis that it would live to see the destruction of Jerusalem, or that it would continue to exist to the end of the world, since the context in no wise intimates that the end of the world is still far away, which, if the continued existence of the Jewish nation were to be such a remarkable phenomenon, would have to be presupposed. On the other hand, that which the present generation was to see could not have been the end of the world, since the date of that event, which, according to Christ’s own teaching (Matth. XXIV, 36; Mark XIII, 32), is known to no one but the Father, is pretty definitely indicated (up to within a period of from 30 to 40 years) in the prophecy here under consideration. Hence the sense of the passage can only be: “Within a generation, i. e., within the lifetime of a human being, the city and the temple will be destroyed and the people led into captivity.”
↩Cfr. Matth. XXVI, 47–50, 60–75, and the parallel passages.
↩Acts II, 1–21.
↩De Bello Iudaico, V, 12, 1–2.
↩Hist., V, 13: “Hanc adversum urbem gentemque Cæsar Tiberius aggeribus vineisque certare statuit.”
↩De Bello Iudaico, VI, 9, 3.
↩Op. cit., VI, 4, 3.
↩Op. cit., VI, 4, 4–6.
↩Hist. Eccles., III, 20 (Migne, P.G., LXVII, 429). On Julian the Apostate see the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VIII, pp. 558 sq.; P. Allard, Julien l’Apostat, 3 vols., Paris, 1900–1902.
↩Rer. Gest., XXIII, 1, 2, and 3 (ed. Gardthausen, Leipsic, 1874, I, 307 sq.): “Templum, quod post multa et interneciva certamina obsidente Vespasiano posteaque Tito aegre est expugnatum, instaurare sumptibus cogitabat [Iulianus] immodicis, negotiumque maturandum Alypio dederat Antiochensi. … Cum itaque rei idem fortiter instaret Alypius iuvaretque provinciae rector, metuendi globi flammarum prope fundamenta crebris adsultibus erumpentes fecere locum exustis aliquotiens operantibus inaccessum, hocque modo elemento destinatius repellente cessavit inceptum.” (C. D. Yonge, The Roman History of Ammianus Marcellinus, London, 1862, p. 317.)
↩De Bello Iudaico, VII, 1, 1.
↩Ibid., VI, 9, 2.
↩Cfr. Dio Cassius, Hist. Rom., LXIX, 12, 14; Th. Granderath, S.J., “Die Trümmer des israelitischen Volkes als Zeugen für den göttlichen Ursprung des Christentums” in the Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, Vol. XVII, pp. 42 sqq.
↩
