Biblical criteria for miracles?

Must the Bible define what constitutes a true miracle?

In the sense that Scripture provides the foundation for the Theology of the Church, yes.

But in a legal-type sense, no.

What do I mean by legal sense? This is where the bible is treated like one might treat the US code of law. If I wanted to know how I am supposed to drive, I would look up US and/or state law, and find directives probably along the lines of “the driver of the vehicle shall obey posted speed limits” or some such. As well, if I wanted to know what the meaning of the word “vehicle was” according to the law, I would find a definition spelled out.

However, except for the Torah proper specifically Leviticus and Deuteronomy there is no law code recorded. God does not in scripture give a definition of a miracle. And it is an assumption that only the specific ways that scripture record miracles are the ways that a miracle will always happen.  

This of course deals with issues of the “regulative principle” and systems that use scripture as a law book of sorts to provide a comprehensive system for order in the Church and theology. 

Instead scripture records events and contains occasional letters. Just because they are inspired, doesn’t imply they are to be used in a “regulative” manner in the same way we in the US use the constitution. 

When it comes to miracles, it is important what scripture says about miracles and the supernatural and the nature of God. Not so that the Church will only believe in miracles that fit the exact manner described, but so that in determining a modern day miracle or supernatural occurrence the Church has a solid foundation to analyze it from. 

Just because all miracles in scripture have trait X doesn’t imply that all miracles God ever does have trait X and must have trait X to be considered from God. The results of the miracle (people moved to love a life of grater faith, hope and love) is more important then criteria which scripture never gives us anyway. 

For instance, in the martyrdom of Polycarp there are several supernatural visions that the Christians claim occurred at his death. The text reads as if none of these were seen by the non-Christians present. Yet, just because when miracles in scripture always seem to be public, doesn’t mean when God does miracles he only makes them public. 

This is because miracles don’t exist in the bible, they exist in reality. (see HERE for more argument behind this concept) The bible records miraculous event at certain times, but there is not reason to think it records all of them that God has ever done or that the descriptions are intended to give us a complete picture of what all supernatural events much look like. 

True miracles will first of all be miraculous. When it comes to healings the Catholics have seven criteria developed by Cardinal Prospero Lambertini (latter Pope Benedict XIV):

1.“ Primum est, ut morbus sit gravis, et vel impossibilis, vel curatu difficilis ” – Firstly, the disease should be serious, incurable or difficult to treat. 

2.“ Secundum, ut morbus, qui depellitur, non sit in ultima parte status, ita ut non multo post declinare debeat ” – Secondly, the eradicated disease should not be in its final stage or at a stage whereby it may involve spontaneous recovery. 

3.“ Tertium, ut nulla fuerint adhibita medicamenta, vel, si fuerint adhibita, certum sit, ea non profuisse ” – Thirdly, no drug should have been administered or, in the event that it has been administered, the absence of any effects should have been ascertained. 

4.“ Quartum, ut sanatio sit subita, et momentanea ” – Fourthly, the recovery has to take place suddenly and instantly. 

5.“ Quintum, ut sanatio sit perfecta, non manca, aut concisa ”– Fifthly, the recovery has to be perfect, and not defective or partial. 6.“ Sextum, ut nulla notatu digna evacuatio, seu crisis praecedat temporibus debitis, et cum causa; si enim ita accidat, tunc vero prodigiosa sanatio dicenda non erit, sed vel ex toto, vel ex parte naturalis ” Sixthly, it is necessary that any noteworthy excretion or crisis has taken place at the proper time, as a reasonable result of an ascertained cause, prior to the recovery; under these circumstances the recovery cannot be deemed prodigious, but totally or partially natural. 

7.“ Ultimum, ut sublatus morbus non redeat ” – Lastly, it is necessary for the eradicated disease not to reappear. 

(From De Servorum Beatificatione et Beatorum Canonizatione. liber IV, Cap. VIII, no. 2)

Along with this a miracle from God must glorify God and encourage true faith and good works. These really just follow the rules that one of the few law books in scripture actually gives us in Deut 18:18-22: 

“But any prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, or who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded the prophet to speak-- that prophet shall die." You may say to yourself, "How can we recognize a word that the LORD has not spoken?"  If a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD but the thing does not take place or prove true, it is a word that the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; do not be frightened by it.”

The legal usage of scripture isn’t even used in the legal books. Of course, I could write a thesis on the problems with the regulative principle, but that would be a bit much for this blog. 

These are theological criteria that allow God to show us the supernatural in ways we haven’t seen before yet also keep us out of following everything that claims to be supernatural. Christians shouldn’t be functional Deists (the supernatural only happened back then) or fall into trusting everything (like former Bishop Pike)