the healing of the Roman centurion’s servant or slave (Matthew 8.5–13; Luke 7.1–10).
In addition, Matthew has
(10) the restoring of sight to two blind men (Matthew 9.27–31).
Luke adds
(11) the healing of a woman with an infirmity (Luke 13.10–17),
(12) the healing of a man with dropsy (Luke 14.1–6),
(13) the cleansing of ten lepers (Luke 17.11–19); and
(14) the restoring of the ear of the slave of the high priest (Luke 22.49–51).
A summary indicates that Mark and Matthew each have eight healings, whereas Luke reports eleven.
The next most numerous are the exorcisms. Two are reported in all three gospels:
(15) the demon-possessed Legion (Mark 5.1–20; Matthew 8.28–34; Luke 8.26–39) and
(16) the epileptic (Mark 9.14–29; Matthew 17.14–21; Luke 9.37–43a).
Mark and Matthew report
(17) the exorcism of the daughter of the Syrophoenician or the Canaanite woman (Mark 7.24–30; Matthew 15.21–28)
Mark and Luke report
(18) the exorcism of an unclean spirit in a synagogue at Capernaum (Mark 1.23–28; Luke 4.33–37).
Matthew and Luke report
(19) the casting out of a demon from a man that was dumb (Matthew adds that he was also blind) (Matthew 12.22; Luke 11.14).
Matthew alone reports
(20) the exorcism of a dumb demoniac (Matthew 9.32–34).
There are four exorcism stories in Mark, five in Matthew, and four in Luke.
The nature signs and wonder stories cover a variety of events and include two narratives in all three gospels:
(21) the wind and the sea obey Jesus (Mark 4.35–41; Matthew 8.18–27; Luke 8.22–25) and
(22) the feeding of the five thousand (Mark 6.30–44; Matthew 14.13–21; Luke 9.10–17).
Mark and Matthew report
(23) Jesus’ walking on water (Mark 6.45–52; Matthew 14.22–33),
(24) the feeding of the four thousand (Mark 8.1–10; Matthew 15.32–39), and
(25) the cursing of the fig tree (Mark 11.12–14, 20–26; Matthew 21.18–22).
Luke alone tells of
(26) the great catch of fish (Luke 5.4–7).
There are five nature signs and wonder stories in Mark, five in Matthew, and three in Luke.
There is only one story of the raising of the dead in the three gospels, that is,
(27) the raising of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5.21–24a, 35–43; Matthew 9.18–19, 23–26; Luke 8.40–42a, 49–56).
Luke alone has the additional account of
(28) the raising of the son of the widow at Nain (Luke 7.11–17).
In addition, there are the general references in the three gospels that tell of multiple healings and exorcisms without specific detail:
(29) Mark 1.32–34, Matthew 8.16–17, Luke 4.40–41 and
(30) Mark 3.7–12, Matthew 12.15–21, Luke 6.17–19.
There are three additional references to such general healings in Mark and Matthew:
(31) Mark 1.39, Matthew 4.23,
(32) Mark 6.5, Matthew 13.58, and
(33) Mark 6.53–56, Matthew 14.34–36.
Matthew and Luke refer to
(34) numerous healings and also to the raising of the dead in the report Jesus sends with the messengers of the Baptist (Matthew 11.5; Luke 7.22).
Matthew has additional general references at
(35) 9.35,
(36) 14.14, and
(37) 15.29–31.
Luke includes such references at
(38) 5.15,
(39) 7.21,
(40) 8.2,
(41) 9.11, and
(42) 13.32.
The disciples also accomplished
(43) healings and exorcisms as reported in Mark 6.7, 16;Matthew 10.1, 8, and Luke 9,1, 6; and again by Luke
(44) for the mission of the seventy (Luke 10.17).
The Absence of Signs and Wonders in the Jerusalem Ministry
It should be noted that all of these references, with the exception of the cursing of the fig tree (Mark 11.12–14, 20–26; Matthew 21.18–22) and the healing of the ear of the servant of the high priest (Luke 22.49–51), occur in the ministry of Jesus prior to his arrival in Jerusalem. The question is certainly in order: Why the absence of signs and wonders for this period of Jesus’ ministry? Since the signs and wonders form such a large portion of his ministry in Galilee and for his journey to Jerusalem and since the gospels report the phenomenal impression these signs and wonders made upon the people, it is strange that Jesus did not use this medium to create a more receptive attitude to himself and for his message in Jerusalem. Perhaps the sign of the raising of Lazarus in John’s Gospel provides the answer for the question, a sign that will be discussed elsewhere in this essay.
The Problem of the Use of the Vernacular “Miracle”
The first problem encountered in our discussion of the signs and wonders is the popular attitude towards and the understanding of this material in our gospels. In our current vocabulary these narratives are most often called “miracle” stories with all the innuendoes and implications that this word carries for popular religion. But the word “miracle” as such is never used in the gospels for the deeds of Jesus. They are referred to as signs, wonders, and mighty works. They are evidences, as in the Old Testament, of the presence and of the activity of God in the world that he has created. The word “miracle” is not appropriate as a reference to or for an understanding of these events and experiences, since it carries overtones and meanings that are improper when applied to the deeds of Jesus. For example, Webster’s Unabridged International Dictionary defines the word as follows: “An event or effect in the physical world beyond or out of the ordinary course of things, deviating from the known laws of nature, or transcending our knowledge of these laws; an extraordinary, anomalous, or abnormal event brought about by superhuman agency as a manifestation of its power, or
