 |
| The Death of Simon Magus according to the Acts of Peter and Paul |
...continued from part three.
8. About the So-Called Miracles of the Devil
"Is the idea that the devil can perform miracles admissible from a theological point of view?"
This was one of the questions that was proposed for discussion at the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment on March 11, 1899. The very possibility of the question in such a formulation and its proposal for public discussion at the aforementioned meeting clearly shows that not all of our theologians adhere to the same and completely definite answer to it. This, indeed, was indicated during the oral discussion of the question. Finally, in the printed answer of one of the members of the Society, Archimandrite Amphilochios, on the one hand, the idea of the possibility of the devil performing miracles is rejected, on the other hand, it is supposedly allowed (provided that the word "miracle" is combined with a broader concept).
Is it really impossible to answer with certainty, precisely and definitively, the question: “Can or cannot the devil perform miracles?” In our opinion, not only is it entirely possible, but from a theological point of view, in this case the very grounds for raising such a question are not entirely clear.
Only God can perform miracles. From a theological point of view, the idea that the devil can perform miracles is certainly unacceptable - this is the only possible answer to the above question. Each dogmatic position is usually confirmed by 1) the teaching of Holy Scripture, 2) the testimonies of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church, and 3) considerations of reason. Let us follow this order.
1. There are passages in the Holy Scriptures that seem to suggest that the devil can perform miracles (Gen. 3:1-5; Ex. 7:11-12; Deut. 13:1-3; Job 1-2; Matt. 4:8 and parallels Mark 1:23-24, 34; Luke 7:21; Matt. 8:28-32 and many others. Matt. 24:24 and parallels Rev. 13:3, 13-14 and others), and others that contain the opposite idea, that is, that miracles can only be performed by the power of God (Ex. 4:1-9, 7:8-10, 16, chapters 12 and others; Ps. 72:18; Matt. 11:3-5, 12:24-28; John 5:36, 10:25, 37-38, etc.; Acts 2:22; Rom. 14:19; 2 Cor. 12:12; 2 Thess. 2:9-12, etc.). But, obviously, Holy Scripture cannot contradict itself, giving different, even contradictory, answers to the same question in different places. What should be done in this case?
The basic hermeneutical rule states that, when interpreting Holy Scripture, it is necessary to take down the so-called "parallel passages" and, according to the reason of those of them where the thought is expressed clearly and definitely, interpret others where the thought is expressed less clearly, without the closest and most precise definition. Is there, now, among the listed passages, such a place where the answer to the above-mentioned question would be given with a precision and certainty that does not allow for reinterpretation? Since it is indisputable that God can perform miracles, the question: “Can the devil perform miracles?” is absolutely unambiguous with the question: “Can anyone besides God perform miracles?” And to such a question in Holy Scripture there is a direct and absolutely definite answer: “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, who alone does wonders,” says the Psalmist (Psalm 71:18). Miracles can be performed only by God and no one else; therefore, the devil cannot perform them by his own power – this is a brief teaching on this issue from Holy Scripture. Further: according to the teaching of Holy Scripture, God Himself creates either directly, such as, for example, the miracle of the confusion of languages (Gen. 11), the miracle of the burning bush (Ex. 3), and all the miracles of Christ; or through the mediation of people: in the Old Testament through the mediation of leaders and prophets, in the New - through the apostles, saints of God and other persons. There is no difference in essence in all these cases, because in them the same almighty power of God always and invariably acts. The idea of Psalm 71, verse 18, that only God can perform miracles, is confirmed by a number of other places in Holy Scripture, where miracles are pointed out as an undoubted and indisputable revelation of the power of God. Jesus Christ Himself repeatedly pointed to miracles as a clear and undoubted testimony of His Divine mission. To the Baptist’s question: Is He the Messiah? The Savior answers through his disciples: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Matthew 11:3–5). In another place He says: “I have a greater testimony than John: for the works which the Father gave Me that I might finish, the same works that I do bear witness of Me, that the Father sent Me” (John 5:36 cf. John 10:32 and others), and even more decisively: “If I do not the works of My Father, do not believe Me, but if I do, and you believe not Me, then believe by My works, that you may understand and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him” (John 10:37–38). In like manner, the Holy Apostles also attribute the miracles they performed to the most convincing evidence of their apostolic dignity and Divine mission. The Apostle Paul writes to the Corinthians: “The signs of an apostle were wrought among you (i.e., the signs of an apostle were manifested before you) in signs and wonders and mighty deeds” (2 Cor. 12:12), which in another place he directly calls the "power of the Spirit of God" (Rom. 15:19). The question arises: what would be the meaning of all these passages of Holy Scripture if, apart from God and His almighty power, someone else could perform real (not merely apparent) miracles by his own power? Obviously, they would lose their meaning and their authenticating value. Thus, that only God can perform miracles, that if any messenger of God performs them, then only by the power of God expressly given to him, this position finds for itself the most solid and clear foundations in Holy Scripture.
From what has been said it becomes clear in itself how one should look at those passages of Holy Scripture which speak of the so-called miracles of the devil. Obviously, by the latter one should understand miracles which are not true and actual, but only imaginary and apparent, which in fact are not miracles. This idea has direct confirmation in Holy Scripture. Here are the most important passages in it which speak of the performance of “miracles” by the power of the devil: Deut. 13:1–3; Matt. 24:24 and parallels 2 Thess. 2–9; Rev. 13:13–14. The first of these passages speaks of “miracles” which false prophets and dreamers can perform for ungodly purposes; the second of “miracles” which false Christs and false prophets are to perform for the purpose of deceiving people before the destruction of Jerusalem; the third and fourth of “miracles” of the Antichrist. The greatest and most striking will be the “miracles” of the Antichrist, for Satan will give him "his power, his throne, and great authority" (Rev. 13:2); and his coming, according to the working of Satan, will be "in all power" (2 Thess. 2:9). In other words: “Satan will spend all his power on him, for it is the end of him also.” And yet – what kind of miracles will these be? Are they true and real? To the great consolation of the entire Christian race, the Holy Apostle Paul gives a deliberately closest and most precise definition of these “miracles” of the Antichrist. According to the Apostle, the coming of the Antichrist will be in “signs and lying wonders, and in general in all deceitfulness of unrighteousness” (2 Thess. 2:9-10). These words of the apostle mean that the "miracles" of the Antichrist will only seem to be miraculous actions, but in reality they will be lies and deception for the purpose of deception. Here, obviously, lies the key to understanding the true and exact meaning of those places in Holy Scripture where the so-called miracles of the devil are discussed without the closest definition of whether only apparent or real miracles should be understood by them.
Thus, all so-called miracles, performed apart from the almighty power of God, by the power of the devil, are in fact miracles, but only seem to be such, are passed off as such, but in reality they are only lies and deception - this is the conclusion that is clearly revealed from a comparison of various passages of Holy Scripture related here.
2. The teaching of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church cannot be different from the teaching of Holy Scripture. This idea, which is in itself, a priori, is fully confirmed by their interpretations of the sacred books that have survived to this day. Thus, Saint Chrysostom, in his interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:9, gives the following words regarding false miracles: “deceptive (apparent), or leading into deception.” Ecumenius explains them in a similar way, writing: “The signs will be false either because he (the Antichrist) will show them ghostly and avert our eyes, or because through them he will lead into lies.” The conjunctions “or...or” obviously have a relation to which of these two, mutually non-exclusive thoughts, according to the understanding of the interpreters, is predominantly expressed by the apostle, and, of course, does not say anything favorable to the assumption of the reality of the “miracles” of the Antichrist. For the first interpreter prefaces his words with a remark about the “miracles” of the Antichrist, that there will be nothing true in them; and the second more closely defines his last words with the explanation that immediately follows them: “He will present things in such a way that he can deceive even believers.” Obviously, neither the one nor the other interpreter connected with their words the idea of the reality of the Antichrist’s performing miracles. The idea that the miracles of the Antichrist will be only apparent is expressed with the greatest clarity and definition by Blessed Theodoret and especially by Saint Cyril of Jerusalem. The first writes: “The miracles will be untrue, and such miracles are performed by deceivers with the dexterity of their hands, because they show as gold what is not gold at all, and do something else, which is soon exposed.” Saint Cyril remarks about the Antichrist: “Being the father of lies, he will deceive the imagination by means of false actions, so that the people will imagine that he sees a dead man resurrected, while he is not resurrected, he will see the lame walking and the blind seeing, while there was no healing.” Saint Ephraim the Syrian reasons in a similar way. Thus, the idea of the possibility of performing miracles by the power of the devil not only does not find support in the interpretations of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church, but, on the contrary, one might say, is directly rejected by them.
3. The impossibility of the devil performing miracles is revealed with no less clarity from considerations of reason. From the point of view of our concepts of miracles, of the limited nature of the evil spirit as a being, although higher than man, but still created, based, finally, on our concepts of God's attitude to the manifestations of evil in the world, it is completely inconceivable to admit any possibility of the devil performing miracles.
Indeed, what are miracles? The Catechism of Metropolitan Philaret, which has the significance of a symbolic book of our Church, directly and definitively answers this question: "Deeds that are above the ordinary order of things and cannot be done by any force or art, but only with the special help of God, for example: to resurrect the dead." The answer not only gives a positive definition of the concept of a miracle, but eliminates, denies the very possibility of applying this name to anything other than the extraordinary actions of God in the world. How then to understand the raison d'etre of the question raised and discussed? Those who think differently usually make the reservation: "If we adhere to a broader concept of a miracle..." and so on. Deriving the word "miracle" from "alien", - or in addition to this, they want to give such a definition of the concept of "miracle" that it is understood as something alien to man in general, i.e., beyond man's powers and incomprehensible to him. Is it possible to "expand" the concept of a miracle in this way? Obviously no; such a definition is untenable, first of all, from a logical point of view, because it concerns not the essence of the defined concept, but only one of its aspects - the relationship to man. And for what purpose do they resort to such a definition of the concept of a miracle? To decide the question of whether this concept is applicable to the actions of the devil. Should we then be surprised that the "ad hoc" definition turns out to be decidedly untenable and leads to absolutely nothing? Can we really call a miracle everything that exceeds our powers? “To add one cubit to one’s stature” – this is beyond our powers (Matthew 6:27), but do we consider the growth of the human body that constantly occurs before our eyes a miracle? No, we even directly call it natural. And how many things do we see around us that exceed our powers, which, however, no one has ever called a miracle? We also do not call a miracle everything that is incomprehensible to us. We do not comprehend the essence of such phenomena of our spiritual life as human thought, self-consciousness, etc. The relationship of the spiritual principle to the material in ourselves, the interaction of force and matter in external nature, the origin of life in a child during the period of intrauterine life, etc. – all these are deep mysteries that our mind does not comprehend and will not comprehend. However, can all this be called miracles? No, we consider them to be phenomena of a natural nature and we subsume them not under the concept of a miracle, but under something completely different – the laws of nature.
If the definition of the concept of a miracle can be expressed in a more general form, it is only in this way: a miracle is a supernatural event or action. It is not difficult to show that from the point of view of this definition, the idea that the devil can work miracles is completely inadmissible. Indeed, what idea is contained in this definition? That a miracle is a conquest, an excess (for a given place and time) of the laws of nature and their usual action, established by God during the creation of the world. Who now, by the action of his will, can conquer, exceed, as if even for a time abolish the order in the life of the world established by the Creator Himself? Can any created being do this, even the highest among others? Obviously, no; and to allow this would mean, at least for a time, placing the creature above the Creator. All the more so should such a conclusion be in relation to the evil spirit.
a) Those who hold a different view of the question under discussion sometimes think to help themselves by the idea that the devil can supposedly perform miracles by God's permission. But after all that has been said, the complete inconsistency of this idea is obvious. By God's permission is meant that God grants, does not prevent, any rational being from using in one way or another (incorrectly) his natural powers and abilities, i.e. those already given in his nature. If the devil, as a created being, cannot, as has been shown, perform supernatural actions in the area of the God-established world order, then, consequently, the concept of God's permission is absolutely inapplicable here.
b) From the formal side, it would be more like the truth to say that God sometimes grants the devil for a time the power to perform miracles (in which sense such passages of Holy Scripture as Gen. 3:1–5; Deut. 3:1–3; Matt. 24:24, etc. are sometimes understood). But this is only from the formal side. In essence, such an idea would contain an obvious inconsistency. Since the devil always strives only for evil, it would follow that God Himself sometimes determines His miraculous power to serve, at least in the most immediate way, evil. In order not to destroy the freedom of rational and moral beings, God can permit the evil that arises from their bad use of freedom. But He cannot increase this evil by granting to the evil spirit, even for a time, powers that exceed his created nature. In this case, there would be something more on the part of God than a simple permission of evil.
Thus, the considerations of reason inevitably lead us to the same conclusion that follows from the teachings of Holy Scripture and the interpretations of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church. Is it surprising after this that in all our dogmatics and in all systems of theology in general, such a view is taken of miracles, according to which they can be performed only by the power of God, while the miracles of the devil are always spoken of only as false, or imaginary, only seeming miracles?
In conclusion, let us note that all those places in Holy Scripture where miracles performed by the devil and his power are spoken of without a closer definition, must be understood and interpreted as follows: they speak of actions that only seem miraculous, but in fact are performed by natural, only higher and secret forces of spiritual and material nature. Let us limit ourselves here to only the following indication regarding the limits of such explanations. The devil, as a being of a higher order, in comparison with us, not bound by a material principle, is given to know and do many things that are inaccessible to us in either one or the other respect. Hence, many of his actions, whether in the sphere of the human soul (demon possession), or in external nature (the serpent in Paradise, the Magi of Egypt, the story of Job, etc.), although they do not contain anything supernatural, but, as accomplished by means of higher powers of spiritual and material nature that are secret to us, can be, through various kinds of analogies with what we have in experience, only partially brought closer to our understanding. But we, forgetting this, sometimes want to comprehend this kind of action of the devil with such clarity, which our knowledge often does not have regarding ourselves and our own relations to the external world. Hence the unfortunate phenomenon that, when the latter proves beyond our strength, we begin to be inclined to mix up certain and firmly established concepts and are even ready to ascribe to our primordial enemy that which belongs only to God.
PART FIVE
8. About the So-Called Miracles of the Devil
"Is the idea that the devil can perform miracles admissible from a theological point of view?"
This was one of the questions that was proposed for discussion at the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment on March 11, 1899. The very possibility of the question in such a formulation and its proposal for public discussion at the aforementioned meeting clearly shows that not all of our theologians adhere to the same and completely definite answer to it. This, indeed, was indicated during the oral discussion of the question. Finally, in the printed answer of one of the members of the Society, Archimandrite Amphilochios, on the one hand, the idea of the possibility of the devil performing miracles is rejected, on the other hand, it is supposedly allowed (provided that the word "miracle" is combined with a broader concept).
Is it really impossible to answer with certainty, precisely and definitively, the question: “Can or cannot the devil perform miracles?” In our opinion, not only is it entirely possible, but from a theological point of view, in this case the very grounds for raising such a question are not entirely clear.
Only God can perform miracles. From a theological point of view, the idea that the devil can perform miracles is certainly unacceptable - this is the only possible answer to the above question. Each dogmatic position is usually confirmed by 1) the teaching of Holy Scripture, 2) the testimonies of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church, and 3) considerations of reason. Let us follow this order.
1. There are passages in the Holy Scriptures that seem to suggest that the devil can perform miracles (Gen. 3:1-5; Ex. 7:11-12; Deut. 13:1-3; Job 1-2; Matt. 4:8 and parallels Mark 1:23-24, 34; Luke 7:21; Matt. 8:28-32 and many others. Matt. 24:24 and parallels Rev. 13:3, 13-14 and others), and others that contain the opposite idea, that is, that miracles can only be performed by the power of God (Ex. 4:1-9, 7:8-10, 16, chapters 12 and others; Ps. 72:18; Matt. 11:3-5, 12:24-28; John 5:36, 10:25, 37-38, etc.; Acts 2:22; Rom. 14:19; 2 Cor. 12:12; 2 Thess. 2:9-12, etc.). But, obviously, Holy Scripture cannot contradict itself, giving different, even contradictory, answers to the same question in different places. What should be done in this case?
The basic hermeneutical rule states that, when interpreting Holy Scripture, it is necessary to take down the so-called "parallel passages" and, according to the reason of those of them where the thought is expressed clearly and definitely, interpret others where the thought is expressed less clearly, without the closest and most precise definition. Is there, now, among the listed passages, such a place where the answer to the above-mentioned question would be given with a precision and certainty that does not allow for reinterpretation? Since it is indisputable that God can perform miracles, the question: “Can the devil perform miracles?” is absolutely unambiguous with the question: “Can anyone besides God perform miracles?” And to such a question in Holy Scripture there is a direct and absolutely definite answer: “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, who alone does wonders,” says the Psalmist (Psalm 71:18). Miracles can be performed only by God and no one else; therefore, the devil cannot perform them by his own power – this is a brief teaching on this issue from Holy Scripture. Further: according to the teaching of Holy Scripture, God Himself creates either directly, such as, for example, the miracle of the confusion of languages (Gen. 11), the miracle of the burning bush (Ex. 3), and all the miracles of Christ; or through the mediation of people: in the Old Testament through the mediation of leaders and prophets, in the New - through the apostles, saints of God and other persons. There is no difference in essence in all these cases, because in them the same almighty power of God always and invariably acts. The idea of Psalm 71, verse 18, that only God can perform miracles, is confirmed by a number of other places in Holy Scripture, where miracles are pointed out as an undoubted and indisputable revelation of the power of God. Jesus Christ Himself repeatedly pointed to miracles as a clear and undoubted testimony of His Divine mission. To the Baptist’s question: Is He the Messiah? The Savior answers through his disciples: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Matthew 11:3–5). In another place He says: “I have a greater testimony than John: for the works which the Father gave Me that I might finish, the same works that I do bear witness of Me, that the Father sent Me” (John 5:36 cf. John 10:32 and others), and even more decisively: “If I do not the works of My Father, do not believe Me, but if I do, and you believe not Me, then believe by My works, that you may understand and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him” (John 10:37–38). In like manner, the Holy Apostles also attribute the miracles they performed to the most convincing evidence of their apostolic dignity and Divine mission. The Apostle Paul writes to the Corinthians: “The signs of an apostle were wrought among you (i.e., the signs of an apostle were manifested before you) in signs and wonders and mighty deeds” (2 Cor. 12:12), which in another place he directly calls the "power of the Spirit of God" (Rom. 15:19). The question arises: what would be the meaning of all these passages of Holy Scripture if, apart from God and His almighty power, someone else could perform real (not merely apparent) miracles by his own power? Obviously, they would lose their meaning and their authenticating value. Thus, that only God can perform miracles, that if any messenger of God performs them, then only by the power of God expressly given to him, this position finds for itself the most solid and clear foundations in Holy Scripture.
From what has been said it becomes clear in itself how one should look at those passages of Holy Scripture which speak of the so-called miracles of the devil. Obviously, by the latter one should understand miracles which are not true and actual, but only imaginary and apparent, which in fact are not miracles. This idea has direct confirmation in Holy Scripture. Here are the most important passages in it which speak of the performance of “miracles” by the power of the devil: Deut. 13:1–3; Matt. 24:24 and parallels 2 Thess. 2–9; Rev. 13:13–14. The first of these passages speaks of “miracles” which false prophets and dreamers can perform for ungodly purposes; the second of “miracles” which false Christs and false prophets are to perform for the purpose of deceiving people before the destruction of Jerusalem; the third and fourth of “miracles” of the Antichrist. The greatest and most striking will be the “miracles” of the Antichrist, for Satan will give him "his power, his throne, and great authority" (Rev. 13:2); and his coming, according to the working of Satan, will be "in all power" (2 Thess. 2:9). In other words: “Satan will spend all his power on him, for it is the end of him also.” And yet – what kind of miracles will these be? Are they true and real? To the great consolation of the entire Christian race, the Holy Apostle Paul gives a deliberately closest and most precise definition of these “miracles” of the Antichrist. According to the Apostle, the coming of the Antichrist will be in “signs and lying wonders, and in general in all deceitfulness of unrighteousness” (2 Thess. 2:9-10). These words of the apostle mean that the "miracles" of the Antichrist will only seem to be miraculous actions, but in reality they will be lies and deception for the purpose of deception. Here, obviously, lies the key to understanding the true and exact meaning of those places in Holy Scripture where the so-called miracles of the devil are discussed without the closest definition of whether only apparent or real miracles should be understood by them.
Thus, all so-called miracles, performed apart from the almighty power of God, by the power of the devil, are in fact miracles, but only seem to be such, are passed off as such, but in reality they are only lies and deception - this is the conclusion that is clearly revealed from a comparison of various passages of Holy Scripture related here.
2. The teaching of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church cannot be different from the teaching of Holy Scripture. This idea, which is in itself, a priori, is fully confirmed by their interpretations of the sacred books that have survived to this day. Thus, Saint Chrysostom, in his interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:9, gives the following words regarding false miracles: “deceptive (apparent), or leading into deception.” Ecumenius explains them in a similar way, writing: “The signs will be false either because he (the Antichrist) will show them ghostly and avert our eyes, or because through them he will lead into lies.” The conjunctions “or...or” obviously have a relation to which of these two, mutually non-exclusive thoughts, according to the understanding of the interpreters, is predominantly expressed by the apostle, and, of course, does not say anything favorable to the assumption of the reality of the “miracles” of the Antichrist. For the first interpreter prefaces his words with a remark about the “miracles” of the Antichrist, that there will be nothing true in them; and the second more closely defines his last words with the explanation that immediately follows them: “He will present things in such a way that he can deceive even believers.” Obviously, neither the one nor the other interpreter connected with their words the idea of the reality of the Antichrist’s performing miracles. The idea that the miracles of the Antichrist will be only apparent is expressed with the greatest clarity and definition by Blessed Theodoret and especially by Saint Cyril of Jerusalem. The first writes: “The miracles will be untrue, and such miracles are performed by deceivers with the dexterity of their hands, because they show as gold what is not gold at all, and do something else, which is soon exposed.” Saint Cyril remarks about the Antichrist: “Being the father of lies, he will deceive the imagination by means of false actions, so that the people will imagine that he sees a dead man resurrected, while he is not resurrected, he will see the lame walking and the blind seeing, while there was no healing.” Saint Ephraim the Syrian reasons in a similar way. Thus, the idea of the possibility of performing miracles by the power of the devil not only does not find support in the interpretations of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church, but, on the contrary, one might say, is directly rejected by them.
3. The impossibility of the devil performing miracles is revealed with no less clarity from considerations of reason. From the point of view of our concepts of miracles, of the limited nature of the evil spirit as a being, although higher than man, but still created, based, finally, on our concepts of God's attitude to the manifestations of evil in the world, it is completely inconceivable to admit any possibility of the devil performing miracles.
Indeed, what are miracles? The Catechism of Metropolitan Philaret, which has the significance of a symbolic book of our Church, directly and definitively answers this question: "Deeds that are above the ordinary order of things and cannot be done by any force or art, but only with the special help of God, for example: to resurrect the dead." The answer not only gives a positive definition of the concept of a miracle, but eliminates, denies the very possibility of applying this name to anything other than the extraordinary actions of God in the world. How then to understand the raison d'etre of the question raised and discussed? Those who think differently usually make the reservation: "If we adhere to a broader concept of a miracle..." and so on. Deriving the word "miracle" from "alien", - or in addition to this, they want to give such a definition of the concept of "miracle" that it is understood as something alien to man in general, i.e., beyond man's powers and incomprehensible to him. Is it possible to "expand" the concept of a miracle in this way? Obviously no; such a definition is untenable, first of all, from a logical point of view, because it concerns not the essence of the defined concept, but only one of its aspects - the relationship to man. And for what purpose do they resort to such a definition of the concept of a miracle? To decide the question of whether this concept is applicable to the actions of the devil. Should we then be surprised that the "ad hoc" definition turns out to be decidedly untenable and leads to absolutely nothing? Can we really call a miracle everything that exceeds our powers? “To add one cubit to one’s stature” – this is beyond our powers (Matthew 6:27), but do we consider the growth of the human body that constantly occurs before our eyes a miracle? No, we even directly call it natural. And how many things do we see around us that exceed our powers, which, however, no one has ever called a miracle? We also do not call a miracle everything that is incomprehensible to us. We do not comprehend the essence of such phenomena of our spiritual life as human thought, self-consciousness, etc. The relationship of the spiritual principle to the material in ourselves, the interaction of force and matter in external nature, the origin of life in a child during the period of intrauterine life, etc. – all these are deep mysteries that our mind does not comprehend and will not comprehend. However, can all this be called miracles? No, we consider them to be phenomena of a natural nature and we subsume them not under the concept of a miracle, but under something completely different – the laws of nature.
If the definition of the concept of a miracle can be expressed in a more general form, it is only in this way: a miracle is a supernatural event or action. It is not difficult to show that from the point of view of this definition, the idea that the devil can work miracles is completely inadmissible. Indeed, what idea is contained in this definition? That a miracle is a conquest, an excess (for a given place and time) of the laws of nature and their usual action, established by God during the creation of the world. Who now, by the action of his will, can conquer, exceed, as if even for a time abolish the order in the life of the world established by the Creator Himself? Can any created being do this, even the highest among others? Obviously, no; and to allow this would mean, at least for a time, placing the creature above the Creator. All the more so should such a conclusion be in relation to the evil spirit.
a) Those who hold a different view of the question under discussion sometimes think to help themselves by the idea that the devil can supposedly perform miracles by God's permission. But after all that has been said, the complete inconsistency of this idea is obvious. By God's permission is meant that God grants, does not prevent, any rational being from using in one way or another (incorrectly) his natural powers and abilities, i.e. those already given in his nature. If the devil, as a created being, cannot, as has been shown, perform supernatural actions in the area of the God-established world order, then, consequently, the concept of God's permission is absolutely inapplicable here.
b) From the formal side, it would be more like the truth to say that God sometimes grants the devil for a time the power to perform miracles (in which sense such passages of Holy Scripture as Gen. 3:1–5; Deut. 3:1–3; Matt. 24:24, etc. are sometimes understood). But this is only from the formal side. In essence, such an idea would contain an obvious inconsistency. Since the devil always strives only for evil, it would follow that God Himself sometimes determines His miraculous power to serve, at least in the most immediate way, evil. In order not to destroy the freedom of rational and moral beings, God can permit the evil that arises from their bad use of freedom. But He cannot increase this evil by granting to the evil spirit, even for a time, powers that exceed his created nature. In this case, there would be something more on the part of God than a simple permission of evil.
Thus, the considerations of reason inevitably lead us to the same conclusion that follows from the teachings of Holy Scripture and the interpretations of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church. Is it surprising after this that in all our dogmatics and in all systems of theology in general, such a view is taken of miracles, according to which they can be performed only by the power of God, while the miracles of the devil are always spoken of only as false, or imaginary, only seeming miracles?
In conclusion, let us note that all those places in Holy Scripture where miracles performed by the devil and his power are spoken of without a closer definition, must be understood and interpreted as follows: they speak of actions that only seem miraculous, but in fact are performed by natural, only higher and secret forces of spiritual and material nature. Let us limit ourselves here to only the following indication regarding the limits of such explanations. The devil, as a being of a higher order, in comparison with us, not bound by a material principle, is given to know and do many things that are inaccessible to us in either one or the other respect. Hence, many of his actions, whether in the sphere of the human soul (demon possession), or in external nature (the serpent in Paradise, the Magi of Egypt, the story of Job, etc.), although they do not contain anything supernatural, but, as accomplished by means of higher powers of spiritual and material nature that are secret to us, can be, through various kinds of analogies with what we have in experience, only partially brought closer to our understanding. But we, forgetting this, sometimes want to comprehend this kind of action of the devil with such clarity, which our knowledge often does not have regarding ourselves and our own relations to the external world. Hence the unfortunate phenomenon that, when the latter proves beyond our strength, we begin to be inclined to mix up certain and firmly established concepts and are even ready to ascribe to our primordial enemy that which belongs only to God.
PART FIVE
