How does 2 Peter 2:16 challenge the belief in miracles? Text Of 2 Peter 2:16 “But he was rebuked for his transgression by a donkey—an animal without speech—who spoke with a human voice and restrained the prophet’s madness.” Immediate Context Peter is exposing false teachers (2 Peter 2:1–22). By invoking Balaam’s talking donkey (Numbers 22:21–35), he underscores God’s ability to interrupt deception and hold rebels accountable. The miracle functions as a historical example, not a fable; its veracity undergirds Peter’s warning. Why Some Claim The Verse “Challenges” Miracles 1. Modern naturalism deems animal speech impossible. 2. Critics assert that if Scripture affirms an “absurdity,” its broader miracle claims—including Christ’s resurrection—are suspect. 3. The donkey episode is cited as evidence that biblical writers were pre-scientific and therefore unreliable. Peter’S Intent: Miracle As Evidence, Not Embarrassment Peter does not apologize for the donkey’s speech; he assumes it. His argument hinges on its historicity: if the event were fiction, the warning loses force. Far from challenging belief in miracles, the verse presupposes the living God’s freedom to override natural processes. Historical And Archaeological Corroboration • Deir ʿAlla Inscription (Jordan, c. 840–760 BC) names “Balʿam son of Beʿor,” validating Balaam as a real seer outside the Bible (H. J. Franken & M. K. Ibrahim, 1976 report). • Josephus, Antiquities 4.6.2, references Balaam, confirming Jewish memory of the account. • Qumran fragment 4Q376 retells Balaam material, showing Second-Temple acceptance. These data establish the episode’s ancient, non-legendary pedigree. Philosophical Possibility Of Miracles 1. If God exists (cosmological, teleological, moral arguments), He can act in the world. 2. A miracle is not a violation of natural law but a supersession by the law-giver. 3. Hume’s objection fails when independent, multiple attestation exists (e.g., Balaam inscription, convergent manuscript evidence, eyewitness claim structure in Numbers). Scientific Considerations • Intelligent Design highlights information causation beyond material processes (cf. origin of genetic code; Meyer, Signature in the Cell). If God encoded language in DNA, imparting transient speech capability to a donkey is trivially easy. • Modern documented glossolalic phenomena and medically attested instantaneous healings (e.g., Baylor University’s Global Medical Research Institute, 2019 meta-analysis) show that speech/anatomical norms can be momentarily overridden. The Meaning Of The Donkey’S Speech • The miracle is judicial: God employs the “mute” to expose the “mad” prophet (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:27). • The episode underlines divine sovereignty; nature itself is God’s instrument. • It anticipates Christ’s triumphal entry: “If they keep silent, the stones will cry out” (Luke 19:40). Implications For The Resurrection • Peter, an eyewitness of the risen Christ (2 Peter 1:16), uses Balaam to reinforce his credibility: the God who made a donkey speak also raised Jesus. • Minimal-facts resurrection case (Habermas): empty tomb, post-mortem appearances, disciples’ transformation—all multiply attested—establish a greater miracle than donkey speech. Rejecting minor miracles while accepting the resurrection would be inconsistent; rejecting both contradicts historical data. Conclusion 2 Peter 2:16 does not undermine belief in miracles; it reinforces it. By rooting his polemic in a well-attested Old Testament miracle, Peter asserts that God’s historical interventions are real, documented, and purposeful. The verse’s authenticity is supported by external archaeology, stable manuscript evidence, coherent philosophical theism, and the broader miracle of Christ’s resurrection. Consequently, the donkey’s voice calls modern skeptics to heed God’s Word before, like Balaam, they find themselves irrationally resisting evident truth. |
    |