Luke 16: Why Miracles Alone Don't Convince

Introduction

If someone came back from the dead to testify, would your unbelieving loved ones finally believe? Many people think so. Dr. John Whitcomb says no, and he rests his case on Jesus himself.

This text is the second part of his article "Apologetics and the Gospel," read on the "Sword and Trowel" podcast of the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London. It is not a sermon preached from a pulpit, but an article read aloud. It opens with a verse: “Now the natural man doesn’t receive the things of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to him, and he can’t know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14).

Having laid the groundwork in the first part, John Whitcomb now examines the biblical texts people use to justify evangelism built on evidence. He walks through the Areopagus in Athens, the miracles of Jesus in John's Gospel, and then the story of the rich man and Lazarus. His conclusion is clear: evidence has its place, but only God's Word, applied by the Holy Spirit, brings faith to birth.

Outline of the Message

1. Paul at the Areopagus: A Model of Communication

Paul's speech to the Athenians (Acts 17:16-34) is often presented as proof that we should bet on apologetics. Paul does not quote Scripture there, and he even cites, with approval, two Greek poets, Epimenides the Cretan and Aratus (verse 28).
Before this speech, Paul had already been proclaiming Jesus and the resurrection, day after day, in the public square of Athens. So the Areopagus speech was not given "in a vacuum": these thinkers wanted to know more about this new teaching.
Far from proving that God exists, Paul declares with authority a God who is Creator and Lord of the world, close to people. He denounces the ignorance of idolatry and announces that God will judge all people through the man he raised from the dead, Jesus, and that he commands everyone, everywhere, to repent.
None of these claims could be demonstrated scientifically, historically or logically, even over several years. The only common ground between Paul and his listeners was the image of God that they all bore by creation, which matters far more for evangelism than Greek literature and philosophy.
Paul does not quote the Old Testament, which his listeners did not know, yet his message is biblical from start to finish. What God uses to draw people to himself is the message of his Word, not necessarily the exact Hebrew or Greek words.
The poets quoted (Epimenides is also quoted in Titus 1:12) serve to illustrate points of agreement with revealed truth. Paul does what he had done at Lystra (Acts 14): he kindly meets those who do not know God's law where they are. This, says Whitcomb, is a model of effective Christian communication, not a model of semi-rationalist apologetics.

2. Athens Was Not a Failure

Some authors who oppose rationalism think, on the contrary, that Paul made a mistake in Athens: there was supposedly no great harvest, and Paul supposedly admitted it when he wrote to the Corinthians that he had determined to know nothing among them except Jesus Christ, and him crucified (1 Corinthians 2:2).
Whitcomb finds this reading inadequate. With Ned B. Stonehouse ("Paul Before the Areopagus"), he points out that Luke gives representative examples of apostolic preaching. It would be surprising if he recorded one to show how not to preach. Luke presents Paul instead as a speaker who knows how to adapt his message to a difficult situation.
Above all, the Spirit honored this message: “But certain men joined with him and believed, among whom also was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them” (Acts 17:34). As everywhere the gospel is sown, some mock, others put it off, and others believe.
Another text often invoked: “test the spirits, whether they are of God” (1 John 4:1). From it people draw the idea that every religion must pass a test of facts, coherence and ethics before being adopted. But this verse is addressed to Christians, to the “beloved,” and the standard of measurement is Scripture.
Whitcomb mentions one consequence of semi-rationalism: Clark Pinnock's suggestion, in an article in Eternity magazine in 1976, that God would identify, among the pagans, those who sincerely seek the good and offer them salvation after death.

3. Two Levels of Evidence

Whitcomb distinguishes two levels of evidence that God has chosen to use toward the unregenerate mind.
The higher level is the miraculous signs: God confronts the human mind directly with himself and with his Word. These miracles were so powerful that no one could deny them. Yet they are rare in the Bible, abundant mainly under Moses, Elijah, Elisha and even more in the ministry of the Lord. Whitcomb is convinced that they do not happen today.
The lower level, partly blurred, is circumstantial evidence: conversion stories, answered prayers, fulfilled prophecies, archaeological discoveries, philosophical arguments for the existence of God, arguments for the supernatural origin of the Bible, historical arguments for the bodily resurrection of Christ.
This evidence is convincing to a certain extent, but it is not miraculous signs. It is therefore incomparably weaker for the unregenerate mind. Here the limit of argument as a tool for evangelism appears.

4. Even Miracles Did Not Change Hearts

The most astonishing fact, according to Whitcomb, is that even genuine miracles did not, by themselves, turn hearts from sin to God.
In Jerusalem, at the Passover: “Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in his name, observing his signs which he did. But Jesus didn’t entrust himself to them, because he knew everyone” (John 2:23-24). On one side, many put their trust in Christ; on the other, Christ did not entrust himself to them. Their faith, born of miracles, remained far from saving faith.
The conversation with Nicodemus confirms it: what this teacher of Israel needed was the new birth. Without it, he would not see the kingdom of God, with or without signs.
John 6 goes further. Thousands of people follow Jesus, fascinated by his miracles. The feeding of the crowd removes the last doubts: “This is truly the prophet who comes into the world” (John 6:14).
The Lord, for his part, does not regard them as true believers: “you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled” (John 6:26). “But I told you that you have seen me, and yet you don’t believe” (John 6:36). “At this, many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him” (John 6:66).

5. The Rich Man and Lazarus: “They Have Moses and the Prophets”

The most striking account may be that of the rich man in Hades (Luke 16:19-31). Seeing that his situation is hopeless, he begs Abraham to send Lazarus to his five brothers, who have not believed the Word of God and are headed for the same fate.
The plan, Whitcomb admits, is impressive. The brothers had probably seen that wretched beggar at their rich brother's gate, and they knew he was dead. He imagines the scene: there is a knock, a brother opens the door and finds, stunned, the former beggar. "I am Lazarus. I have come back from the dead. I have seen your late brother in torment. He desperately wants to warn you to turn from sin and believe in God before it is eternally too late."
Would such a confrontation, an irrefutable miraculous sign, have changed the hearts of the five brothers? Many contemporary apologists seem to think so. Abraham does not: “They have Moses and the prophets. Let them listen to them” (Luke 16:29).
The rich man's answer shows why the gates of heaven are closed to him forever. It is not that he did not care about his brothers. It is that he had no respect for the Word of his God: “No, father Abraham, but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent” (Luke 16:30).
Whitcomb puts words in the rich man's mouth: Moses and the prophets mean nothing to his brothers, the family demands logical, objective, empirical demonstrations before any commitment, and old religious documents have never impressed them. Seeing a man come back from the dead would be something else.
With irony, he then imagines the answer Abraham should have given to be well received in semi-rationalist circles: acknowledge that the family rejects Scripture, judge it unfair to ask them to believe on the basis of the testimony Scripture bears to itself, and send Lazarus as quickly as possible for an "empirical" encounter.

6. Signs Draw Attention, the Word Saves

In contrast to the complicated philosophies in vogue in apologetics, and even to the miraculous signs of Jesus' day, the Lord stresses, through Abraham's mouth, the absolute priority of God's Word. It is through the Word that the Holy Spirit has chosen to carry out his work of illumination.
This truth explains the unbelief of Judas Iscariot in the face of overwhelming evidence. It also explains the paradox of John 12:9-19: because of the raised Lazarus, many Jews believe in Jesus, while the chief priests decide to put Lazarus to death as well. The same sign produces two opposite reactions, depending on the response given to the Word that accompanies it.
Miraculous signs were therefore never meant to convert, but to draw attention to the divine message, which alone can save (see Matthew 9:6 and Acts 14:8-18). When that message was believed, salvation came.
For most of Israel's leaders and for millions of sign-seekers, before and since, what they saw and heard did them no good: “the word they heard didn’t profit them, because it wasn’t mixed with faith by those who heard” (Hebrews 4:2).

7. The True Value of Christian Evidences, and of Love

Be careful, Whitcomb warns: used as a substitute for the gospel or as an indispensable preparation, evidence can become a satanic obstacle in the Holy Spirit's path to the heart. Nowhere does Scripture indicate that the Spirit uses any instrument other than the Word to convict and convert (Isaiah 55:11, Romans 10:8-17, Hebrews 4:12-13).
Used well, however, evidence has great value for the believer: a certain intellectual satisfaction, a deeper admiration for the wonders of God's universe, and useful material for studying the Bible.
For the unbeliever, it can awaken interest and hold attention, somewhat like the signs in the days of the Gospels and Acts, if it carefully accompanies a genuine witness to the gospel. But it can neither create nor sustain faith. Otherwise the greatest archaeologists of Palestine would have been giants of faith, which is rarely the case. “So faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17).
There are other means, available to the ordinary Christian who is not a historian, archaeologist, philosopher or scientist. The image of God in man includes the need for friendship and love. A Christian couple who may not have read any of the latest works on Christian evidences can strongly attract an unbelieving neighbor by showing sincere love. Is that not also a form of Christian evidence, perhaps a more effective one? Whitcomb sees in it an echo of the Lord's promise: “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).
But love never replaces the proclamation of salvation. It is important to speak to people with love; it is infinitely more important to tell them the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). In the same way, if the unbeliever receives only evidence from outside the Bible, however clearly presented, he remains in darkness.
Whitcomb's conclusion: apologetic argument is only one of the means God gives us to attract and hold attention while the gospel is proclaimed. Love and mercy attract everyone, but the gospel message that accompanies them is the Spirit's exclusive instrument for convicting of sin, righteousness and judgment (see John 16:8).
Finally, he returns to the Lord's word to Thomas (John 20:29) to sum up the true apologetic of the church after the apostles: blessed are those who have seen no miraculous sign, not even a providential sign, as a Christian evidence or, better still, an act of love and mercy, and who have nevertheless believed the message of the gospel, responding to the work of the Spirit who convicts and enlightens through the living Word of God, presented by his faithful servants.

Key Takeaways

At the Areopagus, Paul does not prove God by reason: he proclaims him with authority, and his message remains entirely biblical.
Even Jesus' miracles did not, by themselves, change hearts: many saw and did not believe.
"They have Moses and the prophets": whoever rejects Scripture will not be convinced, even by someone raised from the dead.
Christian evidences can awaken interest and strengthen the believer, but faith comes by hearing, through the word of Christ.
Love draws your neighbor's attention, but it never replaces proclaiming the gospel, spoken in love.

Personal Application

For an unbelieving loved one, are you waiting for a decisive argument or a spectacular sign rather than for the work of God's Word?
What place do you give Scripture when you talk about your faith: one support among others, or the heart of your witness?
Like Paul in Athens, how can you reach those who do not know the Bible without changing the message?
Which neighbor or coworker could see a concrete act of love from you this week, and to whom could you then speak the truth in love?
Does your own faith rest on evidence or on what God says in his Word?

Verses Cited

Frequently Asked Questions

Why doesn't Paul quote Scripture before the Areopagus?

His Greek audience did not know the Old Testament. For John Whitcomb, Paul nonetheless remains entirely biblical: he proclaims the Creator God, the judgment through the man who was raised from the dead, and the call to repentance. By quoting two Greek poets, he illustrates points of agreement with revealed truth, without trying to prove it by human reason.

What does "They have Moses and the prophets" mean in Luke 16?

The rich man asks that someone raised from the dead go and warn his five brothers. Abraham refuses and points to Scripture. For John Whitcomb, the Lord thus stresses the absolute priority of God's Word, through which the Holy Spirit has chosen to enlighten hearts. The rich man's problem was not a lack of love for his brothers, but a lack of respect for the Word of his God.

What are Christian evidences for if they do not convert?

They strengthen the believer and can awaken the unbeliever's interest, provided they accompany the witness of the gospel without replacing it. They neither create nor sustain faith: faith comes by hearing (Romans 10:17). Sincere love for your neighbor can also attract his attention, perhaps more effectively than a learned argument.