WHEN MIRACLE STORIES COLLAPSE UNDER SCRUTINY (PART II)

“When Four Days Mysteriously Became Seven”

By Akin Ojumu

In this installment of the commentary series, we will examine a crucial distinction. The difference between believing in an omnipotent God and believing every miracle story told from a Church platform.

That distinction lies at the heart of the follow-up question posed by Sopater, son of Pyrrhus from Berea:

“Could it be true, since God works in mysterious ways?”

Let us begin there.

First, contrary to popular assumption, there is no verse in the Bible that says:

“God works in mysterious ways.”

That familiar expression is not a quotation from Scripture. It comes from the eighteenth-century English poet and hymn writer William Cowper, from his hymn God Moves in a Mysterious Way.

Cowper wrote:

“God moves in a mysterious way. His wonders to perform.”

The sentiment may reflect a legitimate biblical truth—that God’s providence, wisdom, and purposes often transcend human understanding. Passages such as Isaiah 55:8–9, Job 5:9, and Romans 11:33 make that abundantly clear. But the phrase itself is not Scripture.

And even if we grant the underlying truth, it does not follow that every extraordinary claim made from a pulpit must therefore be accepted as credible.

Believing that God can do anything consistent with His nature is one thing. Believing that every preacher who says God did something extraordinary is telling the truth is something entirely different.

The omnipotence of God is not a blank check for human claims.

More importantly, appealing to the mysterious ways of God does not relieve Christians of their obligation to exercise discernment.

With respect to this alleged miracle where Paul Enenche, with eyes red and microphone in hand, remotely resurrected the young man who died after drinking cold water to break a seven-day fast, the question has never been whether God can raise the dead.

Of course He can. God is omnipotent. The Creator of the universe does not require permission from me, Paul Enenche, or anyone else to restore a dead person to life.

The question is not, “Can God raise the dead?” The question is, “Did this particular person actually die and subsequently return to life as claimed?”

Those are two entirely different questions. Confusing them is one of the favorite escape routes of people who want sensational miracle claims to be accepted without evidence.

The moment you ask for documentation, someone responds, “Are you saying God cannot do it?”

No. That is not what was asked. Nobody is putting God on trial. The claim is on trial.

And when a human being publicly claims that another human being died and was miraculously raised from the dead, Christians are not obligated to shut down their minds, suspend all critical inquiry, and shout “Amen.”

Furthermore, whenever God chooses to use a human instrument in the performance of a miracle, the glory belongs to God and God alone.

Yet the manner in which this testimony was presented seemed calculated to magnify Paul Enenche—to portray him as the extraordinary “man of God” whose spiritual power reached into the realm of death and summoned a dead man back to life.

That is precisely why the claim deserves careful scrutiny.

As I said in my original comment, the story as told is also biologically and physiologically questionable. Drinking cold water after a seven-day dry fast is not, by itself, an adequate medical explanation for a person simply dropping dead.

Now, prolonged fasting—especially fasting without water—can certainly be dangerous. Severe dehydration, electrolyte abnormalities, hypoglycemia, cardiac arrhythmias, kidney injury, circulatory collapse, and other serious complications may occur.

In extreme circumstances, prolonged dehydration can certainly contribute to death. But “He drank cold water and died” is not a sufficient medical explanation.

So, the burden of proof rests squarely upon the people presenting this testimony as fact. If you publicly announce before thousands—or millions—that a man was medically dead and subsequently raised from the dead, then provide evidence capable of supporting the claim.

Produce the eyewitnesses who were present. Produce the hospital records. Identify the medical personnel who examined him. Provide documentation showing that a qualified physician actually determined that he was dead.

If a death certificate exists, produce it. If there was emergency resuscitation, hospitalization, or other medical treatment, produce those records.

You cannot make an extraordinary public claim, use that claim to validate somebody's supposed supernatural power, and then demand that Christians switch off their discernment because: “God works in mysterious ways.”

That is not biblical faith. That is credulity.

The Bible explicitly commands Christians not to believe every spiritual claim simply because someone attaches the name of God to it.

1 John 4:1

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

Notice the command.

Do not believe every spirit. Test the spirits. 

Discernment is not unbelief. Asking for evidence is not an attack on the omnipotence of God. Questioning a sensational testimony is not denying the supernatural. Christians have a biblical obligation to test religious claims rather than swallow every dramatic story that comes from a pulpit.

In fact, Jesus Himself warned that signs and wonders are not sufficient proof that a religious teacher represents God.

Matthew 24:24

“For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.”

That warning demolishes the popular assumption: “He performed a miracle; therefore, he must be a man of God.”

No.

Even if something genuinely supernatural occurred, the occurrence of a sign would not automatically authenticate the theology, ministry, character, or spiritual authority of the person associated with it.

The decisive question is not merely: Did something supernatural happen? The decisive question is: Is this man faithful to the Word of God? Does he teach the apostolic faith? Does he faithfully handle Scripture? Does his doctrine conform to the teaching of Christ and His Apostles?

That is the biblical test.

Titus 1:9

“He must hold firmly to the faithful word as it was taught, so that he can encourage others by sound teaching and refute those who contradict it.”

Christianity is not authenticated by spectacle. It is not authenticated by emotional testimonies. It is not authenticated by packed auditoriums. It is not authenticated by crowds screaming “Amen!” And it is certainly not authenticated by miracle stories that nobody is allowed to investigate.

Test the claim. Examine the evidence. Test the doctrine. That is not skepticism. That is historic biblical Christianity.

Apparently satisfied with my answer, Sopater responded simply:

“Thanks, Sir.”

But there was something I did not know at the time of that conversation. And this is where the story becomes even more interesting.

The young man who recently gave the testimony that Paul Enenche raised him from the dead after he supposedly died from drinking cold water following a seven-day dry fast had apparently told essentially the same story at the same Church four years earlier.

Only there was one rather inconvenient difference. In the earlier testimony, given in 2022, the young man said he had been on a FOUR-DAY DRY FAST.

Four days. Not seven.

Let us make sure we understand what happened here.

In 2022: Four-day dry fast.

Four years later: Seven-day dry fast.

Somehow, during the intervening years, the fast grew by three days. The dead man apparently remained the same. The resurrection remained the same. Paul Enenche remained the same. The Church remained the same. 

But the fasting period developed a testimony of its own. Four days became seven. Perhaps by the next time this testimony makes another appearance, the fasting period will have matured into forty days and forty nights.

At this rate, Moses may soon have competition.

And herein lies the problem with manufactured miracle stories. A lie has a terrible memory. When you fabricate an extraordinary story and repeat it over the years, maintaining consistency becomes increasingly difficult.

Details change. Timelines expand. Numbers mysteriously grow. Facts begin colliding with previous versions of the same testimony. And eventually, the story starts testifying against itself.

This is why Christians must stop treating discernment as rebellion.

Stop allowing religious celebrity to replace evidence. Stop confusing emotional excitement with spiritual truth. Stop assuming that questioning a “man of God” means questioning God Himself.

God has nothing to fear from investigation. Truth has nothing to fear from scrutiny. But fabricated miracle stories do.

And when a resurrection testimony cannot even keep its own fasting days straight, perhaps the problem is not that the critics lack faith. Perhaps the problem is that somebody has been telling tall tales.