What is the fundamentalist response to the Gospel miracles?

• A. It insists on their literal accuracy and views any symbolic interpretation as a denial of faith.
• B. It denies miracles altogether.
• C. It claims miracles are stories with no basis.
• D. It reduces miracles to moral lessons.

Answer: (A)

The main idea being tested is how fundamentalists read Gospel miracles: they treat them as real, historical events and insist on their literal truth. In fundamentalist thought, Scripture is viewed as authoritative and inerrant, so miraculous acts are not symbolic or allegorical substitutes for moral lessons. They are seen as actual demonstrations of God's power that authenticate Jesus’s identity and message. Because of that, interpreting miracles symbolically is viewed as denying faith in the clear truth of the biblical text.

Other readings—denying miracles, treating them as mere stories with no basis, or reducing them to moral lessons—do not fit this approach. Denial or skepticism contradicts the supernatural focus and the evidential role miracles play in affirming Jesus’s divine authority within this tradition, while a purely moralizing reading loses the insistence on literal occurrence that fundamentalists prioritize.