INTRODUCTION. By a miracle we mean an event which, according to the principles of sound reasoning, may and must be referred to the extraordinary agency of God. No event, therefore, which evidently disagrees with the moral character of God; no event which can be reasonably traced to angelic, demoniac, or human action; no event which may be fairly ascribed to the working of natural laws or forces, is a miracle; but an event which, in view of its character and circumstances, can rationally be referred to extraordinary divine action, and to that alone, as its cause, is properly miraculous. By saying, "to that alone," we do not mean to exclude the coöperation of natural forces in producing such an event, but rather to affirm that such forces, if used, are directed and reinforced by extraordinary divine action, which superior action determines the event.1 As, however, the occurrence of such an event has been pronounced to be to the last degree improbable, and, indeed, morally im, possible, we shall notice briefly the grounds of such a judgment, before examining the testimony for the miracles of Christ; for the result of our examination of this testimony will be affected more or less by our opinion as to the antecedent probability of miracles. If we are satisfied of their being "to the last degree improbable," we shall yield but a reluctant assent to the fullest proof of their reality; but if we find them to be in certain circumstances "not improbable," a less amount of evidence will be convincing. We shall, 1 Hugh Farmer says, "A miracle is an effect produced in the system of nature, contrary to the general rule by which it is governed;" Tillotson says, "It is a supernatural effect, evident and wonderful to sense; Wardlaw, "A work involving a temporary suspension of the known laws of nature;" Alexander, “ A visible suspension of the laws of nature;" Mansel, "An interposition of divine power;" Bayne, "An occasional display of divine power, independently of those sequences of natural law through which God commonly acts;" McCosh, "An event which is wrought in our world as a sign or proof of God making a supernatural revelation to man ;" and Farrar, "An effect wrought by the direct interposition of the Creator and Governor of nature, for the purpose of revealing a message or attesting a revelation." therefore, at this point review the principal arguments in favor of rejecting all testimony for miracles, stating these arguments, for the sake of brevity, in our own words, and in the simplest manner possible. I. Many alleged miracles are known to be spurious, and therefore it is safe to infer that all are spurious. Says David Hume: "The many instances of forged miracles and prophecies and supernatural events, which in all ages have either been detected by contrary evidence, or which detect themselves by their absurdity, prove sufficiently the strong propensity of mankind to the extraordinary and marvellous, and ought reasonably to beget a suspicion against all relations of this kind." And so frequently, he declares, have miracles been forged in support of "popular religions," that "we may establish it as a maxim, that no human testimony can have such force as to prove a miracle, and make it a just foundation for any such system of religion."1 Now we are ready to admit the premise of this argument, but not the inference which is drawn from it. The fact asserted may be said, with more show of reason, to justify an 1 Essays, Vol. II. pp. 118, 128. |