of the laws of nature. And having done this, he will go with us one step farther, and complete the process. The above argument has proceeded upon the admission that all testimony is variable, merely that Mr. Hume's objection might be met on its own ground. It has been previously established, however, that testimony under certain circumstances is invariable, and that the testimony for the miracles of the New Testament was of this character, because it was never known that men endured a life of constant peril, deprivation, and suffering, and at last submitted to torture and death, in attestation to what they knew at the same time to be absolute falsehood. Now Mr. Hume allows that invariableness amounts to a certainty, and hence the following syllogism seems to settle the question.

Testimony of a given character is invariable, and consequently amounts to a certainty;

The testimony for the Christian miracles is of this given character; therefore,

The testimony for the Christian miracles amounts to a certainty.

11. What has now been said may, perhaps, serve to show that the strength of the argument in review lies in words more than in things. The truth is, we do believe testimony, although contrary to our experience, or in other words, when there is a want of experience, on Our part, in relation to the events which the testimony is designed to establish. We do every day act upon the very principles which the argument in question denies. Here then is the conclusion-Mr. Hume's theory is destroyed by actual practice, his speculations are all exploded by stubborn facts; and, in spite of his metaphysics, men will be men, and will continue to believe, in the very teeth of his celebrated argument.

SECTION III.

FALSE OR COUNTERFEIT MIRACLES.

HUME'S SELECTION

EXAMINED. THE CURE OF A LAME MAN, AND OF

A BLIND MAN BY VESPASIAN;

THE CURES

WROUGHT AT THE TOMB OF ABBE PARIS.

1. It is often said, that there have been false miracles from time immemorial, and that this very fact renders the miracles of the Christian religion suspicious, if it does not form an objection against them. But this is altogether gratuitous as well might one say that vice renders virtue suspicious, or constitutes an objection against its reality. It is granted that there have been false miracles, but to say, therefore, that there never have been any true miracles, is as reasonable as it would be to say, that there is no genuine coin, because there is some spurious-that there is no real modesty and chastity, because there is a great deal of counterfeit.

2. The false miracles which are brought forward, are of a very different character from those which were wrought by Christ and his apostles; and one, who will make a comparison between any of these pretended wonders of which he may have heard, and the works of Jesus, will find that they are altogether too distinct ever to be mistaken for each other. Take, as an example, the

miracles of Mahomet, or such as were attributed to him; and a moment's examination will show the contrast between them and those of the New Testament. They were performed in the night; secretly, either by himself, or in the presence of his friends; were not objects of sense; were not permanent ;-and the same may be said of nearly all other pretended miracles, with the exception of some few, which are attributable to physical causes. On the other hand, the miracles of Christ were done openly, in the presence of enemies, before vast multitudes, and were of such a character as to preclude the possibility of deception--as feeding the multitudes, giving sight to the blind from birth, raising the dead, &c. No false miracles ever had these characteristics, and therefore form no objection against those of the New Testament.

3. Besides, no fals emiracles have ever been subjected to the severe test which the Christian miracles have successfully passed through. They were wrought in the most civilized and polished countries, in an age distinguished for its learning and for a spirit of inquiry, and when there was wanting neither power nor inclination to expose any fraud which might have been practised or attempted. "And it may be presumed that men who were so much interested in detecting the imposture, had there been any, as the Jewish high priests and rulers, and also as the heathen priests, philosophers, and magistrates, (some of whom immediately, and all of whom very soon took the alarm at the rapid spread of Christianity, being in the highest degree exasperated at it,) and who had every possible opportunity for examining the credentials of Christ and his apostles, would have taken the most effectual methods to prevent the growth of a religion that was so exceedingly offensive to them, which was to destroy the credibility of their miracles, which they asserted to have been wrought, and to be at that very time wrought

in its favor."* This they attempted; they examined them with the closest scrutiny, and being unable to question their reality, resorted, as has been stated, to the use of the ineffable name Jehovah, demoniac agency, magic, &c.

4. It is of no consequence that false miracles have been believed; because they were mostly not of such a character as to admit of re-examination. They appeared, as it were, and then vanished, and credit was given them on the impulse of the moment, which credit, had an opportunity presented for investigation, would doubtless have been destroyed. In some instances examination was prevented from fear of those in power. Christ's miracles were wide from this; they were permanent, and would admit of repeated investigation. The blind, and deaf, and dumb, and diseased, who were restored, and the dead, who had been raised to life, were afterwards among the people probably for years, and could be seen and conversed with, as they were, until the reality of the miracle was put beyond question.

5. And it is a consideration of great importance that the early Christians took this very ground against their opposers. Quadratus, whom Eusebius calls a "disciple of the Apostles," and who only twenty-three years after the death of John presented an Apology in defence of the Christians to the emperor Adrian, makes the following appeal:-"The works of our Savior were always conspicuous, for they were real. Both they that were healed, and they that were raised from the dead, not only when they were healed or raised, but for a long time afterwards; not only while he dwelled on this earth, but also after his departure and for a good while subsequent to it-insomuch that some of them have reached to our own times."-t

* Priestley's Institutes, Part II. c. i. § 3.

+ Eusebius, Ecclesiastical Hist. Book iv. chap. 3.

Now, if the miracles of Christ were not real, and the fact here stated true, must not Quadratus have been incomparably foolish to have needlessly convicted himself by such bold appeals to what every one knew was false?

6. Justin Martyr in the year 140, Tertullian in the year 200, and Origen in the year 230, make use of the same argument in relation to the permanent character of the miracles of Christ, affirming that they were such as to be seen, and known, and examined of men. The fact, therefore, that false or spurious miracles have been credited, is no objection to Christian miracles, because there is no parallel between the two cases. The latter were of such a character as to admit of no mistake, they were abiding the subjects of them lived for years among the people, open to constant examination, and thus excluding all possible chance of deception.*

7. But let us take some example of false or pretended miracles, and examine a little into the grounds of their pretensions. Fortunately Mr. Hume himself has made a selection for us. Out of the immense mass of wonders of this sort, he has taken three instances, which, of course, were the best he could find; and these he regards as having equal, if not stronger claims, than those of the New Testament.

(1.) The alledged cure of a blind and of a lame man at Alexandria in Egypt, by the emperor Vespasian; reported by Tacitus. Hist. Lib. iv. 81.

(2.) The restoration of an entire limb of the door

*But suppose we grant that all religions have had their miracles, so called; how does it happen that only the Christian miracles ever accomplished any thing? If these pagan miracles were genuine, or Christ's were false, then why did not the first produce the same effects with the last? There is a most manifest difference in the results on Society,-whence is it?