perty and their persons to ruin. 2. Tacitus did not write from ocular inspection and personal examination of the men; but, twentyseven years afterwards, wrote from hearsay at Rome, an account of transactions which had taken place at Alexandria in Egypt: on the contrary, the narratives of the Christian miracles were published in the very countries, and almost immediately after the time, when the miracles had actually been wrought, and when many persons were living who had witnessed them. 3. Though Tacitus mentions the miracles of Vespasian, he does not say that he saw them, or even believed that they were performed; nay, he very plainly insinuates that he did not believe them to be real. 4. The diseases were not absolutely incurable: this is manifest from the declarations of the physicians, who told Vespasian that the sight of the blind man was not extinct, and that the lame man's joints might recover their strength; and between whom, the emperor, and the patients, the whole seems to have been concerted. But the miracles wrought by Christ were performed on diseases and other cases which no human skill could relieve. 5. Lastly, consider the witnesses. The miracles of Vespasian were not (like the Christian miracles) performed in the presence of acute and inveterate adversaries, who scrutinised them with the utmost rigour, and yielded a reluctant acknowledgment of their reality but the witnesses of them were the followers and flatterers of Vespasian, and the ignorant and superstitious Alexandrians, who were wholly devoted to the worship of Serapis, and to his interest. - 5. The last instance of pagan miracles which we shall notice is that of Apollonius of Tyana, a Pythagorean philosopher, who was born about the time of the Christian æra; but whose life was not written till more than a century after his death by Philostratus, who received his information partly from report, and partly from the commentaries of Damis, the companion of Apollonius. In this work, besides a number of monstrous, ridiculous, and silly wonders, Philostratus has related many things which resemble the miracles of Jesus, as that Apollonius cured diseases, expelled dæmons, gave sight to the blind, raised the dead, and foretold numerous remarkable events. The book of Philostratus was compiled at the request of the empress Julia Domna, who hated the Christians: the remarks, therefore, which have already been made on the biographers of Pythagoras may be applied to him. To which we may add, that Apollonius was ridiculed as an impostor by the heathen philosopher Lucian, who wrote twenty years before Philostratus, and that no use was made of his pretended miracles for the disparagement of Christianity until the commencement of the fourth century: when Hierocles, governor of Bithynia, a man of learning, and a principal instigator of the persecution under Dioclesian, conceived the design of shewing the futility of the miracles of Christ as proofs of a divine Campbell on Miracles, pp. 161–169. Bp. Douglas's Criterion, pp. 49-60. Paley's Evidences, vol.i. pp. 351-355. 1 mission, by opposing to them other performances equally beyond the reach of human powers, and, as he wished it to be believed, equally well authenticated. Hierocles, however, did not attempt either to call in question the genuineness of the books of the New Testament, or to deny that miracles were wrought by Jesus Christ: and his work, which was founded on the narrative of Philostratus, was answered at the time by Eusebius, in a tract that is still extant. 6. The next instance produced by Mr. Hume is the miracle, pretended to have been wrought at Saragossa, and mentioned by the cardinal De Retz. His words, literally translated, are: "In that church they shewed me a man, whose business it was to light the lamps, of which they have a prodigious number, telling me, that he had been seen seven years at the gate with one leg only. I saw him there with two." From this relation it is evident that the cardinal did not attach any credit to the story: he did not examine the man himself concerning the fact. This miracle indeed was vouched by all the canons of the church, and the whole company in town were appealed to for a confirmation of it, whom the cardinal found, by their zealous devotion, to be thorough believers of the miracle. But though those ecclesiastics appealed to the company in the town, it is clear from De Retz's own account that he did not ask any man a single question on the subject. It is easy to conceive that such a story, managed by the priests and backed by their authority, would obtain credit by the ignorant populace; especially in a country where the inquisition was then in full power, where the superstitions and prejudices of the people, and the authority of the civil magistrate, were all combined to support the credit of such miracles, and where it would not only have been extremely dangerous to make a strict inquiry into them, but even the expressing of the least doubt concerning them might have exposed the inquirer to the most terrible of all evils and sufferings. 2 7. The last example of pretended miracles to be adduced is, those reported to have been wrought at the tomb of the Abbé de Paris, and in which both Mr. Hume and his copyists in later times have exulted, as if they were alone sufficient to destroy the credit of the miraculous facts recorded in the New Testament. The circumstances of these pretended miracles are these: While controversies ran high in France between the Jesuits and the Jansenists", about the middle of the eighteenth century, the Abbé de Paris, an opulent and zealous Jansenist, gave the whole of his income to the poor; and, clothing himself in rags, lay on the ground, fed on black bread, water and herbs, and employed watchings and penances to macerate his body. On his death, in May 1727, his party canonised him, and pretended that miracles were wrought at his tomb; whither thousands flocked and practised 1 Memoires du Cardinal de Retz. Livre iv. l'an 1654. 2 Campbell on the Miracles, pp. 170–181. 3 These were a sect of Roman Catholics, in France, who adopted the opinions of Jansenius concerning grace and predestination, which were opposed by the Jesuits. grimaces and convulsions in so disorderly and ridiculous a manner, that the government of France was at length obliged to put a stop to this delusion by ordering the churchyard, in which he was interred, to be walled up in January 1732. Accounts of the cures said to have been wrought at the Abbé's tomb were collected and published by M. de Montgeron, a counsellor of the parliament at Paris, in three quarto volumes; which were critically examined, and the delusions were exposed, as soon as they appeared. On these pretended miracles (which were paralleled with those of Jesus Christ!) we may remark, 1. That they were extolled as real, before they were subjected to examination; and that, when investigated at first, they were tried before persons who were predisposed to favour the Jansenists or appellants: -2. Montgeron, who collected the cures said to be wrought at the tomb, produced vouchers for only eight or nine while some continued there for days and even months, without receiving any benefit:-3. The number, reported to be cured, was but small; nor is there any proof that this small number was cured by the saint's intercession. The imposture of those pretended miracles was detected by the archbishop of Paris in one single instance; and the archbishop of Sens and others, in more than twenty instances, discovered the artifice by which it was supported:-4. The patients were so affected by their devotion, the place, and the sympathy of the multitude, that many were thrown into convulsions, which in certain circumstances might produce a removal of disorders occasioned by obstruction: -5. All who implored the aid of the Abbé were not cured: while Christ and the apostles never failed in any case, and were never convicted of imposture in a single instance: and it was objected at the time, and never refuted by his friends, that the prostrations at his tomb produced more diseases than they cured: -6. Christ's miracles were wrought in a grave and decent, in a great but simple manner, becoming one sent of God, without any absurd or ridiculous ceremonies, or superstitious observances. But the miracles of the Abbé de Paris were attended with circumstances that had all the marks of superstition, and which seemed designed and fitted to strike the imagination. The earth of his tomb was often employed, or the water from the well of his house. Nine days' devotion was constantly used, and frequently repeated again and again by the same persons:- 7. All the cures recorded by Montgeron as duly attested, were partial and gradual, and were such as might have been effected by natural means. Not one of them was instantaneous. The persons at the Abbé's tomb never attempted to raise the dead, nor is there any evidence that either the blind or the deaf were actually cured there. The notary, who received affidavits relative to those miracles, was not obliged to know the names of the persons who made them, nor whether they gave in their own or only fictitious names: 8. The cures wrought at the tomb were not independent of second causes; most of the devotees had been using medicines before, and continued to use them during their applications to the supposed saint; or their distempers had abated before they determined to solicit his help :-9. Some of the cures attested were incomplete, and the relief granted in others was only temporary: but the cares wrought by Christ and his apostles were complete and permanent: -10. Lastly, the design of the miracles ascribed to the Abbé de Paris was neither important, nor was it worthy of God. The miracles of Christ and of his apostles, as we have already seen, were intended to prove the divine authority of the most excellent religion: those reported of the Abbé, to answer the purposes of a party. The former answered the end for which they were designed: the latter raised a prejudice against Jansenism, and divided its adherents, several of whom were provoked at the frauds of their party, and bitterly reproached and accused each other. The moment the civil power interfered to put an end to the impostures, they ceased: but all the powers on earth, both civil and sacerdotal, could not arrest the progress of Christianity, or put a stop to the wonderful works wrought in confirmation of it. To conclude, with regard to the attestations given to Christianity, all was wise, consistent, worthy of God, and suited to the end for which it was designed: but the other is a broken incoherent scheme, which cannot be reconciled to itself, nor made to consist with the wisdom and harmony of the divine proceedings. The miracles of Christ therefore are indisputably true; but those ascribed to the Abbé de Paris are totally destitute of reality, and are utterly unworthy of belief.1 SECTION III. ON PROPHECY. I. Prophecy defined. The highest evidence that can be given of Divine Revelation.II. Difference between the pretended predictions of the heathen oracles and the prophecies contained in the Scriptures. - III. On the Use and Intent of Prophecy. - IV. On the Chain of Prophecy. Classification of the Scripture Prophecies.-CLASS I. Prophecies relating to the Jewish Nation in particular. — 1. Abraham. - 2. Ishmael. — 3. Settlement of the Israelites in Canaan.-4. Predictions of Moses relative to the sufferings, captivities, and present state of the Jews.-5. Birth of Josiah foretold, and his destruction of idolatry.-6. Isaiah's Prediction of the utter subversion of Idolatry among the Jews.-7. Jeremiah's Prediction of Zedekiah's captivity and death.-8. Ezekiel's Prediction of the Calamities of the Jews, inflicted by the Chaldæans.-9. Daniel's Predic tion of the Profanation of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes, &c. 1 Campbell on Miracles, pp. 181-203. Vernet, Traité de la Vérité de la Relig. Chrét tom. vi. pp. 63-135. Leland's View of the Deistical Writers, vol. i. p. 319–335. 4th edit. Bp. Douglas's Criterion, pp. 122–233. ; in pp. 233-236. he has some observations on the pretended miracles of the French prophets. CLASS II. 10. Hosea's Prediction of the present state of the Jews. Prophecies relating to the Nations or Empires that were neighbouring to the Jews. 1. Tyre. 2. Egypt. 3. Ethiopia. 4. Nineveh. 5. Babylon.-6. The four great monarchies. -CLASS III. Prophecies directly announcing the Messiah; their Number, Variety, and Minute Circumstantiality.-1. That the Messiah was to come.-2. The Time.3. The Place of his Coming.-4. His Birth and Manner of Life and Doctrine.. 5. His Sufferings and Death.. -6. His Resurrection and Ascension. -7. The Abolition of the Jewish Covenant by that of the Gospel. The Certainty, with which these Prophecies can only be applied to Christ: CLASS IV. Prophecies delivered by Jesus Christ and his Apostles.1. Prophecies of Christ concerning his Death and Resur rection, the Descent of the Holy Spirit, the Destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple, and the Spread of Christianity. — Refutation of objec tions drawn from its rejection by Jews and Gentiles, and from the existence and prevalence of Mohammedism.-2. Prophecies of the Apostles concerning the Corruptions of the Gospel by the Church of Rome, and the Spread of Infidelity.-V. Refutation of objections from the alleged obscurity of Prophecy. Concluding observations on the evidence afforded by Prophecy. - I. THE various criteria and considerations which have been stated in the preceding section, will enable the impartial inquirer to distinguish between true and false miracles. We add, that it is equally easy to distinguish between true and false prophecies; for PROPHECY is a miracle of knowledge, a declaration, or description, or represent ation of something future, beyond the power of human sagacity to discern or to calculate, and it is the highest evidence that can be given of supernatural communion with the Deity, and of the truth of a revelation from God. The knowledge of future events is that object, which man, with the greatest desire, has the least ability to attain. By tracing cause and effect in their usual operations, by observing human characters, and by marking present tendencies, he may form some plausible conjectures about the future: and an experienced politician, who is thoroughly acquainted with the circumstances, interests, and tempers both of his own community and of those who are his neighbours, will frequently anticipate events with a sagacity and success, which bears some resemblance to direct prescience, and excites the astonishment of less penetrating minds. Still, however, he is limited to a kind of contact with present circumstances. That which he foresees must have some connection with what he actually beholds, or some dependence on it: otherwise his inquiries are vain, and his conjectures idle and delusive; and even within those narrow limits, how often is his penetration baffled, and his wisdom deceived! The slightest intrusion of uncommon circumstances, the smallest possible deviation from rules, which cannot by any means be rendered exact, destroys the visionary chain which he has constructed, and exposes his ignorance to himself and others. The prescience of the most experienced politician, in short, bears a close resemblance to that of an experienced general or a skilful chess player. |