Difference between revisions of "Miracles"

<p> Three distinct New [[Testament]] Greek words represent miracles: seemeion , "a sign"; teras , "a prodigy"; dunamis , "a mighty work." [[Septuagint]] uses seemeion and teras for [[Hebrew]] 'owt and mopheth (&nbsp;Exodus 7:9). ''Seemeion'' , "sign," views the miracle as evidence of a divine commission: &nbsp;John 3:2, "no man can do these signs (Greek) which Thou doest except God be with him" (&nbsp;John 9:30; &nbsp;John 9:33; &nbsp;John 15:24; &nbsp;Luke 7:19-22); teras , "prodigy" or "wonder," expresses the effect on the spectator; dunamis , "mighty work," marks its performance by a superhuman power (&nbsp;Acts 2:22; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 12:12; &nbsp;2 Thessalonians 2:9). The "sign" is God's seal, attestation, or proof of a revelation being genuine. Jesus' miracles were not merely wonders but signs; signs not merely of His power, but of the nature of His ministry and of His divine person. </p> <p> [[A]] grand distinction peculiar to Christianity is, it won the world to it in an age of high civilization, through a few preachers of humble position, on the evidence of miracles. Basing its claim on miracles the creed of the slave became eventually the faith of the Caesars. Muhammed on the contrary, even in a half-enlightened age and country, pretended no miracle. Christ and His apostles still less than Mahomet among friends would have dared to allege miracles, in the midst of hostile Jews and skeptical Romans, unless they were true. This claim is the more striking, since John the Baptist, though coming "in the spirit and power of Elias," the great miracle worker of the Old Testament, never claimed miraculous power; so far is [[Scripture]] from indiscriminately gratifying men's love of the marvelous at the cost of truth. </p> <p> Similarly, Abraham, David, and other Old Testament heroes never appear as miracle workers. Early Christian writers, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Origen, occasionally appeal to miracles in proof of Christianity; but state that their pagan opponents, admitting the facts, attributed them to magic; which accounts for the fewness of their references to miracles. The Jewish writings, as the Sepher Toldoth Jeshu, also the extant fragments of Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian, admit the fact of the miracles, though ascribing them to magic and evil spirits. In the case of the resurrection (&nbsp;Matthew 28:11-15) and the cure of the blind man (John 9) the Jews made a self confuted charge of fraud. The early Christian apologists allege in support of Christianity: </p> <p> '''(1)''' the greatness, number, completeness, and publicity of the miracles; </p> <p> '''(2)''' the beneficial tendency of the doctrine; </p> <p> '''(3)''' the connection of the miracles with prophecy and the whole scheme of redemption from Adam to Christ. The miracles must have been altogether different from the wonders of exorcists, magicians, etc.; else they would not have gained for the gospel so wide and permanent an acceptance. The effect of Philip's ministry on the Samaritans, in opposition to Simon Magus (Acts 8), proves this. The holy character of Christ and His apostles, and the tendency of Christianity to promote truth and virtue, are against the origination of the miracles from evil spirits or jugglery. In the fourth century miracles had ceased (Chrysostom on 1 Corinthians 11-13); in the third, miracles are alleged, but are suspicious, as wrought among those already believing and predisposed to accept prodigies credulously. The ecclesiastical miracles are not attested by inspired writers. The apostles alone could transmit the power of working miracles to others. [[Cornelius]] was an exception, being the firstfruit of the Gentiles. </p> <p> But Philip could not impart it; Peter and John must come to confer on his [[Samaritan]] converts miraculous gifts, by laying on of hands (&nbsp;Acts 8:15-20; &nbsp;Acts 10:44-46; &nbsp;Acts 19:6; &nbsp;Mark 16:17-18). Christianity being once proved and attested to us, the analogy of God's dealings leads us to expect He would leave it to make its way by ordinary means; the edifice being erected, the scaffolding is taken down; perpetual miracle is contrary to His ways. The ecclesiastical miracles alleged are ambiguous, or tentative, or legendary, i.e. resembling known products of human credulity and imposture. Many are childish, and palpably framed for superstitious believers, rather than as evidences capable of bearing critical scrutiny. Most of them are not told until long after their presumed occurrence. [[Herein]] the New Testament miracles wholly differ from them. The Christian miracles are: </p> <p> ''(1)'' [[Recorded]] by contemporaries. </p> <p> ''(2)'' In the same country. </p> <p> ''(3)'' Not based on transient rumor, but confirmed by subsequent investigation, and recorded in independent accounts. </p> <p> ''(4)'' Not naked history, but the history combined with the institution and with the religion of our day, as also with the time and place of the miracle recorded and of Christianity's origin. </p> <p> ''(5)'' With particular specification of names, places, dates, and circumstances. </p> <p> ''(6)'' Not requiring merely otiose assent, as the popular superstitions on which nothing depends, but claiming to regulate the opinions and acts of people. </p> <p> ''(7)'' Not like popish miracles in Roman [[Catholic]] countries, in affirmation of opinions already formed, but performed amidst enemies, converting men from their most cherished prejudices; there was no anterior persuasion to lay hold of, Jesus' miracles gave birth to the sect; frauds might mix with the progress, but could not have place in the commencement of the religion. </p> <p> ''(8)'' Not an imaginary perception, as Socrates' demon; the giving sight to the blind leaves a lasting effect; in those of a mixed nature the principal miracle is momentary, but some circumstance combined with it is permanent; Peter's vision might be a dream, but the message of Cornelius could not have been; the concurrence could only be supernatural. </p> <p> ''(9)'' Not tentative, where out of many trials some succeed, as the ancient oracles, cures wrought by relics, etc. </p> <p> ''(10)'' Not doubtful miracles, as the liquefaction of Januarius' blood, cures of nervous ailments. </p> <p> ''(11)'' Not stories which can be resolved into exaggerations. </p> <p> ''(12)'' Not gradual, but instantaneous for the most part (&nbsp;Luke 18:43); not incomplete; not merely temporary, but complete and lasting. </p> <p> ''(13)'' [[Witnessed]] to at the cost of suffering and death. (Paley, Evidences of Christianity.) </p> <p> [[A]] miracle is not a "violation of the laws of nature" (Hume), but the introduction of a new agent. Such introduction accords with human experience, for we see an intelligent agent often modifying the otherwise uniform laws of nature. "Experience" informs us of human free will counteracting the lower law of gravitation. Infinitely more can the divine will introduce a new element, counteracting, without destroying, lower physical law; the higher law for a time controls and suspends the action of the lower. Or, "law" being simply the expression of God's will, in miracles God's will intervenes, for certain moral ends, to suspend His ordinary mode of working. The wise men following the star, and then receiving further guidance from the Scripture word, illustrate the twofold revelation, God's works, and God's word, the highest guide. Both meet in the Incarnate Word (Matthew 2; &nbsp;2 Peter 1:19-21). As disturbance has entered the world by sin, as nature visibly attests, God must needs miraculously interfere to nullify that disturbance. </p> <p> Hume alleged against miracles their contrariety to "experience," and that experience shows testimony to be often false. But "experience" is not to be limited to our time and knowledge. The "experience" of the witnesses for Christianity attests the truth of miracles. However improbable miracles are under ordinary circumstances, they are probable, nay necessary, to attest a religious revelation and a divine commission. "In whatever degree it is probable that a revelation should be communicated to mankind at all, in the same degree is it probable that miracles should be wrought" (Paley, Evidences of Christianity). That they are out of the ordinary course of nature, so far from being an objection, is just what they need to be in order to be fit signs to attest a revelation. It is as easy to God to continue the ordinary course of the rest of nature, with the change of one part, as of all the phenomena without any change. It is objected, miracles "interrupt the course of nature." </p> <p> But as that course really comprises the whole series of God's government of the universe, moral as well as physical, miracles are doubtless included in it. In this point of view [[Butler]] remarks, nothing less than another world, placed in circumstances similar to our own, can furnish an argument from analogy against the credibility of miracles. They have some known general laws, e.g. they are infrequent, they are signs attesting a revelation; and probably have other laws as yet unknown. The testimony to Christian miracles is that of concurrent and contemporaneous witnesses. The religion so attested specifically differs from the false religions which false miracles have been alleged to support. To draw from the latter a reason against the former is utterly illogical. The argument is the other way, namely, since palpably false religions were propped up by false miracles a pure religion like Christianity is not likely to rest on false miracles. </p> <p> In estimating the value of the testimony to Christ's miracles it is to be remembered there is no counter testimony. The unbelieving Jews admitted them, but attributed them to Satan. Jesus replied, Satan would never help to overthrow his own kingdom. Besides the evidential value of miracles, they are intimately and internally connected with Christianity as a new creation springing from God manifest in the flesh. That the new creating powers brought into the world in Christ should manifest themselves in miraculous agencies was a necessary consequence of His own manifestation or epiphany. The redemption of mankind from sin was typified, and its earnest given, in the redemption of individuals from the ailments which are sin's consequences. Christ's "bearing our griefs and carrying our sorrows" in His own assumed manhood guaranteed His healing human sicknesses and infirmities. </p> <p> The miracle of active compassion necessarily flowed from His divine power and human sympathy combined in His incarnation, of which the atonement is the crown (&nbsp;Matthew 8:17; &nbsp;Isaiah 53:4). The history and separate existence of the [[Israelite]] church (the sole instance of a pure theism in the ancient world) it is impossible to explain without accepting the miracles which the same Scripture records; so Christianity and [[Christendom]] can only be explained by accepting the miracles which introduced them. Both dispensations were inaugurated by miracles, and then mainly left to ordinary providence; only that the Old Testament church, at times when surrounding paganism, as in Elijah's times, threatened to swamp it, was vindicated by miracles. Its miracles are miracles of power, to impress a rude age; the New Testament miracles were miracles of love. </p> <p> The Old Testament miracles were for the foe's destruction; Christ's were miracles of mercy, except the withering of the fig tree and the sending the demons into the swine to perish, both symbolical lessons of warning to man. Many miracles were typical; as the "tongues" manifested the universality of the Christian dispensation designed for every tongue, so counterworking the division of man from man through the confusion of tongues at Babel; the casting out of demons symbolizes Christ's coming "to destroy the works of the devil." Miracles thus were manifestations of the Holy Spirit's presence and operation in the church. The Old Testament miracles attested God's presence as King of the theocracy; though this involved a continual series of miracles, yet as the theocracy was temporary and local those miracles did not violate God's ordinary government of the world by the laws of nature. The Christian miracles on the contrary, as attesting a permanent and universal dispensation, were properly limited to its commencement. </p> <p> Christ performed His miracles more for others' preservation than His own. Christ's mission, doctrine, and life, and Christ's miracles mutually depend on one another. Those were worthy objects for which to suspend the so-called (lower) laws of nature, and they illustrate the new spiritual and material creation which He introduces into our fallen world. Therefore that His miracles were false would be far harder to believe than that the testimony which supports them is true. Pritchard observes, Christ's miracles, as His parables, go on the principle of the law of continuity of the human with the divine. So the ten [[Egyptian]] plagues have a demonstrable connection with Egyptian phenomena, in most cases not reversing, but developing, nature's forces for a foretold particular end and at a defined time. (See [[Egypt;]] [[Exodus.)]] </p> <p> Thus the first plague turning the Nile to blood answers to the natural phenomenon of the water becoming, before the rise, first green, then clear yellow about the 25th of June, and gradually ochre red through microscopic cryptogams and infusoria, at times smelling offensively (&nbsp;Exodus 7:17-21). The supernatural element was the sudden change at Moses' word and act, killing the fish and making the water unfit for use, results not following the ordinary discoloration. So the frogs, accordant with natural phenomena usual in September, but miraculous in extent, intensity, and connection with Moses' word and act. So the dust, or black fertile soil of the Nile basin, called "chemi ," from whence Egypt's ancient name was derived, producing "lice" or tick. </p> <p> So the dogflies or else beetles; and the murrain, an epidemic often in December succeeding the inundation; and the boils, hail, locusts, and "darkness which might be felt," arising from masses of fine sand filling the atmosphere, the [[S.W.]] wind blowing it from the desert. That miracles harmonize with nature in some degree is what we might expect, since the God of revelation is the God of nature. The style of the same author in a new book will resemble his style in former books, only with such changes as the subject requires. The book of nature and the book of redemption are from the same God, written in different characters, but mutually analogous. [[Leslie]] (Short Method with the Deists) observes four notes of truth in the [[Mosaic]] miracles: </p> <p> '''1.''' They were such as men's senses can clearly judge of. </p> <p> '''2.''' Publicly wrought; two nations, [[Israel]] and Egypt, were affected by them, and above two million [[Israelites]] for 40 years witnessed them. </p> <p> '''3.''' Public monuments and, what is more convincing, outward observances continually were retained in commemoration of the facts. </p> <p> '''4.''' These monuments and observances were set up at the time the events took place, and continued without interruption afterward. (Compare &nbsp;Deuteronomy 8:4; &nbsp;Exodus 20:18; &nbsp;Exodus 40:38; &nbsp;Exodus 8:10; &nbsp;Exodus 8:23; &nbsp;Exodus 8:22; &nbsp;Exodus 9:5; &nbsp;Exodus 9:18; &nbsp;Exodus 9:25-26; &nbsp;Exodus 10:4-5; &nbsp;Exodus 10:14; &nbsp;Exodus 10:22-23; &nbsp;Exodus 12:29; &nbsp;Exodus 16:17, etc.; &nbsp;Exodus 19:10, etc.; &nbsp;Joshua 3:16; Numbers 16; &nbsp;Deuteronomy 5:22-23; Numbers 21; 2 Kings 18). </p> <p> Graves (Pentat. 6) observes we have two histories of Moses and his miracles, one in his book, the other in Israel's laws and ceremonies which are a living witness, not only of the [[Pentateuch]] history in general, but also of the miracles it records (&nbsp;Exodus 13:1; compare &nbsp;Numbers 3:11; &nbsp;Numbers 3:46); its facts are inseparably connected with the miraculous. However indifferent nations become as to religion, they never are so as to property; now miracles were the foundation of the Hebrew polity and of the tenure and regulations of property, e.g. the [[Jubilee]] restoration. And the religion and government were so closely connected as to presuppose a peculiar providence rewarding or punishing temporally obedience or disobedience. The effect of the miracles under Joshua kept all his generation faithful to Jehovah, so real and convincing were they (&nbsp;Joshua 24:31; &nbsp;Judges 2:7). </p> <p> Messiah's miracles were foretold (&nbsp;Isaiah 35:5-6; &nbsp;Isaiah 42:7), and so were asked for by John [[Baptist]] (&nbsp;Matthew 11:2-4), and made the ground by the people of calling Him "Son of David" (&nbsp;Matthew 12:23; &nbsp;John 7:31). Their aim was not merely to astonish, for many were wrought in behalf of and before obscure persons. When asked for a startling "sign from heaven" He refused (&nbsp;Luke 11:16). The 40 miracles of Christ recorded are but samples out of a greater number (&nbsp;John 2:23; &nbsp;John 20:30-31; &nbsp;Matthew 4:23; &nbsp;Matthew 8:16; &nbsp;Matthew 9:35; &nbsp;Matthew 12:15; &nbsp;Matthew 14:14; &nbsp;Matthew 14:35-36; &nbsp;Matthew 15:30; &nbsp;Matthew 19:2; &nbsp;Matthew 21:14). Three He restored to life in an ascending gradation: Jairus' daughter just dead, the [[Nain]] widow's son being carried to burial, Lazarus four days dead and decomposing (&nbsp;Matthew 9:18; &nbsp;Luke 7:11-12; John 11). </p> <p> Six demons He cast out, two of which witnessed He is "the Holy One ... the Son of the Most High God" (&nbsp;Mark 1:24; &nbsp;Mark 5:2; &nbsp;Matthew 9:32; &nbsp;Matthew 15:22; &nbsp;Matthew 17:15; &nbsp;Luke 11:15). [[Seventeen]] He cured of sicknesses, fever, leprosy, palsy, infirmity, withered hand, issue of blood, dropsy, blindness, deafness, muteness (&nbsp;John 4:47; &nbsp;John 5:5; &nbsp;John 9:1; &nbsp;Matthew 8:2; &nbsp;Matthew 8:5; &nbsp;Matthew 8:14; &nbsp;Matthew 9:2; &nbsp;Matthew 9:20; &nbsp;Matthew 9:27; &nbsp;Matthew 12:10; &nbsp;Mark 8:22; &nbsp;Luke 13:11; &nbsp;Luke 17:12; &nbsp;Luke 18:35; &nbsp;Luke 22:51); this class is that of miracles bringing in love relief to suffering man. Another class shows His control over nature: creating wine out of water (John 2); feeding 5,000 and 4,000 with bread multiplied manifold (&nbsp;Matthew 14:16; &nbsp;Matthew 15:36); passing unseen through a crowd, setting aside natural laws (&nbsp;Luke 4:30); giving draughts of fish when the fishermen had caught none (&nbsp;Luke 5:4; &nbsp;John 21:6); stilling the storm (&nbsp;Matthew 8:26); walking on the sea (&nbsp;Matthew 14:25), God's attribute, &nbsp;Job 9:8; transfiguring His countenance (&nbsp;Matthew 17:1); directing the fish with the tribute shekel to Peter, and Peter to the fish (&nbsp;Matthew 17:27). </p> <p> Another class is: His overawing men; twice turning out of the temple the sellers and moneychangers (&nbsp;Matthew 21:12; &nbsp;John 2:13); alone dud unarmed striking fear into the officers sent to take Him twice (&nbsp;John 7:45-46; &nbsp;John 18:6). He justified His healing on the [[Sabbath]] on the same ground as God is above the Sabbath law, working on it as on other days for the sustenance of all life and being (&nbsp;John 5:17), "My Father worketh hereto and [[I]] work," thus as the Jews truly alleged calling "God His own (in an exclusive sense, idion ) Father," and "making Himself equal with God." Love to man, unweariedly active, is as conspicuous in His miracles as power. The connection of His miracles with His redeeming work is the reason why faith was the needed preliminary on the part of the recipients of healing (&nbsp;Mark 6:5-6; &nbsp;Mark 7:29; &nbsp;Matthew 9:28-29). If miracles were mere wonders anyone would have been a fit witness of their performance. </p> <p> But the miracles were designed to attract the witnesses to His kingdom. They were symbolical of spiritual needs met by the Redeemer; vehicles of instruction as well as signs of His divine commission. [[Performed]] in His own name and in the first person, [["I]] say unto thee" (&nbsp;Luke 7:14); but the apostles' miracles were in His name (&nbsp;Acts 3:6; &nbsp;Acts 4:10-12). Faith in His power to heal the body prepared the way for faith in His power to heal the soul. Disbelief disqualified for appreciating miracles. To work miracles before hardened unbelievers would only aggravate their opposition, sin, and condemnation (&nbsp;John 15:24; &nbsp;John 9:39-41). They crowned their enmity by attributing His casting out of demons to Beelzebub. The "sign" of Jonah in his virtual burial and resurrection, and the sign of their destroying the temple of His body and His raising it in three days (&nbsp;John 2:18-21; &nbsp;Matthew 16:4), were the only sign which remained to convince them. </p> <p> His resurrection is the central miracle toward which all the rest converge. He would give them no such sign as they craved, a startling phenomenon in the sky visible and indisputable to all. He would still give such signs of unobtrusive mercy as hereto; if they not only still reject them but also His resurrection, there only remains the last condemning sign, the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven (&nbsp;Revelation 1:7; &nbsp;Daniel 7:9-13). His name is "Wonderful" or "miracle" (&nbsp;Isaiah 9:6; &nbsp;Judges 13:18-19). He is an embodied miracle, the [[Miracle]] of miracles. His incarnation and His resurrection include all between, and involve the wonders of Pentecost. Christ's charge that the eye witnesses should not report His miracles (&nbsp;Matthew 9:30; &nbsp;Mark 5:43; &nbsp;Mark 7:36) was in order that men should not dissociate the wonder from His redeeming work. </p> <p> To John the Baptist on the contrary He sent a report of His miracles, because John was not likely to dissever His miracles from His person and His work. His gestures, laying hands on the patient, anointing the blind eyes with clay, putting His finger into the deaf ear and touching the dumb tongue, creating much bread out of little not out of nothing, condescending to use means though in themselves wholly inadequate, all are tokens of His identifying Himself with us men, signs of His person at once human and divine and of His redeeming and sympathizing work for us. If the incarnation be denied, Christianity's existence is an effect without an adequate cause; grant the incarnation, and miracles are its necessary concomitant and natural consequence. To deny testimony because of the improbability of the facts attested would involve the denial of the Napoleonic history and other facts notoriously true. </p> <p> The truth of the miracles is confirmed incidentally by the fact that in no nation but Israel have the knowledge and worship of the one true God, the Creator, been maintained by the mere light of nature, and Israel was far from overtopping other nations in mental power and civilization. [[A]] divine power alone could have so elevated Israel by an extraordinary call, confirmed by miracles. The prophecies, the morality, the structure of the Bible, and Christianity's conquest of the Roman world and its public establishment about 300 years after the execution of its [[Founder]] as a malefactor, similarly confirm the miracles which attest to its divinity. The improbability of the Christian religion being established [[With]] miracles is not nearly so great as the improbability of its being established [[Without]] miracles. Strauss' mythic theory, namely, that the story of Jesus embodies the nation's cherished idea of what the [[Messiah]] was expected to do, and therefore was believed to have done, is counter to the fact that the Jews expected a reigning Messiah, who should not die but deliver them from their Roman masters. </p> <p> The gravity, simplicity, and historical consistency of the New Testament incidents with the otherwise known circumstances of the times, and the internal marks of the date of writing being soon after the occurrence of the facts, are all against the mythic theory, especially in a non-legendary but historical age. How unlike they are to the really mythic apocryphal Gospels, e.g. that of Nicodemus, the Ebionites, etc. No miracles of Jesus' youth are mentioned; there is no description of His personal appearance, nor of His doings in the world of spirits; no miracles of the [[Virgin]] Mary: omissions sure to be supplied in a legendary story. The hostility of the Jewish nation to Christianity confirms the gospel miracles. Had the Jews been generally converted by them, the septic might argue with plausibility that the facts had been invented or exaggerated to gratify the national propensity, credited without examination or proof, and all inquiry checked at the only period when inquiry could have detected imposition. </p> <p> But now we are certain that the gospel miracles were wrought in the presence of enemies, and so subjected to the severest scrutiny. Joel (&nbsp;Joel 2:28-29-31) apparently foretells a fuller outpouring of the Spirit accompanied with "prophesying," "dreams," and "wonders," in connection with and before "the great and terrible day of the Lord" (compare &nbsp;Zechariah 12:10). Also &nbsp;Matthew 24:24; &nbsp;Matthew 24:29, "false Christs and prophets shall show great signs and wonders, inasmuch that if it were possible they shall deceive the very elect ... immediately after ... the sun shall be darkened." So &nbsp;2 Thessalonians 2:9, "the coining of that wicked one, the man of sin, shall be after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders." </p> <p> The same three terms occur for Jesus' miracles (&nbsp;Acts 2:22; &nbsp;Hebrews 2:4); for as the Egyptian magicians imitated Moses (&nbsp;2 Timothy 3:1-8), so antichrist imitates Christ's works as a "sign" of divinity, real but demoniac. The test of miracles is their being wrought, or not, in support of doctrine in accordance with God's known word and revelation; for God cannot by subsequent revelation contradict Himself (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 13:1-5; &nbsp;Galatians 1:8-9; &nbsp;Revelation 13:11-15; &nbsp;Revelation 19:20; &nbsp;1 Kings 13:11-26). </p>

<p> [[A]] miracle, in the popular sense, is a prodigy, or an extraordinary event, which surprises us by its novelty. In a more accurate and philosophic sense, a miracle is an effect which does not follow from any of the regular laws of nature, or which is inconsistent with some known law of it, or contrary to the settled constitution and course of things. Accordingly, all miracles presuppose an established system of nature, within the limits of which they operate, and with the order of which they disagree. Of a miracle in the theological sense many definitions have been given. That of Dr. Samuel Clarke is: [["A]] miracle is a work effected in a manner unusual, or different from the common and regular method of providence, by the interposition of God himself, or of some intelligent agent superior to man, for the proof or evidence of some particular doctrine, or in attestation of the authority of some particular person." Mr. Hume has insidiously or erroneously maintained that a miracle is contrary to experience; but in reality it is only different from experience. [[Experience]] informs us that one event has happened often; testimony informs us that another event has happened once or more. That diseases should be generally cured by the application of external causes, and sometimes at the mere word of a prophet, and without the visible application of causes, are facts not inconsistent with each other in the nature of things themselves, nor irreconcilable according to our ideas. Each fact may arise from its own proper cause; each may exist independently of the other; and each is known by its own proper proof, whether of sense or testimony. As secret causes often produce events contrary to those we do expect from experience, it is equally conceivable that events should sometimes be produced which we do not expect. To pronounce, therefore, a miracle to be false, because it is different from experience, is only to conclude against its general existence from the very circumstance which constitutes its particular nature; for if it were not different from experience, where would be its singularity? or what particular proof could be drawn from it, if it happened according to the ordinary train of human events, or was included in the operation of the general laws of nature? We grant that it does differ from experience; but we do not presume to make our experience the standard of the divine conduct. He that acknowledges a God must, at least, admit the possibility of a miracle. The atheist, that makes him inseparable from what is called nature, and binds him to its laws by an insurmountable necessity; that deprives him of will, and wisdom, and power, as a distinct and independent Being; may deny even the very possibility of a miraculous interposition, which can in any instance suspend or counteract those general laws by which the world is governed. But he who allows of a First Cause in itself perfect and intelligent, abstractedly from those effects which his wisdom and power have produced, must at the same time allow that this cause can be under no such restraints as to be debarred the liberty of controlling its laws as often as it sees fit. Surely, the Being that made the world can govern it, or any part of it, in such a manner as he pleases; and he that constituted the very laws by which it is in general conducted, may suspend the operation of those laws in any given instance, or impress new powers on matter, in order to produce new and extraordinary effects. </p> <p> In judging of miracles there are certain criteria, peculiar to the subject, sufficient to conduct our inquiries, and warrant our determination. [[Assuredly]] they do not appeal to our ignorance, for they presuppose not only the existence of a general order of things, but our actual knowledge of the appearance which that order exhibits, and of the secondary material causes from which it, in most cases, proceeds. If a miraculous event were effected by the immediate hand of God, and yet bore no mark of distinction from the ordinary effects of his agency, it would impress no conviction, and probably awaken no attention. Our knowledge of the ordinary course of things, though limited, is real; and therefore it is essential to a miracle, both that it differ from that course, and be accompanied with peculiar and unequivocal signs of such difference. We have been told that the course of nature is fixed and unalterable, and therefore it is not consistent with the immutability of God to perform miracles. But, surely, they who reason in this manner beg the point in question. We have no right to assume that the [[Deity]] has ordained such general laws as will exclude his interposition; and we cannot suppose that he would forbear to interfere where any important end could be answered. This interposition, though it controls, in particular cases, the energy, does not diminish the utility, of those laws. It leaves them to fulfil their own proper purposes, and affects only a distinct purpose, for which they were not calculated. If the course of nature implies the general laws of matter and motion, into which the most opposite phenomena may be resolved, it is certain that we do not yet know them in their full extent; and, therefore, that events, which are related by judicious and disinterested persons, and at the same time imply no gross contradiction, are possible in themselves, and capable of a certain degree of proof. If the course of nature implies the whole order of events which God has ordained for the government of the world, it includes both his ordinary and extraordinary dispensations, and among them miracles may have their place, as a part of the universal plan. It is, indeed, consistent with sound philosophy, and not inconsistent with pure religion, to acknowledge that they might be disposed by the supreme Being at the same time with the more ordinary effects of his power; that their causes and occasions might be arranged with the same regularity; and that, in reference chiefly to their concomitant circumstances of persons and times, to the specific ends for which they were employed, and to our idea of the immediate necessity there is for a divine agent, miracles would differ from common events, in which the hand of God acts as efficaciously, though less visibly. On this consideration of the subject, miracles, instead of contradicting nature, might form a part of it. But what our limited reason and scanty experience may comprehend should never be represented as a full and exact view of the possible or actual varieties which exist in the works of God. </p> <p> <strong> 2. </strong> If we be asked whether miracles are credible, we reply, that, abstractedly considered, they are not incredible; that they are capable of indirect proof from analogy, and of direct, from testimony; that in the common and daily course of worldly affairs, events, the improbability of which, antecedently to all testimony, was very great, are proved to have happened, by the authority of competent and honest witnesses; that the Christian miracles were objects of real and proper experience to those who saw them; and that whatsoever the senses of mankind can perceive, their report may substantiate. Should it be asked whether miracles were necessary, and whether the end proposed to be effected by them could warrant so immediate and extraordinary an interference of the Almighty, as such extraordinary operations suppose; to this we might answer, that, if the fact be established, all reasonings <em> a priori </em> concerning their necessity must be frivolous, and may be false. We are not capable of deciding on a question which, however simple in appearance, is yet too complex in its parts, and too extensive in its object, to be fully comprehended by the human understanding. Whether God could or could not have effected all the ends designed to be promoted by the Gospel, without deviating from the common course of his providence, and interfering with its general laws, is a speculation that a modest inquirer would carefully avoid; for it carries on the very face of it a degree of presumption totally unbecoming the state of a mortal being. Infinitely safer is it for us to acquiesce in what the [[Almighty]] has done, than to embarrass our minds with speculations about what he might have done. Inquiries of this kind are generally inconclusive, and always useless. They rest on no solid principles, are conducted by no fixed rules, and lead to no clear conviction. They begin from curiosity or vanity, they are prosecuted amidst ignorance and error, and they frequently terminate in impious presumption or universal skepticism. God is the best and indeed the only judge how far miracles are proper to promote any particular design of his providence, and how far that design would have been left unaccomplished, if common and ordinary methods only had been pursued. So, from the absence of miracles, we may conclude, in any supposed case, that they were not necessary; from their existence, supported by fair testimony, in any given case, we may refer with confidence that they are proper. [[A]] view of the state of the world in general, and of the Jewish nation in particular, and an examination of the nature and tendency of the Christian religion, will point out very clearly the great expediency of a miraculous interposition; and when we reflect on the gracious and important ends that were to be effected by it, we shall be convinced that it was not an idle and useless display of divine power; but that while the means effected and confirmed the end, the end fully justified and illustrated the means. If we reflect on the almost irresistible force of prejudice, and the strong opposition it universally made to the establishment of a new religion on the demolition of rites and ceremonies, which authority had made sacred, and custom had familiarized; if we reflect on the extent and importance, as well as the singularity, of the Christian plan; what was its avowed purpose to effect, and what difficulties it was necessarily called to struggle with before that purpose could be effected; how much it was opposed by the opinions and the practice of the generality of mankind, by philosophy, by superstition, by corrupt passions and inveterate habits, by pride and sensuality, in short, by every engine of human influence, whether formed by craft, or aided by power;—if we seriously reflect on these things, and give them their due force, (and experience shows us that we can scarcely give them too much,) we shall be induced to admit even the necessity of a miraculous interposition, at a time when common means must inevitably, in our apprehensions, have failed of success. </p> <p> The revelation of the divine will by inspired persons is, as such, miraculous; and therefore, before the adversaries of the Gospel can employ with propriety their objections to the particular miracles on which its credibility is based, they should show the impossibility of any revelation. In whatever age the revelation is given, succeeding ages can know it only from testimony; and, if they admit, on the report of their fellow creatures, that God had inspired any being with the preternatural knowledge of his will, why should they deny that he had enabled the same being to heal the sick, or to cleanse the leprous? How, may it be asked, should the divine Teacher give a more direct and consistent proof of his preternatural commission, than by displaying those signs and wonders which mark the finger of God? That the [[Apostles]] could not be deceived, and that they had no temptation to deceive, has been repeatedly demonstrated. So powerful, indeed, is the proof adduced in support of their testimony, that the infidels of these later days have been obliged to abandon the ground on which their predecessors stood; to disclaim all moral evidences arising from the character and relation of eye-witnesses; and to maintain, upon metaphysical, rather than historical, principles, that miracles are utterly incapable, in their own nature, of existing in any circumstances, or of being supported by any evidence. </p> <p> Miracles may be classed under two heads: those which consist in a train or combination of events, which distinguish themselves from the ordinary arrangements of Providence; and those particular operations which are performed by instruments and agents incompetent to effect them without a preternatural power. In the conduct of [[Providence]] respecting the Jewish people, from the earliest periods of their existence, as a distinct class of society, to the present time, we behold a singularity of circumstance and procedure which we cannot account for on common principles. [[Comparing]] their condition and situation with that of other nations, we can meet with nothing similar to it in the history of mankind. So remarkable a difference, conspicuous in every revolution of their history, could not have subsisted through mere accident. There must have been a cause adequate to so extraordinary an effect. Now, what should this cause be, but an interposition of Providence in a manner different from the course of its general government? For the phenomenon cannot be explained by an application of those general causes and effects that operate in other cases. The original propagation of Christianity was likewise an event which clearly discovered a miraculous interposition. The circumstances which attended it were such as cannot rationally be accounted for on any other postulatum. ( See [[Christianity.]] ) It may now be observed, that the institutions of the law and the Gospel may not only appeal for their confirmation to a train of events which, taken in a general and combined view, point out an extraordinary designation, and vindicate their claim to a divine authority; but also to a number of particular operations which, considered distinctly, or in a separate and detached light, evidently display a supernatural power, immediately exerted on the occasion. </p> <p> Since Christ himself constantly appealed to these works as the evidences of his divine mission and character, we may briefly examine how far they justified and confirmed his pretensions. That our Lord laid the greatest stress on the evidence they afforded, nay, that he considered that evidence as sufficient to authenticate his claims to the office of the Messiah with all reasonable and well disposed inquirers, is manifest not only from his own words, &nbsp;John 10:25 , but also from a great variety of other passages in the evangelists. Thus, when the disciples of John were sent to Christ, to receive from his own lips the most satisfactory proofs of his divine mission, he referred them to his miracles. "Go," said he, "and show to John again those things which ye hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up," </p> <p> &nbsp;Matthew 11:4-5 . Again: "If [[I]] do not the works of my Father, believe me not: but if [[I]] do, though ye believe not me, believe the works," &nbsp;John 10:37 . This appeal to miracles was founded on the following just and obvious grounds:— </p> <p> First: That they are visible proofs of divine approbation, as well as of divine power; for it would have been quite inconclusive to rest an appeal on the testimony of the latter, if it had not at the same time included an evidence of the former; and it was, indeed, a natural inference, that working of miracles, in defence of a particular cause, was the seal of [[Heaven]] to the truth of that cause. To suppose the contrary, would be to suppose that God not only permitted his creatures to be deceived, but that he deviated from the ordinary course of his providence, purposely with a view to deceive them. The conclusion which the man whom our [[Saviour]] restored to sight drew from this miracle was exceedingly just, and founded on the common sentiments and impressions of the human heart. "We know," says he, "that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth. Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind. If this man were not of God, he could do nothing," &nbsp;John 9:31-33 . If the cause which our Saviour was engaged in had not been approved of by God, it would not have been honoured with the seal of miracles: for the divine power can never be supposed to counteract the divine will. This would be to set his nature at variance with itself; and, by destroying his simplicity, would destroy his happiness, and terminate in confusion and misery. Hence we may justly reject, as incredible, those miracles which have been ascribed to the interposition of wicked spirits. The possibility of their interference is a mere hypothesis, depending upon gratuitous assumption, and leading to very dangerous consequences; and the particular instances in which credulous superstition, or perverted philosophy, has supposed them to interfere, are, as facts, destitute of any clear and solid evidence; or, as effects, often resolvable into natural causes. </p> <p> Secondly: When our Lord appealed to his miracles, as proofs of his divine mission, it presupposed that those miracles were of such a nature as would bear the strictest examination; that they had all those criteria which could possibly distinguish them from the delusions of enthusiasm, and the artifices of imposture; else the appeal would have been fallacious and equivocal. He appealed to them with all the confidence of an upright mind totally possessed with a consciousness of their truth and reality. This appeal was not drawn out into any laboured argument, nor adorned by any of the embellishments of language. It was short, simple, and decisive. He neither reasoned nor declaimed on their nature or their design: he barely pointed to them as plain and indubitable facts, such as spoke their own meaning, and carried with them their own authority. The miracles which our Lord performed were too public to be suspected of imposture; and, being objects of sense, they were secured against the charge of enthusiasm. An impostor would not have acted so absurdly as to have risked his credit on the performance of what, he must have known, it was not in his power to effect; and though an enthusiast, from the warmth of imagination, might have flattered himself with a full persuasion of his being able to perform some miraculous work; yet, when the trial was referred to an object of sense, the event must soon have exposed the delusion. The impostor would not have dared to say to the blind, [[Receive]] thy sight; to the deaf, Hear; to the dumb, Speak; to the dead, Arise; to the raging of the sea, Be still; lest he should injure the credit of his cause, by undertaking more than he could perform; and though the enthusiast, under the delusion of his passions, might have confidently commanded disease to fly, and the powers of nature to be subject to his control; yet their obedience would not have followed his command. </p> <p> The miracles of Christ then were such as an impostor would not have attempted, and such as an enthusiast could not have effected. They had no disguise; and were in a variety of instances of such a nature as to preclude the very possibility of collusion. They were performed in the midst of his bitterest enemies; and were so palpable and certain, as to extort the following acknowledgment even from persons who were most eager to oppose his doctrines, and to discredit his pretensions: "This man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him," </p> <p> &nbsp;John 11:47-48 . The miracles Christ performed were indeed sufficient to alarm the fears of those whose downfall was involved in his success. </p> <p> And it was impossible for them to deny the facts, which so many thousands were ready to attest on evidence too certain to admit even the possibility of mistake, delusion, or imposture. But his enemies, who admitted their reality and yet resisted their design, by not acknowledging the person who wrought them to be the Messiah, had recourse to the most impious and most absurd suppositions, in order to evade their evidence. The [[Heathen]] imputed them to some occult power of magic: and thus applied what has no existence in nature, in order to account for a phenomenon that existed out of its common course. The stories of the Jews, who confessed the miracles, but denied what they were intended to establish, are too ridiculous to be mentioned. We must not, however, omit to take notice of the wicked and blasphemous cavil of the Pharisees, and the noble reply which our Lord made to it. They could not deny the fact, but they imputed it to the agency of an infernal spirit: "This fellow," said they, "doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub, the prince of the devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: and if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?" &nbsp;Matthew 12:24-26 . The purity of the doctrine which was taught by our blessed Lord was totally adverse to the kingdom of darkness. It tended to overthrow it, by the introduction of principles far different from those which Satan would inspire, and by prosecuting objects totally opposite to those which that wicked and malignant spirit would tempt us to pursue: so that in proportion to the prevalence of the kingdom of Christ, the kingdom of Satan would of course be diminished. Now, supposing miracles to be in the power of an infernal spirit, can it be imagined that he would communicate an ability of performing them to persons who were counteracting his designs? Would he by them give credit to a cause that tended to bring his own into disgrace? Thus, as our Saviour appealed to miracles as proofs of his power; so he appealed to the inherent worth and purity of the doctrines they were intended to bear witness to, as a proof that the power was of God. In this manner do the external and internal evidences give and receive mutual confirmation and mutual lustre. </p> <p> The truth of the Christian religion does not, however, depend wholly on the miracles wrought by its divine Founder, though sufficient in themselves to establish his claims: but, in order to give the evidence of miracles the strongest force they could possibly acquire, that evidence was extended still farther; and the same power that our Lord possessed was communicated to his disciples, and their more immediate successors. While yet on earth he imparted to them this extraordinary gift, as the seal of their commission, when he sent them to preach the Gospel: and after his glorious resurrection and ascension into heaven, they were endowed with powers yet more stupendous. Sensible of the validity of this kind of evidence, the Apostles of our Lord, with the same artless simplicity, and the same boldness of conscious integrity, which distinguished their great Master, constantly insisted upon the miracles they wrought, as strong and undeniable proofs of the truth of their doctrines. Thus the miracles of our blessed Lord may be justly considered as the evidence of his divine mission and character. If we consider their nature, their greatness, and their number; and if to this consideration we add that which respects their end and design, we must acknowledge that no one could have performed them, unless God was with him. They were too public to be the artifices of imposture; too substantial and too numerous to afford the slightest suspicion of undesigned and fortuitous coincidence. In a word, supposing that the Most High should in any instance so far counteract the common laws of nature, as to produce a miracle; and should design that miracle as a monument to future times of the truth of any peculiar doctrine, we cannot conceive any mode of communicating it more effectual than that which he has chosen. [[Stronger]] proofs could not be afforded, consistently with the design of the Gospel, which is not to overpower our understandings by an irresistible and compulsory light, but to afford us such rational evidence as is sufficient to satisfy moral inquirers, who are endowed with faculties to perceive the truth; but at the same time who also have power totally to resist it, and finally to forfeit all its blessings. These miracles were of a nature too palpable to be mistaken. They were the objects of sense, and not the precarious speculations of reason concerning what God might do; or the chimerical suggestions of fancy concerning what he did. The facts were recorded by those who must have known whether they were true or false. The persons who recorded them were under no possible temptations to deceive the world. We can only account for their conduct on the supposition of their most perfect conviction and disinterested zeal. That they should assert what they knew to be false; that they should publish it with so much ardour; that they should risk every thing dear to humanity, in order to maintain it; and at last submit to death, in order to attest their persuasion of its truth in those moments when imposture usually drops its mask, and enthusiasm loses its confidence; that they should act thus in opposition to every dictate of common sense, and every principle of common honesty, every restraint of shame, and every impulse of selfishness, is a phenomenon not less irreconcilable to the moral state of things than miracles are to the natural constitution of the world. [[Falsehood]] naturally entangles men in contradiction, and confounds them with dismay: but the love of truth invigorates the mind; the consciousness of integrity anticipates the approbation of God; and conscience creates a fortitude, to which mere unsupported nature is often a stranger. </p> <p> <strong> 3. </strong> How long miracles were continued in the church, has been a matter of keen dispute, and has been investigated with as much anxiety as if the truth of the Gospel depended upon the manner in which it was decided. Assuming, as we are here warranted to do, that real miraculous power was conveyed in the way detailed by the inspired writers, it is plain, that it may have been exercised in different countries, and may have remained, without any new communication of it, throughout the first, and a considerable part of the second century. The Apostles, wherever they went to execute their commission, would avail themselves of the stupendous gift which had been imparted to them; and it is clear, not only that they were permitted and enabled to convey it to others, but that spiritual gifts, including the power of working miracles, were actually conferred on many of the primitive disciples. Allusions to this we find in the epistles of St. Paul; such allusions, too, as it is utterly inconceivable that any man of a sound judgment could have made, had he not known that he was referring to an obvious fact, about which there could be no hesitation. Of the time at which several of the Apostles died, we have no certain knowledge. St. Peter and St. Paul suffered at Rome about [[A.D.]] 66, or 67; and it is fully established, that the life of John was much longer protracted, he having died a natural death, [[A.D.]] 100, or 101. [[Supposing]] that the two former of these Apostles imparted spiritual gifts till the time of their suffering martyrdom, the persons to whom they were imparted might, in the course of nature, have lived through the earlier part of the second century; and if John did the same till the end of his life, such gifts as were derived from him might have remained till more than the half of that century had elapsed. That such was the fact, is asserted by ancient ecclesiastical writers. Whether, after the generation immediately succeeding the Apostles had passed away, the power of working miracles was anew communicated, is a question, the solution of which cannot be nearly so satisfactory. The probability is, that there was no such renewal; and this opinion rests upon the ground that natural causes were now sufficient to accomplish the end for which miracles were originally designed; and it does not appear to have been any part of the scheme of the blessed Author of our religion, that, solely for the purpose of hastening that conversion of the nations which might gradually be accomplished, miracles should be wrought, when these could be of no use in establishing after ages in the faith. </p>

<p> <strong> [[Miracles]] </strong> </p> <p> 1. The narratives <em> a </em> ) In the Gospels Jesus is recorded to have cast out devils (&nbsp; Matthew 8:28; &nbsp; Matthew 15:28; &nbsp; Matthew 17:18 , &nbsp; Mark 1:25 ), restored paralytics (&nbsp; Matthew 8:13; &nbsp; Matthew 9:6 , &nbsp; John 5:8 ), revived the withered hand (&nbsp; Matthew 12:13 ), released from the spirit of infirmity (&nbsp; Luke 13:12 ), stanched an issue of blood (&nbsp; Matthew 9:22 ), cured dropsy (&nbsp; Luke 14:2 ), allayed fever with a touch (&nbsp; Matthew 8:15 ), given speech to the dumb, hearing to the deaf, and sight to the blind (&nbsp; Matthew 9:33; &nbsp; Matthew 12:22 , &nbsp; Mark 7:35 , &nbsp; Matthew 9:29; &nbsp; Matthew 20:34 , &nbsp; Mark 8:25 , &nbsp; John 9:7 ), cleansed leprosy (&nbsp; Matthew 8:3 , &nbsp; Luke 17:18 ), and even raised from the dead (&nbsp; Matthew 9:25 , &nbsp; Luke 7:15 , &nbsp; John 11:44 ). Besides these miracles of healing there are ascribed to Him other extraordinary acts, such as the Stilling of the [[Storm]] (&nbsp; Matthew 8:26 ), the [[Feeding]] of Five Thousand (&nbsp; Matthew 14:19 ) and Four Thousand (&nbsp; Matthew 15:35 ), the [[Walking]] on the Sea (&nbsp; Matthew 14:28 ), the [[Change]] of [[Water]] into Wine (&nbsp; John 2:9 ). The blasting of the [[Fig]] Tree (&nbsp; Matthew 21:19 ), and the finding of the [[Coin]] in the Fish’s [[Mouth]] (&nbsp; Matthew 17:27 ), may possibly be figurative sayings misunderstood. The Two [[Draughts]] of Fishes (&nbsp; Luke 5:6 and &nbsp; John 21:6 ) may be variant traditions of one occurrence, and, like the recovery of the Nohleman’s Son of [[Capernaum]] (&nbsp; John 4:50 ), may be regarded as proof of superhuman wisdom, and not of supernatural power. These miracles are presented to us as the acts of a Person supernatural both in the moral character as sinless and perfect, and in the religious consciousness as alone knowing and revealing the Father. It was the universal conviction of the early Christian Church that after three days He rose from the dead (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), and was universally present in supreme power (&nbsp; Matthew 28:18; &nbsp; Matthew 28:20 ). </p> <p> [[Regarding]] the miracles of Jesus the following general considerations should be kept in view. ( <em> a </em> ) It is impossible to remove the records of miracles from the Gospels without tearing them to pieces, as these works of Jesus are so wrought into the very texture of His ministry. ( <em> b </em> ) The character of the miracles is absolutely harmonious with the power of Jesus; with only two apparent exceptions they are beneficent. The blasting of the fig tree (&nbsp; Matthew 21:19 ), even if the record is taken literally, may be explained as a symbolic prophetic act, a solemn warning to His disciples of the doom of impenitent Israel. The finding of the coin in the fish’s mouth (&nbsp; Matthew 17:27 ) would be an exception to the rule of Jesus never to use His supernatural power on His own behalf, and the narrative itself allows us to explain it as a misunderstanding of figurative language. ( <em> c </em> ) The miracles were not wrought for display, or to prove His claims. Jesus rejected such use as a temptation (&nbsp; Matthew 4:6-7 ), and always refused to work a sign to meet the demands of unbelief (&nbsp; Matthew 16:4 ). He did not highly esteem the faith that was produced by His miracles (&nbsp; John 4:48 ). The cure of the paralytic, which He wrought to confirm His claim to forgive sins, was necessary to assure the sufferer of the reality of His forgiveness (&nbsp; Matthew 9:6 ). The miracles are not evidential accessories, but essential constituents of Jesus’ ministry of grace. ( <em> d </em> ) While faith in the petitioner for, or recipient of, the act of healing was a condition Jesus seemingly required in all cases, while He was prevented doing His mighty works, as at Nazareth, by unbelief (&nbsp; Matthew 13:58 ), while the exercise of His power was accompanied by prayer to God (&nbsp; John 11:41-42 ), His healing acts were never tentative; there is in the records no trace of a failure. ( <em> e </em> ) In view of one of the explanations offered, attention must be called to the variety of the diseases cured; nervous disorders and their consequences did not limit the range of His activity. </p> <p> ( <em> b </em> ) In the Acts the record of miracles is continued. The promise of Jesus to His Apostles (&nbsp; Matthew 10:8 , cf. &nbsp; Mark 16:17-18 ) is represented as abundantly fulfilled. In addition to the charisms of <em> tongues </em> and <em> prophecy </em> (wh. see), there were signs and wonders wrought by the Apostles and others (&nbsp; Acts 2:43; &nbsp; Acts 5:12; &nbsp; Acts 5:18; &nbsp; Acts 6:8; &nbsp; Acts 8:13 ). Miracles of which further details are given are the restoration of the lame man at the gate [[Beautiful]] (&nbsp; Acts 3:7 ), and of the cripple at [[Lystra]] (&nbsp; Acts 14:9 ), the cure of the palsied Æneas (&nbsp; Acts 9:34 ), the expulsion of the spirit of divination at [[Philippi]] (&nbsp; Acts 16:18 ), the healing of the father of [[Publius]] in [[Melita]] (&nbsp; Acts 28:8 ), the restoration to life of Dorcas (&nbsp; Acts 9:40 ) and Eutychus (&nbsp; Acts 20:10 , the narrative does not distinctly affirm death). This supernatural power is exercised in judgment on Ananias and [[Sapphira]] (&nbsp; Acts 5:5; &nbsp; Acts 5:10 ), and on Elymas (&nbsp; Acts 13:11 ) acts the moral justification of which must be sought in the estimate formed of the danger threatening the Church and the gospel, but which do present an undoubted difficulty. One may hesitate about accepting the statement about the miracles wrought by Peter’s shadow (&nbsp; Acts 5:15 ) or Paul’s aprons (&nbsp; Acts 19:12 ). What are represented as miraculous deliverances from imprisonment are reported both of Peter (&nbsp; Acts 12:8 ) and of Paul (&nbsp; Acts 16:26 ). Paul’s escape from the viper (&nbsp; Acts 28:3 ) does not necessarily involve a miracle. These miracles, which, taken by themselves as reported in Acts, there might be some hesitation in believing, become more credible when viewed as the continuation of the supernatural power of Christ in His Church for the confirmation of the faith of those to whom the gospel was entrusted, and also those to whom its appeal was first addressed. In this matter the Epistles of Paul confirm the record of Acts (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 12:10; &nbsp; 1 Corinthians 12:28 , &nbsp; 2 Corinthians 12:12 ). Paul claims this supernatural power for himself, and recognizes its presence in the Church. </p> <p> ( <em> c </em> ) We cannot claim to have contemporary evidence of the miracles of the [[Ot,]] as we have of those of the [[Nt.]] The miracles are almost entirely connected either with the Exodus from Egypt, or with the ministry of [[Elijah]] and of Elisha. The majority of the miracles of the first group are not outside of the order of nature; what is extraordinary in them is their coincidence with the prophetic declaration, this constituting the events signs of the Divine revelation. While the miracles ascribed to Elijah and [[Elisha]] might be considered as their credentials, yet they cannot be regarded as essential to their prophetic ministry; and the variations with which they are recorded represent popular traditions which the compiler of the Books of Kings has incorporated without any substantial alteration. The record of the standing still of the sun in [[Gibeon]] is obviously a prosaic misinterpretation of a poetic phrase (&nbsp; Joshua 10:12-14 ); behind the record of the bringing back of the shadow on the dial of [[Ahaz]] (&nbsp; 2 Kings 20:11 ) we may assume some unusual atmospheric phenomenon, refracting the rays of the sun; the speech of Balaam’s ass (&nbsp; Numbers 22:27 ) may be regarded as an objectifying by the seer of his own scruples, doubts, and fears; the Book of Jonah is now interpreted not literally, but figuratively; the Book of Daniel is not now generally taken as history, but rather as the embellishment of history for the purposes of edification. The revelation of [[Jehovah]] to Israel is seen in the providential guidance and guardianship of His people by God, and in the authoritative interpretation of God’s works and ways by the prophets, and in it miracle, in the strict sense of the word, has a small place. While the moral and religious worth of the [[Ot,]] as the literature of the Divine revelation completed in Christ, demands a respectful treatment of the narratives of miracles, we are bound to apply two tests: the sufficiency of the evidence, and the congruity of the miracle in character with the Divine revelation. </p> <p> <strong> 2. The evidence </strong> . In dealing with the evidence for the miracles the starting-point should be <em> the Resurrection </em> . It is admitted that the belief that Jesus had risen prevailed in the Christian Church from the very beginning of its history; that without this belief the Church would never have come into existence. Harnack seeks to distinguish the [[Easter]] message about the empty grave and the appearances of Jesus from the Easter faith that Jesus lives: but he is not successful in showing how the former could have come to be, apart from the latter. No attempt to explain the conversion of Paul without admitting the objective manifestation of Christ as risen can be regarded as satisfactory. It may not be possible absolutely to harmonize in every detail the records of the appearances, but before these narratives were written it was the common belief of the Christian Church, as Paul testifies, ‘that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the Scriptures’ (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 ). If the Resurrection of Christ is proved, this fact, conjoined with His absolutely unique moral character and religious consciousness, in vests the Person of Jesus with a supernaturalness which forbids our limiting the actions possible to Him by the normal human tests. His miracles are not <em> wonders </em> , for it is no wonder that He should so act, but <em> signs </em> , proofs of what He is, and <em> works </em> , congrnous with His character as ‘ever doing good,’ and His purpose to reveal the grace of the Father. Harnack will not ‘reject peremptorily as illusion that lame walked, blind saw, and deaf heard,’ but he will not believe that ‘a stormy sea was stilled by a word.’ The miracles of healing are not all explicable, as he supposes, by what Matthew [[Arnold]] called <em> moral therapeutics </em> the influence of a strong personality over those suffering from nerve disorders, as they embrace diseases of which the cure by any such means is quite incredible; and the evidence for the <em> cosmic </em> miracles, as the miracles showing power over nature apart from man have been called, is quite as good as for the healing miracles. If the Synoptic Gospels can be dated between a.d. 60 and 90, as is coming to be admitted by scholars generally, the evidence for the miracles of Jesus is thoroughly satisfactory; the mythical theory of Strauss must assume a much longer interval. Harnack regards as ‘a demonstrated fact’ that ‘Luke, companion in travel and associate in evangelistic work of Paul,’ is the author of the Third Gospel and the Acts; nevertheless he does not consider Luke’s history as true; but Ramsay argues that the Lukan authorship carries with it substantial accuracy. In his various writings he has endeavoured to show how careful a historian Luke is, and if Luke’s excellence in this respect is established, then we can place greater reliance on the evidence for miracles in the early Church, as well as in the ministry of Jesus. Harnack lays great stress on the credulity of the age in which the Gospels were written; but this credulity was not universal. The educated classes were sceptical; and, to judge Luke from the preface to his Gospel, he appears as one who recognized the duty of careful inquiry, and of testing evidence. The miracles of the Gospels and the Acts are closely connected with the Person of Jesus, as the Word Incarnate and the risen Lord, and the credulity of the age does not come into consideration unless it can be shown that among either the Jews or the [[Gentiles]] there was a prejudice favourable to belief in the Incarnation and the Resurrection. The character of the miracles, so harmonious with the Person, forbids our ascribing them to the wonder-loving, and therefore wonder-making, tendency of the times. </p> <p> Some indications have already been given in regard to the evidence for the miracles of the [[Ot.]] The frequent references to the deliverance from Egypt made in the subsequent literature attest the historical reality of that series of events; and it cannot be said to be improbable that signs should have accompanied such a Divine intervention in human history. Some of the miracles ascribed to Elisha are not of a character congruous with the function of prophecy; but it may be that we should very cautiously apply our sense of fitness as a test of truth to these ancient narratives. In the [[Ot]] history, <em> [[Prophecy]] </em> (wh. see) was the supernatural feature of deepest significance and highest value. </p> <p> <strong> 3. Explanations </strong> . Admitting that the evidence is satisfactory, and the miracles are real, what explanations can be offered of them? ( <em> a </em> ) One suggestion has already been considered; it is favoured by Harnack and Matthew Arnold: it is that one person may exercise over another so strong an influence as to cure nervous disorders. The inadequacy of this explanation has been shown; but even were it admissible, a reason would need to be given why Jesus used a means not known in His age, and thus anticipated modern developments of medical skill. It is certain that Jesus worked His miracles relying on the Divine powers in Himself; whether in any cases this obscure psychic force was an unknown condition of His miracles is a matter of secondary importance. </p> <p> ( <em> b </em> ) [[A]] second suggestion, made by the late Duke of [[Argyll]] ( <em> [[Reign]] of Law </em> , p. 16), is that God chooses and uses laws unknown to man, or laws which, even if he knew, he could not use. He thinks that this would meet the prejudice of scientific thought against effects without causes. This explanation recognizes that miracles are not explicable by the laws of nature as known to man, and that it is of God’s free choice that for certain ends He uses means otherwise unknown. As these laws are quite hypothetical, and as this use of them only occasionally is not at all probable, this explanation does not appear to make miracles any more credible. </p> <p> ( <em> c </em> ) We may now attempt to define more closely what we mean by a miracle. It does seem, on the whole, desirable to restrict the term ‘miracle’ to an external event of which there is sensible evidence. [[Inward]] changes, such as in the prophetic inspiration, or the religious conversion of an individual, however manifest the Divine presence and action may be for the person having the experience, should not be described as miracles, unless with some qualification such as <em> spiritual </em> or <em> moral </em> . The negative feature of the external event which justifies our describing it as a <em> miracle </em> is that it is inexplicable by the natural forces and laws as known to us. The will of man is a force in nature with which we are familiar, and therefore the movements of the body under the control of the will are not to be described as miraculous. We say more than we are justified in saying if we describe a miracle as an interference with the laws and forces of nature, or a breach in the order of nature; for just as the physical forces and laws allow the exercise of human will in the movements of the body, so the power that produces the miracle may, nay must, be conceived as so closely related to nature that its exercise results in no disturbance or disorder in nature. The miracle need not interfere with the continuity of nature at all. The modem theory of [[Evolution]] is not less, but more, favourable to the belief in miracle. It is not a finished machine, but a growing organism, that the world appears. Life transcends, and yet combines and controls physical forces (Lodge’s <em> Life and Matter </em> , p. 198). Mind is not explicable by the brain, and yet the will directs the movements of the body. There is a creative action of God in the stages of the evolution, which attaches itself to the conserving activity. Applying the argument from analogy, we may regard the Person of Christ and the miracles that cluster round His Person as such a creative action of God. If we adequately estimate the significance of the Exodus in the history of mankind, the providential events connected with it will assume greater credibility. But there is a final consideration. The purpose of God in Christ is not only perfective the completion of the world’s evolution; it is also redemptive the correction of the evil sin had brought on the human race. It was fitting that the redemption of man from sin should be accompanied by outward remedial signs, the relief of his need and removal of his sufferings. God is without variation and shadow that is cast by turning in His purpose, but His action is conditioned, and must necessarily be conditioned, by the results of man’s use of the freedom which for His wise and holy ends He bestowed. He may in His action transcend His normal activity by a more direct manifestation of Himself than the natural processes of the world afford. The consistency of character of a human personality is not disproved by an exceptional act when a crisis arises; and so, to deal effectively with sin for man’s salvation, God may use miracles as means to His ends without any break in the continuity of His wisdom, righteousness, and grace. </p> <p> <strong> 4. Objections </strong> . It seemed desirable to state the facts, the proofs for them, and the reasonableness of them, before taking up the objections that are made. These objections refer to two points, the possibility of miracle at all, and the sufficiency of the evidence for the miracles of the Bible. Each of these may be very briefly dealt with. ( <em> a </em> ) For <em> materialism </em> , which recognizes only physical forces; and <em> pantheism </em> , which so identifies God and man that the order of nature is fixed by the necessity of the nature of God; and even for <em> deism </em> , which confines the direct Divine activity to the beginning, and excludes it from the course of the world, miracles are impossible. <em> [[Agnosticism]] </em> , which regards the ultimate reality as an inscrutable mystery, is under no logical compulsion to deny the possibility of miracles; Huxley, for instance, pronounces such denial unjustifiable. Two reasons against the possibility of miracles may be advanced from a <em> theistic </em> standpoint. In the interests of science it may be maintained that the <em> uniformity of nature excludes miracle </em> ; but, as has just been shown, the theory of Evolution has so modified the conception of uniformity that this argument has lost its force. Life and mind, when first appearing in the process of evolution, were breaches in the uniformity. The uniformity of nature is consistent with fresh stages of development, inexplicable by their antecedents; and only when science has resolved life and mind into matter will the argument regain any validity. In the interests of philosophy, it may be argued that <em> miracles interrupt the continuity of thought </em> : the world as it is is so reasonable (idealism) or so good (optimism) that any change is unthinkable. But the affirmation ignores many of the problems the world as it is presents: sin, sorrow, death are real; would not the solution of these problems give both a more reasonable and a better world? and if miracles should be necessary to such a solution, they are thinkable. Again, is it not somewhat arrogant to make man’s estimate of what is reasonable and good the measure of God’s wisdom and grace? </p> <p> ( <em> b </em> ) The more usual objection is the <em> insufficiency of the evidence </em> . Hume laid down this criterion: ‘No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish. Or briefly, it is contrary to experience that a miracle should be true, but not contrary to experience that testimony should be false.’ But to this statement it may properly be objected, that it assumes what is to be proved; for, while it may be contrary to ordinary experience that miracles happen, what the defenders of miracles maintain is that there have been exceptional experiences of miracles. If miracles were common, they would cease to be so described; their uncommonness does not prove their incredibility. Although the test is one that has no warrant, yet it may be argued that Christ’s character and resurrection would stand it. It is less credible that the portrait of Jesus given in the Gospels was invented, than that Jesus lived as there depicted. It is less credible that the Apostolic faith in the risen Lord, and all it accomplished, should have its origin in illusion, than that He rose from the dead. The improbability of miracle is usually the tacit assumption when the sufficiency of the evidence is denied. If the relation of God to the world is conceived as a constant, immanent, progressive, perfective, redemptive activity, the probability of miracles will be so great that the evidence sufficient to prove an ordinary event will be regarded as satisfactory, provided always that this test is met, that the miracle is connected with the fulfilment of the Divine purpose, and is congruous in its character with the wisdom, righteousness, and grace of God. </p> <p> <strong> 5. [[Value]] </strong> . [[A]] few words may in conclusion be added regarding the value of the miracles. The old apologetic view of miracles as the credentials of the doctrines of Christianity is altogether discredited. It is the truth of the doctrines that makes the fact of the miracles credible. It is Christ’s moral character and religious consciousness that help us to believe that He wrought wonderful works. The [[Nt]] recognizes that a miracle proves only superhuman power (&nbsp; 2 Thessalonians 2:9 ); only if its character is good, is it proved Divine. In the [[Ot]] prophecy is declared false, not only when unfulfilled (&nbsp; Deuteronomy 18:22 ), but also when it leads to idolatry (&nbsp; Deuteronomy 13:3 ). The moral test, which can be applied to the miracles of the Gospels, shows the irrelevancy, not to say the flippancy, of Matthew Arnold’s sneer about the turning of a pen into a pen-wiper as the proof of a doctrine. The miracles of the Gospels are constituent elements of Christ’s moral perfection, His grace towards men. While the miracles are represented in the Gospels as not in themselves sufficient to generate faith (&nbsp; John 11:46; &nbsp; John 12:37 ), yet it is affirmed that they arrested attention and strengthened faith (&nbsp; Matthew 8:27 , &nbsp; Luke 5:8; &nbsp; Luke 7:18 , &nbsp; John 2:11; &nbsp; John 6:14 ). Christ Himself is reported as appealing to them as witness (&nbsp; John 5:36 ), but the appeal seems deprecatory, as elsewhere He rates low the faith that rests on seeing miracles (&nbsp; John 4:48; &nbsp; John 14:11 ), while condemning the unbelief that resists even this evidence (&nbsp; Matthew 11:20 ). At the beginning of the Christian Church the miracles had some value as evidence. Today the change Christ has wrought in human history is the most convincing proof of His claim; but we must not ignore the value the miracles had when they occurred, and their value to us still as works of Christ, showing as signs His grace. </p> <p> Alfred [[E.]] Garvie. </p>

<p> No sincere believer in the inspiration of scripture can have a doubt as to real miracles having been wrought by the power of God both in [[O.T.]] and [[N.T.]] times. It is philosophy so-called, or scepticism, that mystifies the subject. Much is said about 'the laws of nature;' and it is confidently affirmed that these are irrevocable and cannot be departed from. To which is added that laws of nature previously unknown are frequently being discovered, and if our forefathers could witness the application of some of the more recent discoveries, as the computer, mobile telephone, etc., they would judge that miracles were being performed. So, it is argued, the actions recorded in scripture as miracles, were merely the bringing into use some law of nature which had been hidden up to that time. </p> <p> All this is based upon a fallacy. There are no laws <i> of </i> nature, as if nature made its own laws: there are laws <i> in </i> nature, which God in His wisdom as [[Creator]] was pleased to make; but He who made those laws has surely the same power to suspend them when He pleases. Though laws in nature hitherto unknown are being discovered from time to time, they in no way account for such things as dead persons being raised to life, the blind seeing, the deaf hearing, the lame walking, and demons being cast out of those who were possessed by them. Neither has natural philosophy discovered any law that will account for such a thing as an iron axe-head swimming in water. The simple truth is that God, for wise purposes, allowed some of the natural laws to be suspended, and at times He put forth His almighty power, as in supplying the Israelites with manna from heaven, and in feeding thousands from a few loaves and fishes, or by recalling life that had left the body. </p> <p> The words translated 'miracle' in the [[O.T.]] are </p> <p> 1. <i> oth </i> , 'a sign,' as it is often translated, and in some places 'token.' &nbsp;Numbers 14:22; &nbsp;Deuteronomy 11:3 . </p> <p> 2. <i> mopheth, </i> 'a wonder,' as it is mostly translated: it is something out of the ordinary course of events. &nbsp;Exodus 7:9; &nbsp;Deuteronomy 29:3 . </p> <p> 3. <i> pala </i> , 'wonderful, marvellous.' &nbsp;Judges 6:13 . </p> <p> Moses was enabled to work miracles for two distinct objects. One was in order to convince the children of Israel that God had sent him. God gave him three signs to perform before them: his rod became a serpent, and was again a rod; his hand became leprous, and was then restored; and he could turn the water of the Nile into blood. &nbsp;Exodus 4:1-9 . </p> <p> The other miracles, wrought by him in Egypt, were to show to [[Pharaoh]] the mighty power of God, who said, [[I]] will "multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt . . . . and the [[Egyptians]] shall know that [[I]] am Jehovah, when [[I]] stretch forth mine hand upon Egypt." &nbsp;Exodus 7:3-5 . The ten plagues followed, which were miracles or signs of the power of God — signs not only to the Egyptians, but also to the Israelites, as is shown by the reference to them afterwards. &nbsp;Numbers 14:22; &nbsp;Judges 6:13 . </p> <p> By the following list it will be seen that there were many other miracles wrought in [[O.T.]] times — by Moses in the wilderness; by the prophets in the land; and some through the direct agency of God from heaven, as the deliverance of the three from the fiery furnace, Daniel from the lions, etc. All the miracles were indeed the acts of God, His servants being merely the means through which they were carried out. </p> <p> [[Principal]] [[Miracles]] [[In]] [[The]] [[Old]] [[Testament.]] </p> <p> <i> In Egypt. </i> </p> <p> Aaron's rod becomes a serpent &nbsp;Exodus 7:10-12 </p> <p> <i> The Ten Plagues. </i> </p> <p> Water made blood &nbsp;Exodus 7:20-25 </p> <p> [[Frogs]] &nbsp;Exodus 8:5-14 </p> <p> [[Lice]] &nbsp;Exodus 8:16-18 </p> <p> [[Flies]] &nbsp;Exodus 8:20-24 </p> <p> [[Murrain]] &nbsp;Exodus 9:3 - &nbsp;6 </p> <p> [[Boils]] and blains &nbsp;Exodus 9:8-11 </p> <p> [[Thunder]] and hail &nbsp;Exodus 9:22-26 </p> <p> [[Locusts]] &nbsp;Exodus 10:12-19 </p> <p> [[Darkness]] &nbsp;Exodus 10:21-23 </p> <p> Death of the [[Firstborn]] &nbsp;Exodus 12:29-30 </p> <p> [[Parting]] of the Red Sea &nbsp;Exodus 14:21-31 </p> <p> <i> In the Wilderness. </i> </p> <p> Curing the waters of [[Marah]] &nbsp;Exodus 15:23-25 </p> <p> [[Manna]] from heaven &nbsp;Exodus 16:14-35 </p> <p> Water from the rock at [[Rephidim]] &nbsp;Exodus 17:5-7 </p> <p> Death of [[Nadab]] and [[Abihu]] &nbsp;Leviticus 10:1 - &nbsp;2 </p> <p> The earth swallows the murmurers, and </p> <p> the death of Korah, [[Dathan]] and [[Abiram]] &nbsp;Numbers 16:31-40 </p> <p> Budding of Aaron's rod at [[Kadesh]] &nbsp;Numbers 17:8 </p> <p> Water from the rock at [[Meribah]] &nbsp;Numbers 20:7-11 </p> <p> The brazen serpent: Israel healed &nbsp;Numbers 21:8 - &nbsp;9 </p> <p> Balaam's ass speaking &nbsp;Numbers 22:21-35 </p> <p> Parting the [[Jordan]] &nbsp;Joshua 3:14-17 </p> <p> <i> In the Land. </i> </p> <p> Fall of Jericho's walls &nbsp;Joshua 6:6-25 </p> <p> Staying of the sun and moon &nbsp;Joshua 10:12-14 </p> <p> Withering and cure of Jeroboam's hand &nbsp;1 Kings 13:4 - &nbsp;6 </p> <p> [[Multiplying]] the widow's oil &nbsp;1 Kings 17:14-16 </p> <p> [[Raising]] the widow's son &nbsp;1 Kings 17:17-24 </p> <p> [[Burning]] of the captains and their companies &nbsp;2 Kings 1 . &nbsp;10-12 </p> <p> [[Dividing]] of Jordan by Elijah &nbsp;2 Kings 2:7-8 </p> <p> Elijah carried to heaven &nbsp;2 Kings 2:11 </p> <p> Dividing of Jordan by Elisha &nbsp;2 Kings 2:14 </p> <p> [[Cure]] of the waters of [[Jericho]] &nbsp;2 Kings 2:19-22 </p> <p> [[Supply]] of water to the army &nbsp;2 Kings 3:16-20 </p> <p> [[Increase]] of the widow's oil &nbsp;2 Kings 4:2-7 </p> <p> Raising the Shunammite's son &nbsp;2 Kings 4:32-37 </p> <p> [[Healing]] of the deadly pottage &nbsp;2 Kings 4:38-41 </p> <p> Feeding the 100 with 20 loaves &nbsp;2 Kings 4:42-44 </p> <p> Cure of Naaman's leprosy &nbsp;2 Kings 5:10-14 </p> <p> [[Swimming]] of the iron axe-head &nbsp;2 Kings 6:5-7 </p> <p> Resurrection of the dead man on touching Elisha's bones &nbsp;2 Kings 13:21 </p> <p> [[Return]] of the shadow on the dial &nbsp;2 Kings 20:9-11 </p> <p> <i> Among the Gentiles </i> </p> <p> [[Deliverance]] of the three in the fiery furnace &nbsp;Daniel 3:19-27 </p> <p> Deliverance of Daniel from the lions &nbsp;Daniel 6:16-23 </p> <p> Jonah saved by the great fish &nbsp;Jonah 2:1-10 </p> <p> In the [[N.T.]] three Greek words are used, similar to those in the [[O.T.]] </p> <p> 1. τέρας, 'a wonder,' which in the [[A.V.]] is always thus translated and often associated with the word 'signs:' 'signs and wonders.' People were generally amazed at the miracles performed. </p> <p> 2. σημεῖον, 'a sign.' This word is translated 'signs,' 'miracles,' 'wonder,' and in &nbsp; 2 Thessalonians 3:17 'token': it is the word invariably used in John's gospel. </p> <p> 3. δύναμις, 'power:' translated 'miracles,' 'mighty works,' 'powers.' These three divinely selected words explain the nature of miracles. They were 'wonders' that arrested the attention of the people; they were 'signs' that God had visited His people, and that the acts of the Lord Jesus identified Him with the promised Messiah; and they were 'powers,' for they were superhuman. These three words are applied to the miracles of the Lord Jesus in &nbsp; Acts 2:22; to those wrought by Paul, &nbsp;2 Corinthians 12:12; and to the work of Antichrist, the man of sin, in a future day. &nbsp;2 Thessalonians 2:9 . </p> <p> The miracles by the Lord and His apostles were nearly all wrought for the welfare of men, curing them from the diseases of mind and body, and dispossessing them of demons, thus spoiling the kingdom of Satan. The cursing of the fig-tree differs from the others: it was a sign of God's judgement on the Jews. From the wording of several passages it is conclusive that not nearly all the miracles of the Lord are recorded. &nbsp;Mark 6:55,56; &nbsp;John 21:25 . </p> <p> It is stated in &nbsp;Mark 16:16-18 that those who should believe on the Lord Jesus, by the testimony of the apostles, would be able to work miracles; and there is ample testimony in early church history that this was the case, especially in casting out demons. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian testified to the heathen persecutors that there was power in the name of Jesus to effect this, and the persecuting emperors were invited to witness it. While the Christians were being persecuted, such signs would be a visible evidence of the power of God and the value of the name of the Lord Jesus. By the time the emperors professed Christianity, followed by the masses (the 4th century), Christ had been well accredited on the earth: hence there was no further need of such signs. Satan in the days of the apostles had his counterfeits (cf. &nbsp; Acts 8:9; &nbsp;Acts 13:6-8; &nbsp;Acts 19:19 ), as he certainly has had since, and will have in the future, when he will be allowed to bring in his strong delusion: cf. &nbsp;Matthew 24:24; &nbsp;2 Thessalonians 2:9,10; &nbsp;Revelation 13:13,14 . </p> <p> Though not called a miracle, isnot the conversion of a sinner a miracle? It seems impossible for one who has been turned from darkness to light, and has been created in Christ Jesus, with the fruits and effects following, to doubt the reality of other miracles recorded by God in His sacred writings. </p> <p> In the accompanying list of miracles in the [[N.T.]] it will be noticed that some are found in one gospel only — each of the gospels having miracles peculiar to itself — a few are in two gospels; many in three; and only one that is recorded in all four. None but God could have made these selections. Indeed the scriptures are themselves as clear a manifestation of the power and wisdom of God as are any of the miracles. </p> <p> [[Principal]] [[Miracles]] [[In]] [[The]] [[New]] [[Testament.]] </p> <p> [[Miracles]] </p> <p> Two blind men cured - &nbsp;Matthew 9:27-31 . </p> <p> [[Dumb]] spirit cast out - &nbsp;Matthew 9:32,33 . </p> <p> [[Tribute]] money in mouth of fish - &nbsp;Matthew 17:24-27 . </p> <p> [[Deaf]] and dumb man cured - &nbsp;Mark 7:31-37 . </p> <p> Blind man cured - &nbsp;Mark 8:22-26 . </p> <p> [[Draught]] of fishes - &nbsp;Luke 5:1-11 . </p> <p> Widow's son raised - &nbsp;Luke 7:11-17 . </p> <p> Woman loosed from a spirit of infirmity - &nbsp;Luke 13:11-17 . </p> <p> The dropsy cured - &nbsp;Luke 14 : l- 6. </p> <p> Ten lepers cleansed - &nbsp;Luke 17:11-19 . </p> <p> Malchus' ear healed - &nbsp;Luke 22:50,51 . </p> <p> Water made wine - &nbsp;John 2:1-11 </p> <p> Nobleman's son cured - &nbsp;John 4:46-54 . </p> <p> [[Impotent]] man cured - &nbsp;John 5 : l- 9 </p> <p> Man born blind cured - &nbsp;John 9 : l- 7. </p> <p> Lazarus raised from the dead - &nbsp;John 11:38-44 . </p> <p> Draught of 153 fishes - &nbsp;John 21:1-14 . </p> <p> Syro-Phoenician's daughter cured - &nbsp;Matthew 15:21-28; &nbsp;Mark 7:24-30 . </p> <p> Four thousand fed - &nbsp;Matthew 15:32-38; &nbsp;Mark 8 : l- 9. </p> <p> Fig tree withered - &nbsp;Matthew 21:18-22; &nbsp;Mark 11:12-24 . </p> <p> Centurion's servant cured - &nbsp;Matthew 8:5-13; &nbsp;Luke 7:1-10 . </p> <p> Blind and dumb demoniac cured - &nbsp;Matthew 12:22; &nbsp;Luke 11:14 . </p> <p> [[Demoniac]] in the synagogue cured - &nbsp;Mark 1:23-28; &nbsp;Luke 4:33-37 . </p> <p> Peter's wife's mother cured - &nbsp;Matthew 8:14-15; &nbsp;Mark 1:30-31; &nbsp;Luke 4:38,39 . </p> <p> [[Leper]] cured - &nbsp;Matthew 8:2 - &nbsp;4; &nbsp;Mark 1:40-45; &nbsp;Luke 5:12-15 . </p> <p> [[Paralytic]] cured - &nbsp;Matthew 9:2 - &nbsp;7; &nbsp;Mark 2:3-12; &nbsp;Luke 5:18-26 . </p> <p> [[Tempest]] stilled - &nbsp;Matthew 8:23-27; &nbsp;Mark 4:36-41; &nbsp;Luke 8:22-25 . </p> <p> [[Demoniacs]] cured at [[Gadara]] - &nbsp;Matthew 8:28-34; &nbsp;Mark 5:1-20; &nbsp;Luke 8:26-39 . </p> <p> Jairus' daughter raised - &nbsp;Matthew 9:18-26; &nbsp;Mark 5:22-43; &nbsp;Luke 8:41-56 . </p> <p> Woman's issue of blood cured - &nbsp;Matthew 9:20-22; &nbsp;Mark 5:25-34; &nbsp;Luke 8:43-48 </p> <p> Man's withered hand cured - &nbsp;Matthew 12:10-13; &nbsp;Mark 3 : l- 5; &nbsp;Luke 6:6-11 . </p> <p> [[Demon]] cast out of boy - &nbsp;Matthew 17:14-18; &nbsp;Mark 9:14-27; &nbsp;Luke 9:37-42 . </p> <p> Blind men cured - &nbsp;Matthew 20:30-34; &nbsp;Mark 10:46-52; &nbsp;Luke 18:35-43 . </p> <p> Jesus walks on the sea - &nbsp;Matthew 14:24-33; &nbsp;Mark 6:47-51; &nbsp;John 6:16-21 . </p> <p> Five thousand fed - &nbsp;Matthew 14:15-21; &nbsp;Mark 6:35-44; &nbsp;Luke 9:12-17; &nbsp;John 6:5-14 . </p>

<p> God is shown in the Bible to be a God of miracles. But miracles do not feature consistently throughout the biblical record. Rather they are grouped largely around three main periods. </p> <p> The first of these periods was the time of the Israelites’ bondage in Egypt, which challenged God’s purposes to establish his people as an independent nation. By mighty acts God saved his people and brought them into the land he had promised them (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 4:34-35; &nbsp;Joshua 4:23-24). The second period was that of Elijah and Elisha, when Israel’s religion was threatened with destruction. By some unusual miracles God preserved the minority who remained faithful to him, and acted in judgment against those who tried to wipe out the worship of [[Yahweh]] from Israel (&nbsp;1 Kings 19:15-18). The third period was that of the coming of the kingdom of God through Jesus Christ and the establishment of his church through those to whom he had given his special power (&nbsp;Acts 2:22; &nbsp;Acts 3:6; &nbsp;Acts 4:10; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 12:10; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 12:28-29; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 12:12). </p> <p> Of all the miracles, the greatest are those that concern the birth and resurrection of Jesus. God’s act in becoming a human being is itself a miracle so great that it overshadows the means by which it happened, namely, the miraculous conception in the womb of a virgin (&nbsp;Matthew 1:18-23; &nbsp;John 1:14; see [[Virgin).]] The resurrection is a miracle so basic to the Christian faith that without it there can be no Christian faith (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:12-14; see [[Resurrection).]] </p> <p> '''Miracles and nature''' </p> <p> If we believe in a personal God who created and controls the world (&nbsp;Genesis 1:1; &nbsp;Colossians 1:16-17), we should have no trouble in believing the biblical record of the miracles he performed. The physical creation is not something self-sufficient or mechanical, as if it were like a huge clock that, once wound up, runs on automatically till finally God stops it. The God of creation is a living God who is active in his creation (&nbsp;John 5:17). </p> <p> God deals with people as responsible beings whom he has placed in a world where everything is in a state of constant change. Being sensitive to the needs of his creatures, he may work in his creation in an extraordinary, even miraculous, way for their benefit (&nbsp;Exodus 17:6; &nbsp;Joshua 10:11-14; &nbsp;2 Kings 4:42-44; &nbsp;Mark 6:47-51). </p> <p> On the other hand, God does not work miracles every time someone wants him to. If he did there would be chaos. God’s control of the universe is designed to produce order (&nbsp;Job 38:4-41; Job 39; &nbsp;Psalms 147:8-9; &nbsp;Psalms 147:16-18; &nbsp;Matthew 5:45). </p> <p> Since God is the controller of nature, he may have performed many of his miraculous works not by doing something ‘contrary to nature’, but by using the normal workings of nature in a special way. The miracle was in the timing, extent or intensity of the event. </p> <p> Such divine activity may help to explain events such as the plagues of Egypt, the crossing of the Red Sea, the crossing of the Jordan River, the collapse of Jericho’s walls and some of the healings performed by Jesus. But even if these can be explained as having natural causes, they were still miracles to those who saw them. They happened as predicted, even though the chances of their so happening appeared to be almost nil (&nbsp;Exodus 7:17; &nbsp;Exodus 8:2; &nbsp;Joshua 3:8-13). </p> <p> This still leaves unexplained the large number of miracles for which there seem to be no natural causes. Such supernatural interventions by God are not attacks on the so-called laws of nature. What we call the laws of nature are not forces that make things happen, but statements of what people have discovered concerning how nature works. It is God who makes things happens; the ‘laws of nature’ merely summarize the processes by which such things happen. When God acts supernaturally, his actions may be contrary to the way people has usually seen nature work, but his actions do not break any laws of nature. They merely provide new circumstances through which nature works. </p> <p> God is always the creator of life, the healer of diseases, the calmer of storms and the provider of food, whether he does so through the normal processes of nature or through some miraculous intervention. Through the ages God has sent the rain to water the grapes to produce the wine, but he may choose to hasten the process by turning water into wine immediately (&nbsp;John 2:1-11). God has also at times withheld the rain and so caused trees gradually to dry up, but again he may choose to intervene and hasten the process (&nbsp;Matthew 21:18-19). </p> <p> '''The purpose of miracles''' </p> <p> Miracles were usually ‘signs’, that is, works of God that revealed his power and purposes (&nbsp;Exodus 7:3; &nbsp;Deuteronomy 4:34; &nbsp;Isaiah 7:11; &nbsp;Matthew 16:1; &nbsp;John 2:11; &nbsp;John 6:14; &nbsp;John 20:30; &nbsp;Acts 2:43; see [[Signs).]] However, messengers of God never used miracles just to impress people or to persuade people to believe them (&nbsp;Matthew 12:38-39; &nbsp;Luke 23:8). It was the false prophet who used apparent miracles to gain a following (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 13:1-3; &nbsp;Matthew 24:24; &nbsp;2 Thessalonians 2:9-11; &nbsp;Revelation 13:13-14). God’s miracles were usually linked with faith (&nbsp;2 Kings 3:1-7; &nbsp;Daniel 3:16-18; &nbsp;Daniel 6:22; &nbsp;Hebrews 11:29-30). </p> <p> This was clearly seen in the miracles of Jesus Christ. Jesus used miracles not to try to force people to believe in him, but to help those who already believed. He performed miracles in response to faith, not to try to create faith (&nbsp;Matthew 9:27-29; &nbsp;Mark 2:3-5; &nbsp;Mark 5:34; &nbsp;Mark 5:36; &nbsp;Mark 6:5-6). Frequently, Jesus told those whom he had healed not to spread the news of his miraculous work. He did not want to be bothered by people who wanted to see a wonder-worker but who felt no spiritual need themselves (&nbsp;Matthew 9:30; &nbsp;Mark 5:43; &nbsp;Mark 8:26). </p> <p> Nevertheless, it is clear that many of those who saw Jesus’ miracles were filled with awe and glorified God (&nbsp;Matthew 9:8; &nbsp;Luke 5:26; &nbsp;Luke 7:16; &nbsp;Luke 9:43). To those who believed in Jesus as the Son of God and the Messiah, the miracles confirmed the truth of their beliefs and revealed to them something of God’s glory (&nbsp;John 2:11; &nbsp;John 11:40; &nbsp;Acts 14:3; &nbsp;Hebrews 2:3-4; see [[Messiah).]] There was a connection between the miracles of Jesus and the era of the Messiah. This may explain why miracles were common in the early church but almost died out once the original order of apostles died out (&nbsp;Matthew 10:5-8; &nbsp;Luke 9:1; &nbsp;Luke 10:9; &nbsp;Acts 4:16; &nbsp;Acts 4:29-30; &nbsp;Acts 5:12; &nbsp;Romans 15:19; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 12:9-10; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 12:12). </p> <p> In the record of some of Jesus’ miracles, faith is not mentioned. On those occasions Jesus acted, it seems, purely out of compassion (&nbsp;Matthew 8:14-15; &nbsp;Matthew 14:13-14; &nbsp;Matthew 15:32; &nbsp;Luke 4:40; &nbsp;Luke 7:11-17; &nbsp;John 6:1-13); though, as always, he refused to satisfy people who wanted him to perform miracles for their own selfish purposes (&nbsp;John 6:14-15). </p> <p> Jesus’ miracles demonstrated clearly that he was the Messiah, the Son of God (&nbsp;John 20:30-31), and that the power of the Spirit of God worked through him in a special way (&nbsp;Matthew 12:28; &nbsp;Luke 4:18). Being both divine and human, he had on the one hand authority and power to work miracles, but on the other he always acted in dependence upon his Father (&nbsp;John 5:19; &nbsp;John 14:10-11). His miracles were always in keeping with his mission as the Saviour of the world. They were never of the senseless or unbelievable kind such as we find in fairy stories. Jesus did not perform miracles as if they were acts of magic, and he never performed them for his own benefit (cf. &nbsp;Matthew 4:2-10). </p> <p> Jesus’ miracles and the kingdom of God </p> <p> In Jesus the kingdom of God had come into the world. The rule of God was seen in the miracles by which Jesus the Messiah delivered from the power of Satan people who were diseased and oppressed by evil spirits (&nbsp;Matthew 4:23-24; &nbsp;Matthew 11:2-6; &nbsp;Matthew 12:28; see [[Kingdom]] [[Of]] [[God).]] This victory over Satan was a guarantee of the final conquest of Satan when the kingdom of God will reach its triumphant climax at the end of the world’s history (&nbsp;Revelation 20:10). </p> <p> To Christians, Jesus’ miracles foreshadow the age to come. His raising of the dead prefigures the final conquest of death (&nbsp;Matthew 11:5; &nbsp;John 11:24-27; &nbsp;John 11:44; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:24-26; &nbsp;Revelation 21:4). His healing miracles give hope for a day when there will be no more suffering (&nbsp;Matthew 9:27-29; &nbsp;Mark 1:40-42; &nbsp;Revelation 21:4). His calming of the storm foreshadows the final perfection of the natural creation (&nbsp;Matthew 8:24-27; &nbsp;Romans 8:19-21). His provisions of food and wine give a foretaste of the great banquet of God in the day of the kingdom’s triumph (&nbsp;John 2:1-11; &nbsp;Matthew 14:15-21; &nbsp;Matthew 15:32-38; &nbsp;Matthew 26:29; &nbsp;Revelation 19:9). </p>

<p> '''Miracles.''' [[A]] miracle may be defined to be a plain and manifest exercise by a man, or by God at the call of a man, of those powers which belong only to the Creator and Lord of nature; and this for the declared object of attesting that a divine mission is given to that man. It is not, therefore, the ''wonder'' , the exception to common experience, that constitutes the ''miracle'' , as is assumed both in the popular use of the word and by most objectors against miracles. </p> <p> No phenomenon in nature, however unusual, no event in the course of God's providence, however unexpected, is a miracle unless it can be traced to the agency of man, (including prayer, under the term agency), and unless it be put forth as a proof of divine mission. [[Prodigies]] and special providences are not miracles. </p> <p> [[(A]] miracle is not a violation of the laws of nature. It is God's acting upon nature in a degree far beyond our powers, but the same kind of act as our wills are continually exerting upon nature. We do not, in lifting a stone, interfere with any law of nature, but exert a higher force among the laws. Prof. Tyndall says that "science does assert that, without a disturbance of natural law quite as serious as the stoppage of an eclipse, or the rolling of the St. Lawrence up the falls of Niagara, no act of humiliation, individual or nation, could call one shower from heaven." </p> <p> And yet men, by firing a cannon during a battle, can cause a shower: does that cause such a commotion among the laws of nature? The exertion of a will upon the laws does not make a disturbance of natural law; and a miracle is simply the exertion of God's will upon nature. - Editor). </p> <p> Again, the term "nature" suggests, to many persons, the idea of a great system of things, endowed with powers and forces of its own - a sort of machine, set a-going originally by a first cause, but continuing its motions of itself. Hence, we are apt to imagine that a change in the motion or operation of any part of it, by God, would produce the same disturbance of the other parts as such a change would be likely to produce in them, if made by us or by any other natural agent. </p> <p> But if the motions and operations of material things be produced really by the divine will, then his choosing to change, for a special purpose, the ordinary motion of one part does not necessarily, or probably, imply his choosing to change the ordinary motions of other parts in a way, not at all requisite, for the accomplishment of that special purpose. </p> <p> It is as easy for him to continue the ordinary course of the rest, with the change of one part, as of all the phenomena without any change at all. Thus, though the stoppage of the motion of the earth, in the ordinary course of nature, would be attended with terrible convulsions, the stoppage of the earth miraculously, for a special purpose to be served by that only, would not, of itself , be followed by any such consequences. (Indeed, by the action of gravitation, it could be stopped, as a stone thrown up is stopped, in less than two minutes, and yet, so gently as not to stir the smallest feather or mote on its surface. - Editor). </p> <p> From the same conception of nature as a machine, we are apt to think of interferences, with the ordinary course of nature, as implying some imperfection in it. But it is manifest that this is a false analogy; for the reason why machines are made is to save us trouble; and, therefore, they are more perfect in proportion as they answer this purpose. </p> <p> But no one can seriously imagine that the universe is a machine, for the purpose of saving trouble to the Almighty. Again, when miracles are described as "interferences with the law of nature," this description makes them appear improbable to many minds, from their not sufficiently considering that the laws of nature interfere with one another, and that we cannot get rid of "interferences" upon any hypothesis consistent with experience. </p> <p> The circumstances of the Christian miracles are utterly unlike those of any pretended instances of magical wonders. This difference consists in - </p> <p> (1) The greatness, number, completeness and publicity of the miracles. </p> <p> (2) In the character of the miracles. They were all beneficial, helpful, instructive, and worthy of God as their author. </p> <p> (3) The natural beneficial tendency of the doctrine they attested. </p> <p> (4) The connection of them, with a whole scheme of revelation, extending from the origin of the human race to the time of [[Christ]] . </p>

<p> God sees fit to carry on his common operations on established and uniform principles. These principles, whether relating to the physical or moral world, are called the laws of nature. And by the laws of nature the most enlightened philosophers and divines have understood the uniform plan according to which, or the uniform manner in which, God exercises His power throughout the created universe. </p> <p> This uniform method of divine operation is evidently conducive to the most important ends. It manifests the immutable wisdom and goodness of God, and, in ways too many to be here specified, promotes the welfare of His creatures. Without the influence of this uniformity, rational beings would have no effectual motive to effort, and the affairs of the universe, intelligent and unintelligent, would be in a state of total confusion. And this general fact may be considered as a sufficient reason why God, in the common course of His providence, has adopted a uniform method of operation in preference to any other. </p> <p> But if, in conducting the affairs of his great empire, God sees, in any particular case, as good a reason for a deviation from this uniform order, as there is generally for uniformity, that is, if the glory of his attributes and the good of His creatures require it—and no one can say that such a case may not occur—then, unquestionably, the unchangeable God will cause such a deviation; in other words, will work miracles. </p> <p> It is admitted that no man, apart from the knowledge of facts, could ever, by, mere reasoning, have arrived at a confident belief, that the conjuncture supposed would certainly occur. But to us who know that mankind are so depraved and wretched, and that the efforts of human wisdom to obtain relief have been in vain, the importance of a special divine interposition is very apparent. And being informed what the plan is, which a merciful God has adopted for our recovery to holiness and happiness, and being satisfied that this plan, so perfectly suited to the end in view, could never have been discovered by man, and never executed, except by a divine dispensation involving miracles, we conclude, that the introduction of a new and miraculous dispensation was in the highest degree an honor to God and a blessing to the world. The mode which God has chosen to impart the knowledge of this dispensation to man, is that of making a revelation to a number of individuals, who are to write and publish it for the benefit of the world. This revelation to individuals is made in such a manner as renders it certain to their minds, that the revelation is from God. But how can that revelation be made available to others? It will not answer the purpose for those who receive it merely to declare that God has made such a revelation to them, and authorized them to proclaim it to their fellow-creatures. For how shall we know that they are not deceivers? Or, if their character is such as to repel any suspicion of this kind, how shall we know that they are not themselves deceived? Have we not a right, nay, are we not bound in duty, to ask for evidence of the divine authority of what they reveal? But what evidence will suffice? The reply is obvious. The revelation, in order to be of use to us, as it is to those who receive it directly from God, must not only be declared by them to us, but must have a divine attestation. In other words, those who declare it to us must show, by some incontestable proof, that it is from God. Such proof is found in a miracle. If an event takes place which we know to be contrary to the laws of nature, we at once recognize it as the special act of him who is the God of nature, and who alone can suspend its laws, and produce effects in another way. The evidence of a direct interposition of God given in this way is irresistible. No man, no infidel, could witness an obvious miracle, without being struck with awe, and recognizing the finger of God. </p> <p> It is clear that no event, which can be accounted for on natural principles, can prove a supernatural interposition, or contain a divine attestation to the truth of a prophet's claim. But when we look at an event which cannot be traced to the laws of nature, and is clearly above them, such as the burning of the wood upon the altar in the case of Elijah's controversy with the false prophets, or the resurrection of Lazarus, we cannot avoid the conviction, that the Lord of heaven and earth does, by such a miracle, give his testimony, that Elijah is his prophet, and that Jesus is the Messiah. The evidence arising from miracles is so striking and conclusive, that there is no way for an infidel to evade it, but to deny the existence of miracles, and to hold that all the events called miraculous may be accounted for according to the laws of nature. </p> <p> Hume arrays uniformsexperience against the credibility of miracles. But the shallow sophistry of his argument has been fully exposed by Campbell, Paley, and many others. We inquire what and how much he means by uniform experience. Does he mean his own experience? But because he has never witnessed a miracle, does it follow that others have not? Does he mean the uniform experience of the greater part of mankind? But how does he know that the experience of a smaller, part has not been different from that of the greater part? Does he mean, then, the uniform experience of all mankind in all ages? How then does his argument stand? He undertakes to prove that no man has ever witnessed or experienced a miracle, and his real argument is, that no one has ever witnessed or experienced it. In other words, to prove that there has never been a miracle, he asserts that there never has been a miracle. This is the nature of his argument—an example of begging the question, which a man of Hume's logical powers would never have resorted to, had it not been for his enmity to religion. </p> <p> The miraculous events recorded in the Scriptures, particularly those which took place in the times of Moses and Christ, have all the marks which are necessary to prove them to have been matters of fact, and worthy of full credit, and to distinguish them from the feats of jugglers and impostors. This has been shown very satisfactorily by Leslie, Paley, Douglas, and many others. These miracles took place in the most public manner, and in the presence of many witnesses; so that there was opportunity to subject them to the most searching scrutiny. Good men and bad men were able and disposed to examine them thoroughly, and to prove them to have been impostures, if they had been so. </p> <p> [[A]] large number of men, of unquestionable honesty and intelligence, constantly affirmed that the miracles took place before their eyes. And some of these original witnesses wrote and published histories of the facts, in the places where they were alleged to have occurred, and near the time of their occurrence. In these histories it was openly asserted that the miracles, as described, were publicly known and acknowledged to have taken place; and this no one took upon him to contradict, or to question. Moreover, many persons who stood forth as witnesses of these miracles passed their lives in labors, dangers, and sufferings, in attestation of the accounts they delivered, and solely in consequence of their belief of the truth of those accounts; and, from the same motive, they voluntarily submitted to new rules of conduct; while nothing like this is true respecting any other pretended miracles. </p> <p> It has been a long agitated question, whether miracles have ever been wrought, or can be consistently supposed to be wrought, by apostate spirits. </p> <p> It is sufficient to say here, that it would be evidently inconsistent with the character of God to empower or to suffer wicked beings to work miracles in support of falsehood. And if wicked spirits in the time of Christ had power to produce preternatural effects upon the minds or bodies of men, and if those effects are to be ranked among real miracles (which, however, we do not affirm), still the end of miracles is not contravened. For those very operations of evil spirits were under the control of divine providence, and were made in two ways to subserve the cause of Christ. First; they furnished an occasion, as doubtless they were designed to do, for Christ to show His power over evil spirits, and, by His superior miracles, to give a new proof of His Messiahship. Secondly; the evil spirits themselves were constrained to give their testimony, that Jesus was the Christ, the Holy One of Israel. </p> <p> As to the time when the miraculous dispensation ceased, we can only remark, that the power of working miracles, which belonged pre-eminently to Christ and His apostles, and, in inferior degrees, to many other Christians in the apostolic age, subsided gradually. After the great object of supernatural works was accomplished in the establishment of the Christian religion, with all its sacred truths, and its divinely appointed institutions, during the life of Christ and His apostles, there appears to have been no further occasion for miracles, and no satisfactory evidence that they actually occurred. </p>