No Other Religion Possesses the Same Kind and Degree of Evidence as Christianity

Having given a brief view of the external evidences of Christianity, it is now proper to inquire whether any system of religion, ancient or modern, is as well supported by evidence; and whether other miracles have testimony in their favour, as satisfactory as that by which the miracles of the gospel are accompanied. The usual declamation of infidel writers on this subject is calculated to make the impression on unsuspicious readers, that all religions are similar in their origin; that they all lay claim to miracles and divine rommrnications; and that all stand upon an equal footing. But when we descend to particulais, and inquire what religions that now exist, or ever did exist, profess to rest their claims on well attested miracles and the exact accomplishment of prophecy, none besides the Jewish and Christian can be pro

; 70 EVIDFN’CES OF CHRIdTIA MTT.

iuced. Among ;hG mnltiform systdP.s of Pjganisra ihere is not one which was founded on nionifesl miracles or prophecies. They had indeed their prodigies and their oracles, by which the credulous multitude were deceived; and their founders pretended to have received revelations or to have held conmmnion with the gods. But what well attested miraculous fact can be produced from all the religions of tho heathen world? What oracle ever gave responses so clear and free from ambiguity, as to furnish evidence that the knowledge of futurity was possessed. It is easy to pretend to divine revelation: this is done by every fanatic.

It is not disputed that many impostors have appeared in the world, as well as many deluded fanatics. But the reason why all their claims and pretensions may with propriety be rejected, is, that they were not able to exhibit any satisfactory evidence that they were commissioned from heaven to instruct mankind in religion.

In this we are all agreed. Of what use therefore can it be, to bring up these impostures and delusions, when the evidences of the Christian religion are under consideration? Can it be a reason for rejecting a religion which comes well attested, that there have been innumerable false pretensions to divine revelation? Must miracles supported by abundant testimony be discredited, because there have been reports 3f prodigies and miracles which have no evidence? And because heathen oracles have given answers to inquiries respecting future events, dark, indeterminate, and designedly ambiguous; shall we place no confidence in numerous aiuhentic prophecies, long ago committed to writing, which have been most exactly and wonderfully a<complislied?

It is alleged, that the early history of all ancient cations is fabulous, and abounds in stories of incredib.e prodigies; and hence it is infLrred, that the miracles of the Old and New Testament should be considered in the same light. To which it may be replied, ♦hat his general consert of nations that miraties have existed, is favourable to the opni)n that fnie miracles have at some time occurred. It may again be observed, that the history of Moses, which IS more than a thousand years older than any profane history, has every evidence of being a true relation, of facts; and moreover, that the age in which the miracles of the New Testament were performed, so tr from being a dark and fabulous age, was the most enlightened period of the heathen world. It was the age of the most celebrated historians, orators, and poets. There never was a time when it would have I een more difficult to gain a general belief in mirades which had no sufficient testimony than in the Augustan and succeeding age. Not only did learning flourish; but there was at that period a general tendency t3 skepticism and atheism. There can evideiuiy therefore be no inference unfavourable to Christianity, derived from the belief of unfounded stories of miraculous events in the dark ages of antiquity. The only elfect of the prevalence of false accounts of miracles should be, to produce caution and careful examination into the evidence of every report of this kind. Reason dictates that truth and falsehood should never be confounded. Let every fact be subjected to the test of a rigid scrutiny, and let it stand or fall, according as it is supported or unsupported by testimony. If the miracles of the Bible have no better evidence than the prodigies of the heathen, they ought to receive no more credit; but if they have solid evidence, they ought not to be confounded with reports which carry imposture on their very face, or at least have no credible testimony in titeir favour.

There is no other way of deciding on facts which occurred long since, but by testimony. And the truth of Christianity is ically a matter of fact. In support of it, we have adduced testimony which cannot be invalidated; and we challenge our opponents to show that any other religion stands on the same firm basis. Instead of this, they would amuse us with vague declamations on the credulity of man, and the many fabuloLS Stories which have been circulate 3 an.’l believed. But what has this to do with tl e question.-’ We admit all this, and maintain that it does not fuinish the semblance of an argument against the truth of the well-attested facts recorded by the evangelists. Because there is much falsehood in the world, is there no such thing as truth? It would be just as reasonable to conclude that, because many men have been convicted of falsehood, there are no persons of veracity in the world; or because there are many knaves, all pretensions to honesty are unfounded.

The Mohammedan religion is frequently brought forward by the enemies of revelation, with an air of confidence, as though the pretensions and success of that impostor would derogate from the evidences of Christianity. It is expedient, therefore, to bring this subject under a particular examination. And here let it be observed, that we do not reject any thing, respecting the origin and progress of this religion, which has been transmitted to us by competent and credible witnesses. We admit that Mohammed existed and was the founder of a new sect, and that from a small beginning his religion spread with astonishing rapidity over the fairest portion of the globe. We admit also, that he was the author of the Koran, which he composed from time to time, probably with the aid of some one or two other persons. It is also admitted, that he was an extraordinary man, and prosecuted the bold scheme which he had projected, with uncommon perseverance and address. Neither are we disposed to deny that the Koran contains many sublime passages, relative to God and his perfections, and many sound and salutary precepts of morality. That the language is elegant, and a standard of purity in the Arabic tongue, has been asserted by all Mohammedan writers, and conceded by many learned Christians. But as to his pretended revelations, there is no external evidence whatever ihat they were real; and there is an ever vhehning weigh: of internal evidence that they are not fiona God.

To bring this subject fairly before us, let, the folowina; considerations be impartially weighed:

1. The pretensions of JNIohaninied were supported by no miracles or prophecies. He was often called upon by his opposers to confirm his mission by this decisive proof; but he always declined making the attempt, and resorted to various excuses and subterfuges. Ill the Koran, God is introduced as saying, “Nothing hindered us from sending thee with miracles, except that the former nations have charged them with imposture: thou art a preacher only.” Again, that if he did perform miracles, the people would not believe, as they had before rejected Moses, Jesus, and the prophets who performed them.

Dr. Paley* has enumerated thirteen different places in the Koran, where this objection is considered, in not one of which is it alleged that miracles had been performed for its confirmation. It is true, that this artful man told of things sufficiently miraculous; but for the truth of these assertions, we have no manner of proof except his own word, which, in this case, is worth nothing.

If it had been as easy a thing to obtain credit to stories of miracles publicly performed, as some suppose, surely Mohammed would have had recourse to this measure, when he was so pressed and teased by his enemies with a demand for this very evidence But he had too much cunning to venture upon an expedient so dangerous; his opposers would quickly have detected and exposed the cheat. At length, hcwever, he so far yielded to the demand of his enemies as to publish one of the most extravagant stories which ever entered into the imagination of man, and solemnly swore that every word of it was true I refer to his night journey to Jerusalem, and thence to heaven, under the guidance of the angel Gabriel.

This marvellous story, however, had well nigh ruined his cause. His enemies treated it with deserved ridicule and scorn; and a number of his followers forsook him from that time. Vi fact, it ren

* Paley’s Bvidcnccs.
1,3’

174 EVIDSNC£S OF CHIUS’IIA NIT.’.

dered his further continuance at Mecca entirely inexpedient; and having before despatched some of hie disciples to Medina, he betook himself with his followers to that city, where he met with a iiore cordial reception than in his native place.

The followers of Mohammed, hundreds of years after his death, related many miracles, which they pretended that he performed: but their report is not only unsupported by testimony, but is in direct contradiction to the Koran, where he repeatedly disclaims all pretensions to miraculous powers. And the miracles which they ascribe to him, while they are marvellous enough, are of that trifling and ludicrous kind commonly to be met with in all forgeries in which miracles are represented as having been performed; such as, that the trees walked to meet him; that the stones saluted him; that a beam groaned to him; that a camel made complaint to him; and that a shoulder of mutton told him that it was poisoned.

It appears then that Mohammedanism has no evidence whatever but the declaration of the impostor. It is impossible therefore that Christianity should be placed in a more favourable point of light than in comparison with the religion of Mohammed. The one, as we have seen, rests on well attested miracles; the other does not exhibit the shadow of a proof that it was derived from heaven.

2. It is fair to compare the moral characters of thfe respective founders of these two religions. And here we have as perfect a contrast as history can furnih. Jesus Christ was “holy, harmless, undefiled, anti separate from sinners.” His life was pure, without a stain. His most bitter enemies could find no faul» in him. He exhibited, through life, the most perfect example of disinterested zeal, pure benevolence, and unaffected humility which the world ever saw. Mohammed was an ambitious, licentious cruel, and unjust man. His life was stained with the most atrocious crimes. lilaspheniy, perjury, murder, adultery, and robbery, were actions of daily occurrence i)i his ‘ife. And to shield himself from censire, and f;viden<;es of chuistI-’.nii v 175

open y dor for unbridled indulgence, in pretended revelations from heaven to justifj’- all h- rilost practices. He had the effrontery to pretcii’/ that God had given him the privilege to comnii: .it pleasure the most abominable crimes. The facts which could be adduced in support of these general cV.arges, are so numerous and so shocking, that I will not defile my paper, nor wound the feelings of the reader, by a recital of them.

3. The Kovn itself can never bear a comparison ‘jvitb the Nev Testament, in the view of any impartial person, ft is a confused and incongruous heap of subhme sentiments, moral precepts, positive institutions, extravagant and ridiculous stories, and manifest lies and contradictions. Mohanmied himself acknowledged that it contained many contradictions; but he accounted for this fact by alleging that what had been communicated to him in one char’^^er was repealed in a subsequent one: and so he chp ges his inconsistency on his Maker. The nurnbe). f abrogated passages is so great, that a Mussulmwi. cannot be easily confuted by proving the falseho-.r of any declaration in the Koran; for he will have ^;course to this doctrine of abrogation. There is notning in this book which cannot easily be accounted lor; nothing above the capacity of impostors to accomplish. It is artfully accommodated to the religions of Arabia, prevalent at the time. It gives encouragement to the strongest and most vicious passions of human nature; promotes ambition, despotism, revenge, and offensive war; opens wide the door of licentiousness; and holds out such rewards and punishments as are adapted to make an impression on the minds of wicked men. It discourages, and indeed forbids all free inquiry, and all discussion of the doctrines which it contains. Whatever is excellent in the Koran, is in imitation of the Bible; but wherever the author follows his own judgment, or indulges his own imagination, we find falsehood, impiety, i r ridxulouji absurdity.*

See Ryan’s History of the effects of Religion or Mankind.

.76 KVIDENCES OF CHRISI’IAxN 1 H.

4. The means by which the religion of Moham ined was propagated were entirely different from those employed in the propagation of the gospel. If there is any point of strong resemblance between these two systems, it consists merely in the circumstance of their rapid and extensive progress and permanent continuance.

But when we come to consider the means by which this end was attained in the two cases, instead of resemblance we find a perfect contrast. JIohammed did indeed attempt at first to propagate his religion by persuasion and artifice, and these efforts he continued for twelve years, but with very small success. At the end of three years, he had gained no more than fourteen disciples: at the end of seven years, his followers amounted to little more than eighty; at the end of twelve years when he fled from Mecca, the number was still very inconsiderable. As far, therefore, as there can be a fair comparison between the progress of Christianity and JNIohammedanism — that is, during the time that Mohammed employed argument and persuasion alone — there i no resemblance. The progress of Christianity was like the lightning which shineth from one part of heaven to the other; extending in a few years, not only without aid from learning and power, but in direct opposition to both, throughout the whole Roman empire, and far beyond its hmits. Mohammedanism for twelve years made scarcely any progress, (hough it commenced among an ignorant and uncivilized people. During this period, the progress was scarcely equal to what might be expected from any artful impostor. This religion never spread in any other way than by the sword. As soon as the inhabitants of Medina declared in favour of Mohammed, he changed his whole plan, and gave out that he was directed to propagate his religion by force. From this time he is found engaged in war. He began by attacking mercantile caravans, and as his force Increased went on to conquer the petty kingdoms into which Arabia was then divided.* Sometimes,

* Sec rridcau.” * I.ilc of IMdlinmiiicd.

EVIDENCES OF CirRISTIAN ITT. 177

he p It al. the prisoners to death, and at othei times, sold th(!ni into slavery. At first, the order was to massacre every creature that refused to embrace his reUgion; but he became more lenient afterwards especially to Jews and Christians. The allernativ* was, “the Koran, death, or tribute.”

But it is a great mistake to suppose that the con q-iests of Mohammed himself were very extensive He, never, during his life, extended his dominior beyond the limits of Arabia, except that he overran one or two inconsiderable provinces of Syria. It was by the Caliphs, his successors, that so great a part of Asia and Egypt were brought into subjection. But what is there remarkable in these successes more than those of other conquerors? Surely the propagation of Mohammedanism by the sword, however rapid or extensive, can never bear any comparison with that of Christianity, by the mere force of truth under the blessing of heaven.

5. The tendency and effects of Mohammedanism, when compared with the tendency and effects of Christianity, serve to exhibit the latter in a very favourable light. The Christian religion has been a rich blessing to every country which has embraced it; and its salutary effects have borne propoition to the care which has been taken to inculcate its genuine principles, and the cordiality with which its doctrines have been embraced. Wh.at nations are truly civilized? Where does learning flourish? Where are the poor and afflicted most effectually relieved? Whore do men enjoy the greatest security of life, property, and liberty? Where is the female sex treated with due respect, and exalted to its proper place in society? Where is the education of youth most assiduously pursued? Where are the brightest examples of benevolence; and where do men enjoy most rational happiness? If we were called upon to designate the countries in which these advantages are most highly enjoyed, every one of them would be found in Christendom; and the superiority enjoyed by some over the others, would be found to beaj lis EV^IDKNCES CF CIIUISTIaNITY

an exact proportion to the practical influenc3 of pure Christianity.

On the contrary, if we take a survey of the rich and salubrious regions possessed by Mohammedans we behold a wide-spread desolation. The fairest portion of the globe, where arts, literature, and refinement formerly most flourished, are now blighted Every noble institution has sunk into oblivion. Despotism extends its iron sceptre over these ill-fated 2ountries, and all the tranquillity ever enjoyed is the dead calm of ignorance and slavery. Useful learning is discouraged, free inquiry proscribed, and servile submission required of all. Justice is perverted or disregarded. No man has any security for life or property, and as to liberty, it is utterly lost wherever the Mohammedan religion prevails. While the fanatic ardour of making proselytes continued, :he fury of the propagators of this faith rendered them irresistible. Indeed, their whole system is adapted to a state of war. The best work that can be performed, according to the Koran, is to fight for the propagation of the faith; and the highest rewards are promised to those who die in battle. There is no doubt that the principles of the Koran greatly contributed to the conquest of the Saracens, by divesting them of all fear of death, and inspiring them with an assurance of being admitted into a sensual paradise, if it should be their fate to be slain in battle. “The sword is the key of heaven and hell; a drop of blood shed in the cause of God, a night spent under arms, is of more avail than two months of fasting and prayer. Whosoever falls in battle, his sins are forgiven. At the day of judgment, his wounds shall be resplendent as vermilion and odoriferous as musk; and the loss of his iinibi shall be replaced by the wings of angels and cherubims.” But when they had finished their conquests, and a state of ])eace succeeded their long and bloody wars, they sunk into torpid indolence and stupidity While other nations have been making rapid im orovem’^n s in all the a,-’^, they have remained stationary, or rather have been continually going backwards They have derived no advantages from the rviva’ of letters, the invention of printing, or other improvements in the arts and sciences. The peoj)le who have been subjected to their despotism without adopting their religion, are kept in the most degrad d subjection.

At present,* the Greeks are making noble exertions to break the cruel yoke which has oppiessed them, and though unsupported by Christian nations, have succeeded in expelling the Turks from a large portion of their country. God grant them success, and give tjiem wisdom to make a good use of their liberty and independence when acquired and established!! Mohammedanism was permitted to prevail, as a just punishment to Christians for their luxury and dissensions. It is to be hoped, however, that the prescribed time of these “locusts of the abyss” J IS nearly come to an end; and that a just God, who has so long used them as a scourge to Christians, as he formerly did the Canaanites to be thorns in the eyes and in the sides of the Israelites, will soon bring to an end this horrible despotism, founded on a vile imposture. The signs of the times give strong indications that the Mohammedan power will shortly be subverted. But it is not for us to “know the times and the seasons which the Father hath put in hi& own power.”

The only thing further necessary to be considered, in this chapter, is, the miracles which have been brought forward as a counterpoise to the miracles of Christ and his apostles. This is an old stratagem, at least as old as the second century, when one Philostratus, at the request of Julia Augusta, wife of the emperor Severus, wrote a history, or rather romance, of Apollonius of Tyana, a town in Cappadocia. This Apollonius was nearly contemporary with Jesus Christ; but whether he was a philosopher or a conjurer cannot now be ascertained; for as to the

A.D 1825.

t The Gz-eeks have n becotne an independent nation, 1836.

t Key. ix. 3.

Story of Pliilostratus, which is still extant, it is totally unsupported by any reference to eye-witnesses of the facts, or any documents of credit, and has throughout as much the air of extravagant fiction as any thing that was ever published. That the design of the writer was to set up this ApoUonius as a rival to Jesus Christ, is not avowed, but is sufficiently evident from the similarity of many of his miracles to those recorded in the gospels, borrowed from the evangelical history. He is made to raise the dead, to cast out demons, and to rise from the dead him self In one instance, the very words of the demons expelled by Jesus Christ, as recorded by St, Luke, “Art thou come to torment us before the time?” are put into the mouth of a demon, said to be cast out by ApoUonius. But in addition to these miracles, his biographer pretends that he saw beasts with a human head and a lion’s body, women half white and half black, together with phoenixes, griffins, dragons, and similar fabulous monsters.

In the fourth century, Hierocles, a bitter enemy of Christianity, instituted a comparison between Jesus and ApoUonius, in which, after considering their miracles, lie gives the preference to the latter. This book was answered by Eusebius, from whose work only, we can now learn how Hierocles treated the subject, as the book of the latter is not extant. The only conclusion which can be deduced from this history of ApoUonius is, that the miracles of Christ were so firmly believed in the second century, and were attended by such testimony, that the enemies of Christianity could not deny the facts, and therefore resorted to the expedient of circulating stories of equal miracles performed by another.

Modern infidels have not been ashamed to resort to the same stale device. Mr. Hume has taken much pains to bring forward a great array of evidence in favour of certain miracles, in which he has no faith, with the view of discrediting th(^ Uuth M Christianity. These have been so fully and ■sali.^il.’ir torily considered by Dr. Douglass, Bishop or’ Sah>

EVIDENCES OF CHlUSTr ANITT. 181

bury, ill his Criterion, and by Dr. Campbell, .n his Essay on Miracles, that I need only refer to these learned authors fir a complete confutation of Hume’s arguments from this soiu’ce.

For the sake, however, of those who may not have access to these works, I will lay down a few general principles by which we may distinguish true and false miracles; for which lam indebted principally to the author of the Criterion.

1. The nature of the facts should be well considere.l, whether they are miraculous. The testimony which supports a fact may be sufficient, and yet it may have been brought about by natural causes.

The miracles of Jesus Christ were such that there was no room for doubt respecting their supernatural character; but a great part of those performed by others, which have received the best attestation, were of such a nature that they may readily be accounted tor, without supposing any divine interposition. The case of the man diseased in his eyes, said to have been cured by Vespasian’s rubbing his hand over them, and the lame man cured by a touch of the emperor’s foot, were no doubt impositions practised by the priests of the temple where they were performed. The emperor did not pretend to possess any miraculous power, and was induced, only after much persuasion, to make the experiment. It may be admitted that the facts as related by Tacitus, though he was not an eye-witness, are true. Such persons were probably brought forward and a cure pretended to be made, but there is no evidence that there was a real miracle. There was no one present who felt interested to examine into the truth of the miracle. The priests who proposed the thing had no doubt prepared their subjects; and the emperor was flattered by the honour of being selected by their god to work a miracle. How often do beggars in the street impose upon many, by pretending to be blind and lame! The high encomiums which Mr. Hume bestows on the historian Tacitus, in order to set ofl” tho testimony to the best advantage, can have no weig’l

182 EVIDKXCrs OF CHRISriAMTT

here; for he only related what he had heaid from others, ai.d showed pretty evidently that 1:3 dii not credit the story himself.

The same may be said respecting the man at Saragossa, spoken of by Cardinal de Retz, who was represented as having been seen without a leg, but obtained one by rubbing the stump with holy oil. The Cardmal had no other evidence of his havirg ever been manned, than the suspicious report of the canons of the Church; and he took no pains to ascertain whether the leg which he obtained was really flesh and blood, or an artificial limb.

A great part of the cures said to have been performed at the tomb of the Abbe Paris, were proved upon examination to be mere pretences; and those which were real may easily be accounted for from the influence of a heated imagination and enthusiastic feelings; especially, since we have seen the wonderful effects of animal magnetism and metallic tractors.

The Abbe Paris was the oldest son of a counsellor of Paris, but being much inclined to a life of devotion he relinquished his patrimony to his younger brother, and retired to an obscure part of Paris, where he spent his life in severe penance, and in charitable exertions for the relief of the distressed poor. He was buried in the ground of the church of St. Medard, near the wall, where his brother erected a tombstone over the grave. To this s])ot many poor people who knew his manner of life, came to perform their devotions, as much, probably, out of feelings of gratitude as any thing else. Some, among the devotees who attended at this place, professed that they experienced a salutary change in their ailments. This being noised abroad, as the Abbe had been i* zealous Jansenist all who were of his party encor-raged the idea of miracles having been performed; and multitudes who were indisposed, were ifduced to go to the tomb of the saint: and some, as ihey confessed before a competent tri ounal, wcic persuaded to feign diseases which iliey jever had. It is a fact, however, that the greater part received no benefit, and that more diseases were produced than were cured: for, soon, many of the worshippers were seized with convulsions, from which proceeded the sect of Convulsionists, which attracted attention for many years.

It was soon found expedient to close up the tomb: hut cures were still said to be performed by the saint on persons in distant places. The Jesuits exerted themselves to discredit the whole business, and the Archbishop of Paris had a judicial investigation made of a number of the most remarkable cases, the results of which were various, and often ludicrous. A young woman said to have been cured at the tomb of blindness and lameness, was proved to have been neither blind nor lame. A man with diseased eyes was relieved, but it appeared that he was then using powerful medicine, and that, after all, his eyes were not entirely healed. A certain Abbe who had the misfortune to have one of his legs shorter than the other, was persuaded that he experienced a sensible elongation of the defective limb, but on measurement no increase could be discovered. A woman in the same situation danced on the tomb daily to obtain an elongation of a defective limb, and was persuaded that she received benefit; but it was ascertained, that she would have to dance there fifty-four years, before the cure would be effected, at the rate at which it was proceeding; but as for the unfortunate Abbe, seventy-two years would have been requisite. In short, the whole number of cures, after examination, was reduced to eight or nine, al’ of which can be easily accounted for on natural ] rinciples; and in several of these instances, the cures were not perfect.

2. A second consideration of great weight is. that in true miracles we can trace the testimony to the very time when the facts are said to have occurred, but in false miracles the report of the facts originates a long time afterwards, as in the case of ApoUonius, the miracles ascribed to Mohammed by Abulfcda, and Al-Janabbi, an the miracles ascribed by the

184 EVIDE^CES OF CHRISTIANITY.

.Tesiiifs to Ignatius Loyo.a their founder; which were never heard of until long after his death.

3. Anothe! criterion of importance is, that the report of miracles sl.onld originate and first obtain credit in the place and among the people, where they are said to have been performed. This is too remarkab.y the fact, in regard to the miracles of the Bible, to require any proof But many stories of miracles are rendered suspicious by the circumstance that they were first reported and believed in some place fai from that in which they were alleged to have been wrought. The miracles ascribed by the Romanists to Francis Xavier, are condemned by both the rules last mentioned. In all his letters while a missionary in the east, he never hints that miracles had been wrought; and a reputable writer who gave some account of his labours nearly forty years after hia death, not only is silent about Xavier’s miracles, but confesses that no miracles had been performed among the Indians. These miracles were said to be performed in the remote parts of India and Japan, but the report of them was published first in Europe Almost all the miracles ascribed by the Romish Church to her saints, fall into the same predicament. The history of them is written long after they are said to have been performed, and often in countries remote from the place where it is pretended they occurred or they are manifestly the effect of cunning contrivance and imposture.

4. Another necessary question in judging of tho genuineness of miracles, is, whether the facts were scrutinized at the time, or were suffered to pass without examination. When the miracles reported coincide with the passions and prejudices of those ♦?efore whom they are performed; when they are exhibited by persons in power, who can prevent all examination and put what face they please on facts, they may well be reckoned suspicious. The cures at the iomb of the Abbe Paris weit; not performed in these circumstances. The Jansenists were not in power, nd their enemies not )nly had the opportunity ta

EVinKNCES OF CIIKISTIANI IT 185

examine into the facts, but actually did sc with the utmost diligence. We have reason to beUeve, therefore, that we have now a true report of those occurrences. The defect of these miracles is in their na lure, not in their evidence.

But, in most cases, the miracles which have been reported, took place when there was no opportunity of examining into the facts; when the people were I leased to be confirmed in their favourite opinions: or when the ruling powers had some peculiar end to answer.*

But supposing these miracles to be ever so well attested, I do not perceive how the evidence of divine revelation can be affected by them; for if it could be made to appear that these were supported by testimony as strong as that which can be adduced in favour of the miracles of the New Testament, the only fair conclusion is, that they who believe in Christianity should admit them to be true — but what then? Would it follow, because miracles had been wrought on some rare occasions, different from those recorded in the Bible, that therefore, these were of no validity as evidence of divine revelation? Would not the fact that other miracles had been wrought, rather confirm our belief in those which were performed with so important a design? Mr. Hume does, indeed, artfully insinuate that the various accounts of miracles which exist cannot be true, because the religions which they were wrought to confirm, are Dpposite; yet not one of those which he brings forward as being best attested, was performed in confarmation of any new religion, or to prove any particular doctrine, therefore they are not opposed to Christianity. If they had actually occurred, it would not in the least disparage the evidence for the facts recorded in the New Testament. And especially, it is a strange conceit, that miracles performed within the bosom of the Christian Church should furnish any proof against Christianity.

It is, however, no part of the object of those who

On this whole subject, sec Doug iss’s (Titerion.

166 EVIDENCES. F CHRISTI iNITT.

bring forward such an array of testimony in si.pporl of certain miracles, to prove that such facts ever occurred. This is diametrically opposite to their purpose. Their des.gn is to discredit all testimony in favour of miracles, by showing, that facts acknowledged to be false have evidence as strong as those on which revealed religion rests. But they have utterly failed in the attempt, as we have shown: and if they had succeeded in adducing as strong testmiony for other miracles, we would readily admit their truth, and that in perfect consistency with our belief in Christianity.

The Romish Church and some other fanatical sects, do still profess to work miracles; but these pretences are never submitted to the test of an impartial exammation by opposers. Or if they are ever publicly exhibited, as in the case of the liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius, it only serves to convince all reasonable men that it is a gross imposture.