ON MIRACLES. 225 



to be racked, burned, or strangled, rather than give up the 

 truth of their account, — still, if Mr. Hume^s rule be my guide, 

 I am not to believe them. Now, I undertake to say that 

 there exists not a sceptic in the world who would not believe 

 them, or who would defend such incredulity.-" 



Such is Paley's conclusion, and such, I believe, would be the 

 conclusion drawn by mankind generally. 



The principal purpose of this paper is to deal with the 

 objection : that a miracle is incredible, — that it cannot be 

 proved. The paper is, therefore, defensive. Its object is 

 attained if it pi^ove that the objection is invalid. In aiming 

 at this object I have considered every form of the objection 

 presented by unbelievers. The conclusion to which my 

 argument leads is, that miracles may be subjects of testi- 

 mony, — testimony can reach to the supernatural. 



It has not been a part of my object to consider whether 

 they have actually occurred. But it will not be out of place, 

 before concluding this paper, to indicate the kind of testi- 

 mony which avouches the reality of the Christian miracles. 

 The principal testimony on which we receive the great miracle 

 of the Resurrection of Jesus, is the evidence of Matthew, 

 Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul. If the evidence which 

 we have in the New Testament is genuine, no one will doubt 

 that the testimony possesses the first qualification demanded 

 of competent testimony, — capacity. The witnesses were eye- 

 witnesses, and possessed of intelligence ; still less will any one 

 deny that it possesses the second qualification demanded of 

 competent testimony, — integrity. On the above assumption, 

 — the genuineness of the New Testament writings, — we have 

 testimony competent to prove the principal Fact of Chris- 

 tianity, — the Resurrection of Jesus. 



It would be quite impossible, in the space at my command, 

 to indicate the method of proving the genuineness of the 

 writings in question. But there is one strand of the argument 

 which can be shortly indicated, and which is of great force. 

 In St. Paul's universally-accepted letters (Epistles to the 

 Romans, Corinthians I. and II., and Galatians) the Resur- 

 rection of Christ is asserted categorically, and the evidence in 

 proof of it marshalled with legal acumen. St. Paul's evidence 

 and belief implicated that of the other witnesses. He was 

 the friend of Peter and John; Luke and Mark were his 

 travelling companions. It may, therefore, be assumed with 

 confidence that they were in accord in regard to the proof of 

 the fundamental articles of their common belief. And, further, 

 St. Paul became a Christian about eight years after the 

 Resurrection. "We may safely infer that his Creed in the year 



VOL. XX. R 



