145 
in records confessedly anterior to those events, predicted too 
with a circumstantial exactness which negatives all idea of a 
mere fortuitous accomplishment, sometimes embracing the 
most improbable, almost contrariant, statements, utterly hope- 
less of being realized by the most laboured adaptation ; surely 
here is miracle — either a miracle of fore - knowledge or of ofter- 
power. And, here again, but for the labour of others, I should 
be constrained to enter more at large into this matter, and to 
endeavour to meet objections to miracles instead of simply 
utilizing the miraculous element, adducing them as evidence. 
This work has, however, been very ably and sufficiently done 
by Mr. English in his paper read before this Institute during 
our last session, and therefore passing by all objections here, 
from the earliest to perhaps the latest sceptical utterance on 
this subject — from Mr. Hume's notorious, and to my mind un- 
tenable, position, that a miracle is contrary to experience, down 
to Mr. Crawfurd's dictum, if rightly reported, at the recent 
meeting of the British Association at Dundee, that “ a miracle 
is a cause inadmissible in science, or at least ought to be re- 
stricted to one great and for ever inscrutable secret — the crea- 
tion itself;" thus, in one breath, both excluding and admitting 
a miracle — excluding what seems inconvenient to his theory, 
admitting what the very senses conspire to witness, the 
miracle of creation ; passing by all objections in this place, I 
proceed to suggest, by way of example, the following observed 
phenomena, selected especially on this ground, that in each 
and all the priority of the records cannot be questioned, the 
respective accomplishments, either in their past or current 
effects, being patent to this hour. 
My first example is the Sacred Record itself. I shall not 
touch the points arising out of the claim to Divine inspiration, 
either as to any particular theory, its mode, or its extent ; but 
confining our test to the prophetical element, we need only to 
establish the one relation between the two parts of which it 
consists, that of clear succession in point of date — undoubted 
priority of the predictions to their respective accomplishments 
— in a word, that the assumed are real predictions. We know 
that this has been questioned, and upon what ground — 
itself a testimony to the exactness of the fulfilments. We 
know also how ably and conclusively our position, even by 
means of a searching criticism, has been fortified; witness 
the noble works of Dr. Pusey on “ Daniel," and Dr. Payne 
Smith on “ Isaiah." We have also, no mean support or 
advantage, the general connection between sacred and 
profane history — in no measure at proved variance with the 
