one is at liberty to attach what idea he pleases to any word he uses, provided he explains his meaning. I am therefore far from blaming any other writer who has given a definition of the word miracle different from mine. If he understood the word, according to his definition, he had a perfect right to do so. I have abstained, therefore, from examining the several definitions, and from pointing out what may be thought defective or praiseworthy in them. But as Christian miracles are realities which have actually existed in the world, they must have some peculiar properties by which a correct idea can be formed of them, and by which they can be distinguished from what they are not. These properties I have endeavoured to investigate, according to what seems the opinion most general in the Christian world, and the most comformable to the doctrine of Holy Scripture; and from these properties I have composed my definition of the word. miracle.

If this definition be strictly accurate and fully expressive of what is meant by a miracle, according to the Christian revelation, then it follows that those writers who have assigned to that word different significations, have not had Christian miracles for the subject of their inquiries, but ideas of their own, to which perhaps there is no corresponding object in existence. Thus, when Mr Hume gives us his idea of a miracle, and tells us "that a miracle may be accurately defined a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposal of some invisible agent," it is evident that, in this sense of the word, there is no such thing as a miracle existing, or possibly can exist; for, as Dr Campbell justly observes, the word transgression invariably denotes a criminal opposition to authority; and of this God Almighty is here represented as guilty in

༥**,

ལ་འདུད

e maret

ways pity of I

a te done vil Viat non

in. di terdekatig low rom such deas

Most Attune or hem instead of

alertated ite stations of dieir.wn fancy,

vita Sophs from them conclusions which the Chris

nable what soa condemns, we need not be sur作 b. Cab Chaschinong may natutally flow from the primé, dém month they lay down, but Christianity cannot TO MCC564 by Theth For, though these writers insidiFor by Amply the same word to signify their ideas, that Chandomer wit to denote real miracles, it is plain that Add Padaunga and conclusions cannot in the least #jass affet suther Christian miracles or Christianity.

VI 18 Tous leaving this subject, I must observe that aldus (fortalban uthors of note define the word miracle me a mucas Imited manner than I have done, excluding all created agents, and understanding by it only such Ibraslinary operations as require the arm of the Almighty to perform them.

Then korons are two: First, that when an angel perbrains anything uneanal to us in this material creation, it 6 molex conformable to nature than if it were done by me, nor is it in the least surprising or wonderful to thon puritual beings, who see and know the cause pertorming it for the angel in this case only acts according to box natural power, and produces an effect naturally concaponding to it. Secondly, because the sacred Scripture expressly attributes miracles to God only. Thus, Ps. TAX AS Blessed be the Lord the God of Israel, who on's goth wonderful things" Use Ps. lxxxvi, 10: For Thou te greas, and dest wondrous things: Thou art God

alone." Again, Ps. cxxxvi. 4: "To Him who alone doth great wonders: for His mercy endureth for ever." Add to these, Ecclus. xi. 4: "The works of the Highest only are wonderful." Hence they conclude, that those operations only are to be admitted as miracles which are peculiar to Almighty power, and can be done by none. but God. It does not appear, however, that this is the opinion of the Christian world, or that it is the true idea which the Scripture itself conveys. For, according to this limited sense of the word, several remarkable effects related in the Scripture as miraculous, and yet performed by angels, and many others evidently within the power of angels, which fully answer all the ends of miracles, would be entirely excluded.

It would certainly be thought a miracle were a man to stand in the fire and not be touched by it, as was the case with the three children in the fiery furnace; and yet the Scripture declares that this was done by the ministry of an angel. In like manner the deliverance of Daniel from the lions is justly esteemed miraculous, and yet that prophet himself declared that "God had sent His angel and shut up the lions' mouths that they had not power to hurt him." Now both these events produced the full effect intended of convincing two heathen princes that Almighty God alone was the supreme Lord and Master of all things, as much as if they had been the immediate operation of God Himself; yet they, as well as many others, cannot be recognised as miracles if the above limited sense of that word be adopted. However, as there is a great difference between any operation which can be performed by the ordinary power of a created agent, and such as can be done only by the almighty hand of the Creator, it is proper to make a

VOL. I.

B

distinction, and we shall see this more particularly when we come to consider the criterion of miracles.

To miraculous operations, therefore, which can be performed by created agents, we shall give the name of relative miracles; because, though to man they be real miracles, yet they are not so with relation to the angels, but are effects produced by an adequate cause, natural in that order of beings. Miracles which can be performed by none but God we shall call absolute miracles, because they are really miracles with relation to all creatures, and exceed the natural powers of every created being. This distinction will fully answer the argument from reason, that nothing is to be esteemed a miracle which does not require Almighty power. And to reconcile the Scripture with itself, in answer to those texts above cited, we must say, either that they speak only of absolute miracles, which are peculiar to God alone; or, if both kinds are to be understood, the meaning is, that God alone doth wonderful things, either immediately by His own hand, or by the ministry of His holy angels, who never perform such wonders but when commissioned and authorised by Him to act.

VIII. We shall now conclude this explanation by taking a view of the different kinds of miracles.

First, then, if we consider the nature of the miraculous effects performed, we find two kinds specifically different,— the one being a suspension of some known law of nature ; and those of this kind we call miracles contrary to the laws of nature. Miraculous effects of the other kind not being contrary to these laws, but new or unusual operations performed in nature beyond the power of any natural agent, we call miracles out of, or besides, the ordinary course of nature.

Secondly, if we consider the character of the opera

tions, this will give us two other kinds no less distinct than the former, such as are supernatural, both in the thing done and in the manner of doing it; and such as are miraculous and supernatural only in the manner of performing it, but where the thing itself is natural, and may be brought about by natural means.

Thirdly, if we consider the agents, we shall find another division into relative miracles, which can be performed by the natural ability of supernatural created agents, and absolute miracles, which exceed all created power, and can be done only by the great Creator.