false miracles mentioned by some of the ancient Christians. I and made verses, and then disappeared: and that three hunThey can lay claim to none of the proofs by which the miracles of Jesus and his apostles are established; and the miracles said to have taken place in modern times are, if possible, still more destitute of evidence. Besides all the marks of evidence above mentioned, by which the ancient frauds are confuted, they have stains peculiar to themselves, by which their credibility is utterly destroyed." Let us now apply the preceding tests to the principal miracles ascribed to pagans and to the Romish church, which have been brought forward by the opposers of revelation, with the insidious but fruitless design of invalidating the credibility of the Gospel miracles. The chief pretenders to miracles among the ancient heathens were Aristeas, Pythagoras, Alexander of Pontus, Vespasian, and Apollonius Tyaneus: and if we examine the miracles ascribed to them, we shall find that they were either trifling or absurd, and were wrought not to promote the honour of God and the good of mankind; and that these miracles were neither designed to confirm any useful doctrine, nor to reform mankind from superstition and vice, but to gain reputation with the vulgar, and to strike men with astonishment. dred and forty years after this he was seen at Metapontum, where he erected an altar to Apollo, and a statue for himself close by it, telling them that he had once been the crow which accompanied Apollo into Italy; after which he vanished again. The pretended resurrection of this man was compared by Celsus with that of Jesus Christ; but how absurd is it to compare a story, which has every mark of fiction, with the accounts of Christ's resurrection! For, in the first place, Herodotus, who first mentions it, did not write till four hundred and ten years after it; secondly, he gives it only on hearsay; and, lastly, it is an idle tale, to which no man of sense can give the least credit; it being impossible that any Metapontine, then living, could know a man who had been dead nearly four centuries before." [ii.] Occurrences equally extravagant as these are related of Pythagoras, as that he foretold to some fishermen the exact number of fish which they had caught, and having paid them for them, commanded the men to return them alive to the sea: that he detained the savage Daunian bear, and having fed it with maize and acorns, compelled it by an oath no longer to touch any living thing; that by whispering in the [i.] Herodotus relates, that he heard a story told at Pro-ear of an ox which was eating green beans at Tarentum, he connesus, that Aristeas died there, but that his body could not only caused the beast to refrain from them, but that the not be found for seven years; that, afterwards, he appeared latter never after tasted them; and that he showed to the Scythian philosopher, Abaris, his golden thigh, telling him longer obtain satisfactory evidence of their continuation. That miraculous he had come down from heaven, and assumed a human form, powers were exercised after the death of the apostles, on certain occasions, for the purpose of remedying and benefiting the condition of is a fact supported by the unanimous and successive testimony of the fa thers down to the reign of the emperor Julian. In the apostolical age mira. mankind. Similar extraordinary things are related of Pycles were frequent; in the succeeding century their number decreased, thagoras by his biographer Porphyry; who, as well as lambut still we have satisfactory evidence, in the appeals made to them by theblichus, affirms, that he communicated the power of working Christian apologists, that they were actually performed. (See particularly Tertullian's Apologia, c. 22., and the Octavius of Minutius Felix, c. 27., and miracles to others. On these assertions we remark, 1. That also the references in Mr. Kett's Bampton Lectures, p. iv. of the Notes and Porphyry and Iamblichus (who compiled their lives of the Authorities.) In the third century only a few traces remained of superna philosopher only something more than eight hundred years tural interposition; and after that time we have no authentic testimony for the working of miracles, with the exception of the miraculous frustration AFTER his death) wrote at a time when the miracles of the of the emperor Julian's mad attempt to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem, Gospel were known throughout the Roman empire, and were which is so clearly attested by heathen adversaries as well as by ecclesiasucal writers, that the sceptical historian of the Decline and Fall of the every where appealed to as the proofs of the Christian reliRoman Empire (though he attempts to invalidate some of its proofs, and in- gion;-2. That those authors themselves wrote in the consinuates a want of impartial authorities) is compelled not only to acknow. troversy between the Gentiles and Christians;-3. That their leige the general fact, but also many of the particular circumstances by principal design in publishing their memoirs of Pythagoras which it was accompanied and distinguished. In reply to the questionWhy are not miracles now wrought?-we remark that, the design of miwas to discredit the Christian miracles, by placing miracles, racles being to confirm and authorize the Christian religion, there is no equal or greater, as they imagined, in opposition to them. It longer any occasion for them, now that it is established in the world, and is daily extending its triumphs in the heathen lands by the divine blessing cannot, therefore, excite astonishment if, while they had this on the preached gospel. Besides, if they were continued, they would be end in view, they made the competition as close as they of no use, because their force and influence would be lost by the frequen- could, and endeavoured to give the preference to their hero;ey of them; for, miracles being a sensible suspension or controlment of 4. Lastly, the power of working miracles, pretended to be or deviation from-the established course or laws of nature, if they were repeated on every occasion, all distinctions of natural and supernatural imparted by Pythagoras, consisted only in the secrets of would vanish, and we should be at a loss to say, which were the ordinary magic and incantation. and which the extraordinary works of Providence. Moreover, it is probable that, if they were continued, they would be of no use, because those persons who refuse to be convinced by the miracles recorded in the New Testament, would not be convinced by any new ones: for it is not from want of evidence, but from want of sincerity, and out of passion and preju dice, that any man rejects the miracles related in the Scriptures; and the same want of sincerity, the same passions and prejudices, would make him resist any proof, any miracle whatever. Lastly, a perpetual power of work while it would rescind and reverse all the settled laws and constitutions of Providence. Frequent miracles would be thought to proceed more from Bone defect in nature than from the particular interposition of the Deity; and men would become atheists by means of them, rather than Christians. The topics here briefly noticed are more fully discussed by Bp. Newton, Works, vol. vi, pp. 193–203, and by Dr. Jenkin in his Reasonableness of the Christian Religion, vol. ii. pp. 481-494. ing of miracles would in all ages give occasion to continual impostures, The most distinguished miracles, which are credited by the church of Rome, are those attributed to Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the order of Jesuits, and to Francis Xavier, one of his carliest associates, who was surnamed the Apostle of the Indies. Neither of these men, during their lives, claimed the power of working miracles. Xavier, indeed, in his correspondence with his friends during his mission, not only made no mention of iniracies, but expressly disclaimed all supernatural assistance. Ribade neira, a Jesuit and contemporary with Loyola, in the earliest account of his life, confessed that Loyola had not wrought any miracles, and anticipated the objections which might be urged from this circumstance against his claims to saintship; but fifteen years afterwards, when Loyola's canonization was in agitation, he retracted this acknowledgment, and mentioned a variety of miracles which he said had been wrought by him. The insincerity and fraud of this statement are severely exposed by Bayle, in his Dietary, art. Loyola, note (N.) The earliest life of Xavier was not pub. lished until about forty years after his death; and it is to be observed, that, of the numerous miracles which are ascribed to him, the scene of action is laid at a great distance from the country where they were first reported; betog supposed to have been performed in China and Japan, but reported and believed only in Europe, where the persons to whom they were proposed (being unavoidably deprived of all opportunities of examining them and ascertaining the truth) were liable to be imposed upon by those whose private interests were connected with the propagation of an imposture. On the miracles ascribed to Loyola and Xavier, see Bp. Douglas's Criterion, pp. 61-78. In the Christian Observer for 1817 (vol. xvi. pp. 782-790.), there are some excellent strictures on a popish miracle, pretended to have been wronght on one Winifred White at St. Winifred's Well. And in the British Crine for 1923 (vol. xix. N. S. pp. 43-57.), the reader will find some acute remarks on a pretended miracle, said to have been wrought on an English an, near Chelmsford, in Essex, by Prince Alexander Hohenlohe, residing al Banberg, in Germany. > Macknight's Truth of the Gospel History, pp. 361-373. [iii.] In order to show how easy it is for cunning and impudence to impose on the credulity of barbarians, Mr. Hume introduces the story of Alexander of Pontus, an interpreter of Esculapius and a fortune-teller, and compares this juggler to the apostle Paul. Alexander, however, first practised his impositions, not among the philosophers of Athens, but among the rude and ignorant Paphlagonians; while Paul preached at Corinth, at Rome, and at Athens, before the Stoics and Epicureans, and even before the Areopagus, the most venerable judicature in Greece. Further, Alexander founded his impositions on the established superstitions; while the apostle, by propagating a new religion, encountered the prejudices and incurred the hatred of the heathens. Alexander enriched himself, while the apostle (it is well known) laboured with his hands for his own support. Lastly, Paul wrought his miracles, and preached Christ crucified, before the enemies of the Gospel, very many of whom were men of learning; while the Pontian juggler exhibited his wonders only before those who were thorough believers in the popular system and his nocturnal mysteries were always introduced with an avaunt to atheists, Christians, and Epicureans; none of whom could have been present at them without exposing themselves to certain danger." his copyists, and which he affirms to be the best attested in [iv.] But the principal instance noticed by Mr. Hume and all profane history, is that of the miracle said to have been performed by the emperor Vespasian at Alexandria, in Egypt, in curing a blind man by means of his spittle, and a man who was lame in his hand by the touch of his foot. The transaction is thus related by Tacitus:-"One of the com mon people of Alexandria, known to be diseased in his eyes, | piled at the request of the empress Julia Domna, who hated by the admonition of the god Serapis, whom that super- the Christians the remarks, therefore, which have already stitious nation worship above all other gods, prostrated him- been made on the biographers of Pythagoras may be applied self before the emperor, earnestly imploring from him a to him. To which we may add, that Apollonius was ridiremedy for his blindness, and entreating, that he would deign culed as an impostor by the heathen philosopher Lucian, to anoint with his spittle his cheeks and the balls of his eyes. who wrote twenty years before Philostratus, and that no use Another, diseased in his hand, requested, by the admonition was made of his pretended miracles for the disparagement of of the same god, that he might be touched by the foot of the Christianity until the commencement of the fourth century: emperor. Vespasian at first derided and despised their ap- when Hierocles, governor of Bithynia, a man of learning, plication; afterwards, when they continued to urge their pe- and a principal instigator of the persecution under Dioclesian, titions, he sometimes appeared to dread the imputation of conceived the design of showing the futility of the miracles vanity; and at other times, by the earnest supplication of the of Christ as proofs of a divine mission, by opposing to them patients, and the persuasion of his flatterers, to be induced to other performances equally beyond the reach of human hope for success. At length he commanded an inquiry to be powers, and, as he wished it to be believed, equally well made by the physicians, whether such a blindness and de- authenticated. Hierocles, however, did not attempt either to bility were vincible by human aid. The report of the phy- call in question the genuineness of the books of the New sicians contained various points; that in the one, the power Testament, or to deny that miracles were wrought by Jesus of vision was not destroyed, but would return, if the obsta-Christ; and his work, which was founded on the narrative of cles were removed; that in the other, the diseased joints Philostratus, was answered at the time by Eusebius, in a might be restored, if a healing power were applied; that it tract that is still extant. was perhaps agreeable to the gods to do this; that the em- [vi.] The next instance produced by Mr. Hume is the peror was elected by divine assistance; lastly, that the credit miracle pretended to have been wrought at Saragossa, and of the success would be the emperor's, the ridicule of the mentioned by the cardinal De Retz. His words, literally disappointment would fall upon the patients. Vespasian, translated, are,-"In that church they showed me a man, believing that every thing was in the power of his fortune, whose business it was to light the lamps, of which they have and that nothing was any longer incredible, whilst the multi-a prodigious number, telling me, that he had been seen seven tude which stood by eagerly expected the event, with a years at the gate with one leg only. I saw him there with countenance expressive of joy, executed what he was desired two." From this relation it is evident that the cardinal did to do. Immediately the hand was restored to its use, and not attach any credit to the story: he did not examine the light returned to the blind man. They, who were present, man himself concerning the fact. This miracle indeed was relate both these cures, even at this time, when there is vouched by all the canons of the church, and the whole comnothing to be gained by lying."1 pany in town were appealed to for a confirmation of it, whom the cardinal found, by their zealous devotion, to be thorough believers of the miracle. But though those ecclesiastics appealed to the company in the town, it is clear from De Retz's own account that he did not ask any man a single question on the subject. It is easy to conceive that such a story, managed by the priests and backed by their authority, would obtain credit with the ignorant populace; especially in a country where the inquisition was then in full power,where the superstitions and prejudices of the people, and the authority of the civil magistrate, were all combined to support the credit of such miracles, and where it would not only have been extremely dangerous to make a strict inquiry into them, but even the expressing of the least doubt concerning them might have exposed the inquirer to the most terrible of all evils and sufferings.4 [vii.] The last example of pretended miracles to be adduced is, those reported to have been wrought at the tomb of the Abbé de Paris, and in which both Mr. Hume and his copyists in later times have exulted, as if they were alone sufficient to destroy the credit of the miraculous facts recorded in the New Testament. The circumstances of these pretended miracles are as follows: Such is the narrative of the historian, and how little the miracles related by him are entitled to credibility will easily appear from the following considerations:-1. Supposing the fact of this application to Vespasian to have really taken place as Tacitus relates, the design of them was both political and interested it was to give weight to the authority of Vespasian,then recently elevated to the throne of imperial Rome by the great men and the army, and to induce the belief that his elevation was approved by the gods. Not so the miracles of Christ and the apostles, which alike exposed their property and their persons to ruin. 2. Tacitus did not write from ocular inspection and personal examination of the men; but twentyseven years afterwards, wrote from hearsay at Rome, an account of transactions which had taken place at Alexandria, in Egypt: on the contrary, the narratives of the Christian miracles were published in the very countries, and almost immediately after the time, when the miracles had actually been wrought, and when many persons were living who had witnessed them. 3. Though Tacitus mentions the miracles of Vespasian, he does not say that he saw them, or even believed that they were performed; nay, he very plainly insinuates that he did not believe them to be real. 4. The diseases were not absolutely incurable: this is manifest from the While controversies ran high in France between the Jesuits declarations of the physicians, who told Vespasian that the and the Jansenists, about the middle of the eighteenth censight of the blind man was not extinct, and that the lame tury, the Abbé de Paris, an opulent and zealous Jansenist, man's joints might recover their strength; and between gave the whole of his income to the poor; and, clothing whom, the emperor, and the patients, the whole seems to himself in rags, lay on the ground, fed on black bread, water, have been concerted. But the miracles wrought by Christ and herbs, and employed watchings and penances to macerate were performed on diseases and other cases which no human his body. On his death, in May, 1727, his party canonized skill could relieve. 5. Lastly, consider the witnesses. The him, and pretended that miracles were wrought at his tomb; miracles of Vespasian were not (like the Christian miracles) whither thousands flocked and practised grimaces and conperformed in the presence of acute and inveterate adversaries, vulsions in so disorderly and ridiculous a manner, that the who scrutinized them with the utmost rigour, and yielded a government of France was at length obliged to put a stop to reluctant acknowledgment of their reality; but the witnesses this delusion, by ordering the church-yard, in which he was of them were the followers and flatterers of Vespasian, interred, to be walled up in January, 1732. Accounts of the and the ignorant and superstitious Alexandrians, who were cures said to have been wrought at the Abbé's tomb were wholly devoted to the worship of Serapis, and to his interest. collected and published by M. de Montgeron, a counsellor of [v.] The last instance of pagan miracles which we shall the parliament at Paris, in three quarto volumes; which were notice is that of Apollonius of Tyana, a Pythagorean philo-critically examined, and the delusions were exposed as soon sopher, who was born about the time of the Christian æra; as they appeared. On these pretended miracles (which were but whose life was not written till more than a century after paralleled with those of Jesus Christ!) we may remark, his death by Philostratus, who received his information part-1. That they were extolled as real before they were subjected ly from report, and partly from the commentaries of Damis, to examination; and that when investigated at first, they the companion of Apollonius. In this work, besides a number of monstrous, ridiculous, and silly wonders, Philostratus has related many things which resemble the miracles of Jesus, as that Apollonius cured diseases, expelled demons, gave sight to the blind, raised the dead, and foretold numerous remarkable events. The book of Philostratus was com 2 Campbell on Miracles, pp. 161-169. Bp. Douglas's Criterion, pp. 4960. Paley's Evidences, vol. 1. pp. 351-355 In the Encyclopædia Metropolitana, vol. x. pp. 619-644., there is an able article on the character and pretended miracles of Apollonius Tyaneus, in the course of which the subject of miracles is discussed at considerable length. a Memoires du Cardinal de Retz. Livre iv. l'an 1654. 4 Campbell on the Miracles, pp. 170-181. These were a sect of Romanists, in France, who adopted the opinions of Jansenius concerning grace and predestination, which were opposed by the Jesuits. : Prophecy.-IV. On the Chain of Prophecy.-Classification of the Scripture Prophecies.-CLASS 1. Prophecies relating to the Jewish Nation in particular.-1. Abraham.-2. Ishmael.-3. Settlement of the Israelites in Canaan.-4. Predictions of Moses relative to the sufferings, captivities, ana present state of the Jews.-5. Birth of Josiah foretold, ana his destruction of idolatry.-6. Isaiah's Prediction of the utter subversion of idolatry among the Jews.-7. Jeremiah's Prediction of Zedekiah's captivity and death.-8. Ezekiel's Prediction of the Calamities of the Jews, inflicted by the Chaldæans.-9. Daniel's Prediction of the Profanation of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes, &c.-10. Hosea's Prediction of the present state of the Jews.-CLASS II. Prophecies relating to the Nations or Empires that were neighbouring to the Jews.-1. Tyre.-2. Egypt.-3. Ethiopia.— 4. Nineveh.-5. Babylon.-6. The four great monarchies. -CLASS III. Prophecies directly announcing the Messiah; their Number, Variety, and Minute Circumstantiality.—1. That the Messiah was to come.-2. The Time.-3. The Place of his Coming.-4. His Birth and Manner of Life and Doctrine.-5. His Sufferings and Death.-6. His Resurrection and Ascension.-7. The Abolition of the Jewish Covenant by that of the Gospel.-The Certainty with which these Prophecies can only be applied to Christ.CLASS IV. Prophecies delivered by Jesus Christ and his Apostles.-1. Prophecies of Christ concerning his Death and Resurrection, the Descent of the Holy Spirit, the Destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple, and the Spread of Christianity.-Refutation of objections drawn from its rejection by Jews and Gentiles, and from the existence ana prevalence of Mohammedism.-2. Prophecies of the Apos tles concerning the Corruptions of the Gospel by the Church of Rome, and the Spread of Infidelity.-V. Refutation of objections from the alleged obscurity of Prophecy.-Concluding observations on the evidence afforded by Prophecy. I. PROPHECY defined. were tried before persons who were predisposed to favour the Jansenists or appellants:-2. Montgeron, who collected the cures said to be wrought at the tomb, produced vouchers for only eight or nine: while some continued there for days and even months, without receiving any benefit:-3. The number reported to be cured was but small; nor is there any proof that this small number was cured by the pseudosaint's intercession. The imposture of those pretended miraeles was detected by the archbishop of París in one single instance; and the archbishop of Sens and others, in more than twenty instances, discovered the artifice by which it was supported:-4. The patients were so affected by their devotion, the place, and the sympathy of the multitude, that many were thrown into convulsions, which in certain circumstances might produce a removal of disorders occasioned by obstruction:-5. All who implored the aid of the Abbé were not cured; while Christ and the apostles never failed in any case, and were never convicted of imposture in a single instance and it was objected at the time, and never refuted by his friends, that the prostrations at his tomb produced more diseases than they cured :-6. Christ's miracles were wrought in a grave and decent, in a great but simple manner, becoming one sent of God, without any absurd or ridiculous ceremonies, or superstitious observances. But the miracles of the Abbé de Paris were attended with circumstances that had all the marks of superstition, and which seemed designed and fitted to strike the imagination. The earth of his tomb was often employed, or the water from the well of his house. Nine days' devotion was constantly used, and frequently repeated again and again by the same persons:-7. All the cures recorded by Montgeron as duly attested were partial and gradual, and were such as might have been effected by natural means. Not one of them was instantaneous. The persons at the Abbé's tomb never attempted to raise the dead, nor is there any evidence that either the blind or the deaf were actually cured there. The notary, who received affidavits relative to those miracles, was not obliged to know the names of the persons who made them, nor whether they gave in their own or only fictitious names :8. The cures wrought at the tomb were not independent of stated in the preceding section will enable the impartial insecond causes; most of the devotees had been using medi-quirer to distinguish between true and false miracles. We eines before, and continued to use them during their applications to the supposed saint; or their distempers had abated before they determined to solicit his help :-9. Some of the cures attested were incomplete, and the relief granted in others was only temporary; but the cures wrought by Christ and his apostles were complete and permanent:-10. Lastly, the design of the miracles ascribed to the Abbé de Paris was neither important nor was it worthy of God. The miracles of Christ and of his apostles, as we have already seen, were intended to prove the divine authority of the most excellent religion: those reported of the Abbé to answer the purposes of a party. The former answered the end for which they were designed: the latter raised a prejudice against Jansenism, and divided its adherents, several of whom were provoked at the frauds of their party, and bitterly reproached and accused each other. The moment the civil power interfered to put an end to the impostures they ceased; but all the powers on earth, both civil and sacerdotal, could not arrest the progress of Christianity, or put a stop to the wonderful works wrought in confirmation of it. To conclude, with regard to the attestations given to Christianity, all was wise, consistent, worthy of God, and suited to the end for which it was designed; but the other is a broken incoherent scheme, which cannot be reconciled to itself, nor made to consist with the wisdom and harmony of the divine proceedings. The miracles of Christ, therefore, are indisputably true; but those ascribed to the Abbé de Paris are totally destitute of reality, and are utterly unworthy of belief.' SECTION III. ON PROPHECY. I. Prophecy defined.—The highest evidence that can be given of Divine Revelation.—II. Difference between the pretended predictions of the heathen oracles and the prophecies contained in the Scriptures.-III, On the Use and Intent of 1 Campbell on Miracles, pp. 181-203. Vernet, Traité de la Vérité de la Rel Chret. tom. vi. pp. 63-135. Leland's View of the Deistical Writers, vol i pp. 319-335. 4th edit. Bp. Douglas's Criterion, pp. 122-233. in pp. 23-2. he has some observations on the pretended miracles of the French prophets. The various criteria and considerations which have been add, that it is equally easy to distinguish between true and false prophecies; for PROPHECY is a miracle of knowledge, a declaration, or description, or representation of something future, beyond the power of human sagacity to discern or to calculate, and it is the highest evidence that can be given of supernatural communion with the Deity, and of the truth of a revelation from God. The knowledge of future events is that object, which man, with the greatest desire, has the least ability to attain. By tracing cause and effect in their usual operations, by observing human characters, and by marking present tendencies, he may form some plausible conjectures about the future; and an experienced politician, who is thoroughly acquainted with the circumstances, interests, and tempers both of his own community and of those who are his neighbours, will frequently anticipate events with a sagacity and success, which bears some resemblance to direct prescience, and excites the astonishment of less penetrating minds. Still, however, he is limited to a kind of contact with present circumstances. That which he foresees must have some connection with what he actually beholds, or some dependence on it: otherwise his inquiries are vain, and his conjectures idle and delusive; and even within those narrow limits, how often is his penetration baffled, and his wisdom deceived! The slightest intrusion of uncommon circumstances, the smallest possible deviation from rules, which cannot by any means be rendered exact, destroys the visionary chain which he has constructed, and exposes his ignorance to himself and others. The prescience of the most experienced politician, in short, bears a close resemblance to that of an experienced general or a skilful chess-player. Judging how he himself, were he in his adversary's place, would act in consequence of one of his own movements, he builds upon his adversary's acting in the same manner, when placed in the same circumstances; vides against what he foresees must be the result of it; antiand thence, on the presumption of his thus acting, he procipating in this manner the final winding up of the affair, nation. Prescience, then, of the present description, will even when he is at a considerable distance from its termiextend just so far as the principle upon which it is built. But the deducing of effects from a combination of causes can never be carried forward to any very remote period: because new causes, which themselves again must be combined, will perpetually spring up; and consequently, as those new causes are as yet unknown, no human sagacity can deduce events from such causes. To foresee and foretell future events is a miracle of which the testimony remains in itself. It is a miracle, because to foresee and foretell future events, to which no change of circumstances leads, no train of probabilities points, is as much beyond the ability of human agents, as to cure diseases with a word, or even to raise the dead, which may properly be termed miracles of power. That actions of the latter kind were ever performed can be proved, at a distant period, only by witnesses, against whose testimony cavils may be raised, or causes for doubt advanced but the man, who reads a prophecy and perceives the corresponding events, is himself the witness of the miracle; he sees that thus it is, and that thus by human means it could not possibly have been. A prophecy yet unfulfilled is a miracle at present incomplete; and these, if numerous, may be considered as the seeds of future conviction, ready to grow up and bear their fruit, whenever the corresponding facts shall be exhibited on the theatre of the world. So admirably has this sort of evidence been contrived by the wisdom of God, that in proportion as the lapse of ages might seem to weaken the argument derived from miracles long since performed, that very lapse serves only to strengthen the argument derived from the completion of prophecy. scheme, and point to one person, whose family, country, character, and circumstances, they announce, long before he was born. The heathen oracles spoke what rulers dictated, or what tended to advance the interest of the priests: precepts of morality, and rules of just conduct, were seldom— if ever-delivered from the cave, or from the consecrated tripos. The purest sentiments prevalent among the pagans were either delivered by the philosopher (who had no means of enforcing them), or adorned the pages of the poet; while the Hebrew prophets, on the contrary, boldly reproved kings, enforced the purest morality by the most solemn sanctions, and suffered rather than gained by the predictions which they uttered. They did not prophesy in compliance with the wishes or natural propensities of their countrymen; but opposed their prejudices, by predicting the impending calamities, the humble state of the Messiah, the rejection of the Jews, and the call of the Gentiles. Their prophecies tended to one end; and the total cessation of them, when that end was answered, proves that they did not owe their accomplishment to chance or to imposture. Further, when no means of evasion remained, the answers given by the heathen oracles were frequently delusive, and capable of quite contrary interpretations; and the most celebrated of them concealed their meaning in such ambiguous terms, that they required another oracle to explain them. Of this ambiguity several authentic instances are recorded. If the books of the Old and New Testament be genuine Thus, when Croesus consulted the oracle at Delphi relative and authentic, that is, were written by the persons to whom to his intended war against the Persians, he was told that they are ascribed, and at or about the times when they pro- he would destroy a great empire. This he naturally interfess to have been written (and these points have already been preted of his overcoming the Persians, though the oracle proved to demonstration), the very numerous predictions was so framed as to admit of an opposite meaning. Croesus which they contain must necessarily be divine. For they are made war against the Persians, and was ruined; and the a regular chain, extending almost from the beginning to the oracle continued to maintain its credit. The answer given end of time; and many of them relate to events so distant, so to Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, many ages after, was of yet contingent, and so apparently improbable, that no human more doubtful interpretation, being conceived in terms so foresight could ever anticipate them. Some relate to dates ambiguous, that it might either be interpreted thus:-I say and circumstances that require the most exact accomplish- that thou son of Eacus canst conquer the Romans. Thou shalt ment, and some are fulfilling to the present time, and before go, thou shalt return, never shalt thou perish in war, or thus, our eyes so that, though this kind of evidence might be ren-I say that the Romans can conquer thee, son of Eacus. Thou dered doubtful or suspicious, yet it is daily accumulating, shalt go, thou shalt never return, thou shalt perish in war. and gathering strength as it accumulates. Pyrrhus understood the oracle in the former sense; he waged an unsuccessful war with the Romans, and was overcome: yet still the juggling oracle saved its credit. Another remarkable instance of the ambiguity of the pretended prophets occurs in 1 Kings xxii. 5, 6. Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, and Ahab, king of Israel, having united their forces against the Syrians, in order to recover Ramoth-Gilead, the latter monarch gathered the false prophets together, about four "Happy had it been for the heathen world, if, upon the subject of mo rality, their oracles had been invariably silent. The few sentiments which they did deliver were not always grounded upon the severe principles of reason and truth: they varied with the fluctuation of human opinions, and were even accommodated to the prejudices, the passions, and the vices of their votaries. Nay, they frequently even commanded the grossest violations of morality and decorum, and veiled, under the prostituted name of religion, the most flagitious and horrible abominations, which have ever been permitted to pollute the annals of the human race. The prophets of the true God were inspired by the purest principles. They actively and invariably exerted themselves in the cause of virtue. The system of morality which they sanctioned was pure, severe, and founded upon determinate and acknowledged principles. They tempered its severity, however, with the love of mercy and the gentle feelings of benevolence. With all the II. On the DIFFERENCE between the pretended predictions of heathen oracles and the prophecies contained in the Scriptures. When we meet with a prophecy, the avowed end of which is to satisfy some trivial curiosity or abet the designs of some ambitious leader, suspicion must necessarily take the alarm. This was evidently the character of the ancient oracles. However directed, whether by evil men or evil spirits, they certainly spoke as they were paid or intimidated; and the long continued history of ancient times has completely informed us of the practices by which the priests of the false gods endeavoured to gain credit for their idols, and profit for themselves, by foretelling things to come. "But how did they conduct this difficult traffic? Did they make it hazardous as well as difficult, by pledging their lives on the truth of their predictions? Far otherwise:-they had very different arts and plans, much more compatible with the consciousness of being extremely liable to error. In the first place, unless a direct appeal to their inspiration was made by direct inquiry, they usually observed a prudent silence. They ut-warmth of zeal, and energy of eloquence, they recommended the cause of tered no spontaneous prophecies. In saying nothing, they exposed themselves to no detection; and when they were obliged to speak, it was always with sufficient precaution. Obstacles were first thrown in the way of inquiry. By magnificent and repeated sacrifices, it was rendered extremely expensive. This preliminary had a double advantage: it lessened the number of inquirers, and at the same time se-der the poor possessor of a neighbouring vineyard. The piety which they cured abundant advantage to the priests. These sacrifices were preceded, attended, and followed by many prescribed ceremonies; the omission or mismanagement of any one of which was sufficient to vitiate the whole proceeding. The gods were not at all times in a humour to be consulted.gious duties were not varied with the progress of civilization, nor made to Omens were to be taken, and auguries examined, which, if unfavourable in any particular, either precluded the inquiry for the present, or required further lustrations, ceremonies, and sacrifices to purify the person who consulted, and rendered him fit to receive an answer from the gods, or to bring their wayward deities to a temper suitable to the inquiry." When indeed answers were given, the heathen oracles had no determinate scheme, and related to detached, unconnected events; while the prophecies of Scripture respect one great UT!! 1 Van Dale, De Oraculis, tom. i. p. 3. 2 Dr. Nares's Connected View of the Prophecies relative to the Christian Church, p. 14. the stranger, the widow, and the orphan. Neither the pomp of station, nor Bampton Lectures, for 1800, pp. 241–244. iii. Aio te acida Romanos vincere posse. ers. hundred men, and said unto them, Shall I go against Ramoth- great damage to the kingdom of Judah, united together absoGilead to battle, or shall I forbear? And they said, Go up, for lutely to destroy it, and came to lay siege to Jerusalem. the Lord shall deliver [it] into the hands of the king. It is to Ahaz, king of Judah, and all his subjects, being seized with be observed, that the word [it] is not in the original, and terror, the prophet Isaiah came to him, and publicly assured that the reply of the pseudo-prophets is so artfully con- him that the enterprise of the two kings should be frusstructed, that it might be interpreted either for or against the trated: that in a short time they would both die; and that, beexpedition; as thus, the Lord will deliver (it) Ramoth- fore a child, that was to be born in about ten months, could Gilead into the king's (Ahab's) hand; or, the Lord will deliver say, "My father and my mother," Damascus, the capital of (Israel) into the king's hand, that is, into the hands of the Syria, and Samaria, the capital of the kingdom of Israel, king of Syria. Relying upon this ambiguous oracle, the should be subject to the king of Assyria. Within three short monarchs of Judah and Israel engaged the Syrians, and years the event justified the prophecy in all its parts, though were utterly discomfited. it was without any natural probability. The destruction Whenever the oracles failed, the priests, who officiated at of Sennacherib's army, together with all the minute circumthem, were never at a loss for subterfuges for preserving stances of his previous advance, was announced by Isaiah a their credit. If the event happened not to correspond with long time before it happened, with this additional circumthe prophecy, it was discovered, when too late, that some stance, that such destruction should take place in the night; indispensable ceremony or observance had been omitted; that and that the noise of the thunder that should roll over the the gods were averse to the inquirer; or that he had not been Assyrians should be to Jerusalem an harmonious sound, and in a proper state for consulting them. If an evil event took like a melodious concert, because it would be followed with place when a good one had been promised, it was the fault public thanksgivings. It was these precise and circumof the inquirer. If, on the contrary, the result was more fa- stantial predictions that supported the hope of Hezekiah, vourable than the prediction, this was owing to the interces- notwithstanding every thing that seemed to oppose it. Nor sion of the priests, to the prayers they had offered, or to the can it excite our astonishment that, after their accomplishrites they had performed for propitiating the offended pow-ment, the pious monarch and his people were persuaded that But notwithstanding all these and other precautions, Isaiah was a prophet, to whom the Almighty revealed his the heathen priests succeeded very imperfectly in maintain- designs, and that he spoke by his command.-In like maning the credit of the oracles. The wiser and more sagacious ner, after the departure of the ambassadors, whom Merodachheathens, especially in later times, held thein in utter con- Baladan, king of Babylon, had sent to congratulate Hezetempt. They were ridiculed by the comic poets; and the kiah on his recovery from sickness, the same prophet was pretendedly inspired priestess was, in several instances, even commissioned to tell the Jewish sovereign that all his treapopularly accused of being bribed to prophesy according to sures (which in the secret pride of his heart he had shown the interests of a particular party. Such was the success to his ambassadors) should be conveyed to Babylon; that of false prophecy, even with all the aids of art, and a sys- princes descended from him should be made captives; and tematic plan of imposture to preserve it from detection.3 that they should be employed by the conqueror in menial offices." This prediction was apparently contrary to all probability: the kings of Babylon and Judah were then allies and united in interest. The former seemed in no respect formidable, when compared with the kings of Assyria, whose yoke he had but just shaken off, and to whom he was, perhaps, still tributary; and yet the prophecy is positive, and Hezekiah entertained no doubt of it. It was literally accomplished, and then the Jews hoped for their return from captivity, which Isaiah had not only foretold many times, and in the most magnificent terms, but also marked out the conqueror of Babylon, and the deliverer of the Jews by name, considerably more than one hundred years before Cyrus became king of Persia, and liberated the captive Jews.-Lastly, Isaiah clearly declared the ruin of Babylon, after he had seen, in prophetic spirit, all its splendour and glory under Nebuchadnezzar 10 and it is astonishing with what exactness all the parts of his predictions were accomplished; so that the precise site of Babylon cannot now be ascertained. How widely different from these pretended predictions are the prophecies contained in the Scriptures! They were delivered without solicitation, and pronounced openly before the people; and the prophet knew himself by law exposed to capital punishment, if any one of his predictions were to be overthrown. The events which were foretold were often both complicated and remote, depending on the arbitrary will of many, and arising from a great variety of causes, which concurred to bring them to pass. Some of them were accomplished shortly after they were delivered; others had their accomplishment somewhat later, but the prophets who delivered them saw the event. Others again had a more distant object which exceeded the prophet's life; but the different events which he foretold were so connected together, that the most distant bordered pretty nearly upon some others, the accomplishment of which was preparatory to the last. The fulfilment of the first prophecies served to raise an expectation of those which were distant; and the accomplishment of the last confirmed the first. The predictions of Isaiah will furnish an illustration of the correctness of these remarks; and whoever reads the prophets with attention will readily find many more instances. 4 The kings of Syria and Israel, who separately had done Thus Aristotle observes, with his usual accuracy and penetration, that "pretended prophets express themselves in general language. In a game at odd and even, a man may say, whether the number be odd or even, much sooner than what it is; and that such a thing will happen, than when Therefore those who deliver oracles never define when." (Aristot. Rhet. lib. iii. c. 5. § 4. Op. tom. iv. edit. Bipont.)-Cicero likewise has the following remark: "If this be foretold, Who is the PERSON meant and what is the TIME? The writer has conducted himself so dexterously, that any event whatever will suit his prophecy, since there is No specification of men and times." (De Divinat. lib. ii. c. 54. Op. tom. xi. p. 287. edit. Bipont.) Horace also ridicules with great humour the pompous nothing. ness of the heathen oracles in the following verses: O Laërtiade, quicquid dicam, aut erit, aut non; will not; For the great Apollo gives me to divine. Lastly, Lucian, in his history of Alexander, after relating in what manner that impostor pretended to answer the sealed questions delivered to him, without opening the seal, adds:-"Thus he delivered oracles, and gave divine responses, but with great prudence, and giving perplexed, doubt ful, or obscure answers, according to the custom of oracles. Some he encouraged; others he dissuaded, replying as he thought proper. To some he prescribed plain remedies and diets, for he knew many useful medi; cines. But, with respect to the hopes (of advancement), the increase of property, and successions to inheritances, he always deferred giving an answer, adding, "All things shall be done when I am willing, and when my prophet Alexander shall entreat me, and shall offer prayers in your be half"-It is to be observed that this impostor spoke in the name of the god Esculapius; and that he did not give his responses for nothing, his stated price being one drachma and two oboli (about 101d. sterling) for each answer. Luciana Alexander seu Pseudoinantis. Op. tom. v. pp. 85, 86. edit. Bipont. Nares on Prophecy, p. 16. VOL. I. Isa. vii. 1. 9-16. Once more, a large proportion of the Scripture prophecies was committed to writing, and preserved in books which were always left open to public examination, and all persons were enjoined to peruse them. This is a test which the spurious predictions of the heathens never could endure. Their oracles were never collected in any authentic records; never brought into one view, with even a pretence to prove the prescience of their deities. Certain officers only were allowed to superintend them. In Egypt, the oracular books were kept by the priests exclusively, and written in a peculiar character; and at Rome, the Sibylline books were allowed to be consulted only by the quindecemviri, and not even by these privileged few without an order from the senate. And when at length a compilation was offered to the world, professing to contain the Sibylline oracles, it was so gross and clumsy a forgery as never to impose on any man of sense, who exerted even the smallest skill in bringing it to the test of criticism." It is a remark, which holds alike in every circumstance of divine revelation, that impostors never did attempt to produce their credentials in such a manner as the real messengers of God. Yet does the malice or the blindness of its opposers continually endeavour to confound them. Because there have been lying prophets, the true must be suspected; because Isa. viii. 2-4. 2 Kings xv. 29, 30. xvi. 9. Isa. viii. 7, 8. Isa. xliv. and xlv. 10 Isa. xlvii. 1. 7, 8, 9. 12, 13. xiii. 4. 19, 20. 21. et seq. xiv. 22-24. |