On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
ture is effected equally with the supposed deviation from or transgression of them ( the case of miracles ) is unknown to us . The supposition supported by Mr , Hume of an array 01 antagonists or opposite proofs between miracles , and
testimony as the criterion of them , is so weak and untrue , as to be really unworthy of him . Wherein is exemplified any mutual destruction of arguments ? Does the liability to falsehood in testimony , annul or impede its capacity to record truth , even although that truth be of a miraculous nature ?
Certainl y not ; both the concessions in the Kssay , and numerous other more powerful considerations herein adduced , prove it beyond doubt . Is testimony any other than the record of experience ? " the criterion of facts which do not fall immediately under
our own observation . " What , then , can be more absurd than to oppose the record of positive experience to the absence of an uniform and personal one , or to
the liability to error in testimony , designed or undesigned , especially in a case of this kind , where multitudes of living witnesses could have contradicted k ? At the time the miracles are
recorded to have been performed , they were never denied ; the Power only by which they were accomplished was ever called in question . Human nature , too , having been fully admitted to be the same in all ages , the persons living in those days were equally
competent with ourselves , not only to ascertain the facts , but also to record to others the experience of their sc ? iscs : and surely nothing more either has been done , or is wanting to be done , to establish the proof of miracles , since this is the test by which we can alone know them : but such are the minor
sophisms adduced in corroboration of this celebrated objection , and maintained to be indispensable by their author . Much stress has been laid by Mr . Hume and others on the natural
improbability of miracles , but with little reason . VVere it a question of probability only ( which , however , it certainly is not ) , the balance of records in which they are noticed affirming their truth , and the preponderance of veracity in human testimony having been conceded in the Kssay , the evidence in their favour , even on thig ground , is
Untitled Article
decisive . By the addition of a single ounce to a pair of well poised , thoug h , ordinary scales , you will turn them as completely , and more commodiously too , than by that of a pound - , but the addition of hundreds or thousands of
ounces , at once , to a pair of sceptical scales , would produce no other effect that I am acquainted with , than the breaking of them : and well would it be for the experimentalist , if he were not materially injured in the general wreck . Improbability , moreover , has
no relation to testimony , but only to opinion : where testimony begins , improbability ends . To give testimony to any event , supposes that we have already ascertained the fact , either directly , by the observation of our own senses , or indirectly , through the medium of the senses of others . In either
case , Improbability is wholly out of the question . The consideration that the subsequent effects in the Christian world can be accounted for on no other principle , than upon the supposition of the truth of the miracles , with the important end
to be answered by them , are arguments that have justly made a forcible impression on numbers . Some have denied experience to be the sole foundation on which to ground our belief in testimony : others , in answer to the
objection that miracles are not wrought in our days , have replied to it by saying that they are no longer necessary ; information now abounds in the wor ^ ld ; mankind are of themselves sufficiently inclined to examine the records of
immortality ; a prceternatural stimulus is no longer wanting ; and the Almighty cannot be expected to resort to extraordinary means while ordinary ones are fully adequate 5 a priori considerations have actuated the researches of a few , who have directed their principal efforts to ascertain the abstract nature of
miracles , rather than the subsequent establishment of their proofs . The sum total , however , of these united observations , seem to me to tend more to the refutation of the minor difficulties
of the case , than to the subversion of the principal one : and one , more specious than Mr . Hume ' s , will , I apprehend , be easily admitted to have never been made . The capacity of testimony to record truth , even although that truth be of a miraculous nature , can no longer be
Untitled Article
An Examination qfMr . Hume ' s Objection to Miracles . lQ
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1817, page 19, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2460/page/19/
-