A question has also been raised whether it is not possible that miracles may be wrought by evil spirits in support of a false doctrine. This question affects Christian evidences simply, and in this line the only question that can practically be raised is whether the Scripture miracles — supposing them not to be pure fab- rications— are real miracles wrought by divine power, or normal events occurring in the course of nature, or pro- duced by human means. Indeed, the possibility of real miracles other than divine is a question rather of curi- osity than of practical value. An able discussion of this subject will be foinid in Farmer's Dissertation, though the author has weakened his argument by at- tempting too much. So far as he undertakes to show that there is no sufficient evidence that miracles actual- ly have been wrought by evil spirits in behalf of a false religion, his reasoning is logical and satisfactory, and his treatment of the supposed miracles of the Egyptian magicians is in this respect highly successful. But when he proceeds from the historical to the theological argument, and maintains that it is inconsistent with God's perfections that such miracles ever should be wrought, he appears to assume more than is warranted either by reason or by Scripture, and to deduce a conse- quence which is not required by the former, and ap- pears difficult to reconcile with the latter. That there may be such a thing as " the working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders," and that such working will actually be manifested before the last day in support of Antichrist, is the natural interpretation of the language of Scripture. That such a manifestation has as yet taken place is, to say the least, a conclusion not established by existing evidence.
Another question has been raised as to the means of distinguishing between true and false miracles, mean- ing by the latter term phenomena pretended to be mi- raculous, but in fact either natural events or human im- postures or fabrications. Various rules for distinguish- ing between these have been given by several authors, the best known being the four rules laid down in Les- lie's Short and Easy Method tcith the Deists, and the three given in bishop Douglas's Ci'iterion, and to some extent the six given by bishop Stillingfleet in Orif/ines Sacra, bk. ii, chap, x, and the very acute observations in a similar kind of work, J. H. Newman's Life oJ'Ajml- lonius Tyanmus, published in the Encydopcedia Metro- politana. Yet the practical value of these rules, though considerable as compared with the inquiry previously noticed, is available rather for particular and temporary phases of controversy than for general and perpetual edification. A more permanent principle in relation to
MIRACLES
320 MIRACLES, ECCLESLVSTICAL
this question is suggested by Leslie in his remarks on the prcteiuled miracles of Apollonius, where he shows that the assumed miracles, even if admitted, have no important connection with our belief or practice. " But now," he says, " to sum up all, let us sui)pose to the utmost that all this said romance were true, what
8vo); Christlieb, Mod. Doubts (1874), ch. v; Bnshnell, Nature and the Supernatural (new ed. 1874) ; Cudworlh, Intellectual System (see Index in vol. iii) ; ^\■atson, TheoL Inst it. i, 73 sq.. 14G sq., 234; Hodge, St/steinatic T/uol. vol. i, ch. xii ; llagenbach. Hist. iJoctr. i. 314 sq., 414 sq. ; ii, 407 sq. ; Haag, Histoire des I)Of/mes L'hre-
wdulil it amount to V Oidy that Apollonius did such 1 tiens, pt. i, ch. iv, et al. ; J. Pyc Smith, First Lines of tilings. Wiiat then? A\'hat if lie were so virtuous a Christian Theol. p. 62 sq., 582 sq., et al. ; Pascal, Pen- pcrson that (iod should have given him the power to *■«.<, pt. ii, art. 19, § 9 ; Lyall, I'mp. I'roph.p.'lAl; Kit- work several miracles? Tins would noways hurt the | tn,Ci/rlop.Bibl.Lit. s.v.; Smith, L'ihI. iJict. s. v.; Chris- argument that is here brouglit against the deists, be- \tian Magazine, 1797; Christian Ifistrndor, xvii, 145; cause A])olloniu3 set up no new religion, nor did \\c\ Christian Rev.. )a\x,\^b6; Theol. lier.voL iv; For. Qu. pretend tliat he was sent with any revelation from hcav- | vol. xxii ; Bill. Sacra, vols, ii and vii ; Xorth Brit. Rev. en to introduce any new sort of worship of God; so j Feb. 1846, art. viii; April, 1862, art. iv: North Amer. that it is of no consequence to the world whether these i Rev. Jidy, 1860; Journ. of Sac. Lit. April, Oct. 1854; were true or pretended miracles; whether Apollonius Jan. 1856; South. Presb. Rev. ISoG; South, (^u. Rer.. ]n\y,
were an honest man or a magician ; or whether there ever were such a man or not. For he left no law or gos- pel behind him to be received upon the credit of those miracles which he is said to have wrought." " To this," says dean Mausel, "it may be added that there is an enormous a priori improbability against miracles per- formed without any professed object, as compared with those which belong to a system tliat has exercised a good and permanent influence in the world. This im- probal)ility can only be overcome by a still more enor- mous mass of evidence in their favor; and imtil some actual case can be pointed out in which such evidence