New Orleans Republican., 1875-11-21

that l use o phrase meaningless to
| many minds. But l explain and in
dorse it in this way. Before we can regard
any thing or aot as an exception to q rule
| we must have had clear conception of
| the rule itself in our mind and the reoOg.
milton of the exception makes the more
vivid the sule by which We tested it.
Thus miracles conserve the order of the
| universe and leave the laws of nature in
full force Nowhere in the Scriptures do
we meet. with any reference to dread in
any mind that men would cease to trust
nature If it, or his servants, perform sd
miraclee or had lost confidence in her laws
because he had performed them. The Jews
| in the time of Moses did not cease to dig
wells, because Moses struck water from the
| rock. Ia the time of the prophets they did
not cease TO think that iron would sink in
water, because they saw the head of the
Ak rise buOyantly to the surface. In the time
OF our Master the feeding of the 5000 did not
suspend the action of the plow and seed
basket in Holy Land; nor was the Sea of
Gallilee less bu0yant to the tisberman's
boats or less liable to tempests because
Jesus Christ once walked upon its waters;
nor did the Healer's art cease to be prac-
ticed because the Great Healer's finger and
word had far exceeded them all.
But further, the laws of nature are parts
OF q general system which regulates the re-
Aopioho ootWcCn pou duA DlS TtbpUublUlS
creatures Now the material is subordinate
t. the moral in government. Rare interpo-
sitions may therefore serve the higher pur.
poses of law by evincing the supremacy of
the Ruler over His works, For such an end
miracles are certainly most fitted and there.
fore are every way probable.
10 call the ex perience in proof of the uni
formity of the laws of nature general, and
then array it as such against the particular
experience by which miracles are proved
is simply absurd.
This mode of objection to miracles is
either atheistic in spirit or falacious in
reasoning. or both. The celebrated argu.
ment of Hume that the testimony of the
Apostles IN favor of miracles is more likely
TO be false than the universal testimony of
men against them, is a plain begging
OF the question. 1t is placing 200 men who
did not see fact against ten who did. The
value OF testimony is not a question of
numbers, and general experience has no
bearing on particular testimony further
than as it supplies test to distinguish the
trustworthy from its opposite.
10 believe in Romish miracles we NAV
say "Nerity the fact before attempting to
explain it," Charles ITs trick OF the two
goblets of water equal weight and the
same quantity of water; place fish in one
and 1t will be lighter than the other Ex-
plain this fact. They tried TO explain it
Wi.nout verifying 1t and got laughed at.
The improbable may be true. "If twelve
honest men, says j. S. Mill, 'depose upon
oath, and at great loss to themselves, that
two dice gave skies ten times in succession,
while knowing that the chances are $685.
l5o, 44O, ,062,976 against the combination,
still should believe them"
II, then. by the laws of nature Divine |
ordinances are meant, they are in no sense
contrary to miracles, and against a covertly |
atheistic use of the expression miracles
make visible and unans werable protest,
to be resisted only by him who has already |
said in his heart, There is no God"