as an abettor of the contrary opinion Certissimum est says he à Divinâ Providentiâ pendere res omnes cujuscunque ordinis ab eâdem vera miracula edita esse It is I think a sufficient prejudice against the opinion which he produces these Authors to insinuate and patronize or at least his judgment in the choice of his Authors that two out of three declare flatly against him in that Point Yet 't is possible that as he produces them here they may both better consist with him and Spinoza than with themselves This therefore comes to be examined and will lead us gradually to give a particular Answer to each part of the whole Work We begin therefore with the Premonition to the Reader he there with Mr. Burnett What he takes from Mr. Burnett is out of the eleventh and last chapter of the first book of his Theory Mr. Burnetts Words are these In eâ sum equidem sententiâ Authores Sacros cùm de rebus Naturalibus Sermones habent c. Upon these the Translator thus varies in the first Words of his Premonition It is the judgment of most of the Ancient Fathers of the Christian Faith and of the most learned Theologues of the Moderns that the Authors of the Holy Scriptures when they speak of Natural things c. And so goes on with the rest of that Page which he translates more faithfully what he designed in this amplification whether to amuze his Reader oblige Mr. Burnet or to make a fair shew of his own great reading I shall not enquire The Summ of what he has out of Mr. Burnett is this That the Authors of the Holy Scriptures where they speak of Natural things design only to excite Piety and Devotion in us not to improve us in the knowledg of Nature That agreeably to this Design they explain the visible Works of God in a manner suitable to the received opinions of the vulgar they wrest the general causes and ends of the whole Creation in favour of the Peoples prejudices as if all things were ordained only for the good and benefit of mankind they do not make mention of the ordinary train of second causes in the productions of Nature but recur immediately to God himself the first Cause Author and President of it and compendiously refer all things to his immediate Power and to his irresistible Will and Command All Mr. Burnett's design in this is to excuse himself for giving a Philosophical and Mechanical account of the Deluge and other grand Effects in the Sublunary World as the Original of the Mountains Rocks Islands Ocean Rivers c. in the Terraqueous Globe The production of all these the Scripture immediately refers to God and Divines ordinarily speak of them as Effects supernatural and miraculous viz. That God by the same powerful Word whereby he created Heaven and Earth cast up the Mountains and cut out the Channels for the Rivers and that vast cavity for the immense Ocean commanded the waters into one place and made the dry land appear And by the like command when the wickedness of man was great upon the Earth and the end of all flesh was come before him opened the Catarrhacts of Heaven and broke up the Fountains of the Deep and destroyed all mankind except eight persons by a deluge of Waters To this Mr. Burnetts Answer is That it is in no wise necessary that these effects should be conceived to have been wrought by miracle For the Scripture that it does not appear that they are recorded for Miracles there because the Scripture immediately refers effects purely Natural to God and makes no mention of the train of second causes subservient to God in their production the design of the sacred Writers when they speak of natural things being not to instruct us in the knowledg of Nature by giving us a Philosophical account of their mediate causes but to excite in us Piety and Devotion by working in our minds a true sense of the Power and Providence of Almighty God to which all things owe their original This is the intent scope and drift of Mr. Burnett's Words as they stand at home in their proper place but here they are applied to far different purposes as appears by the Conclusion the Translator draws from them when he comes to speak himself viz. That these things considered 1. We are not to admire if we find in the Holy Scripture many memorable things related as miracles which notwithstanding proceeded from the fixt and immutable order of Nature c. 2. Which is but the application of the former We ought not rashly to accuse any Man of Infidelity only because he refuses to believe that those Miracles were effected by the immediate Power of God c. Which conclusion of his 1. Is just the quite contrary to Mr. Burnett's 2. Destroys the authority of Scripture and leaves us free to disbelieve any Miracle recorded in it for such 1. It is quite contrary to Mr Burnett's Mr. Burnett's way of Arguing is this The Scripture immediately refers to God things which are purely the effects of Nature Ergo we cannot justly conclude that what effects the Scripture immediately refers to God those it records for miracles Yes says the Translator upon the same grounds we may conclude that it records them for Miracles and this too we may conclude over and above that the Scripture records such effects for Miracles which really are the Effects of Nature 2. It destroys the authority of Scripture and leaves us free to disbelieve any Miracle recorded in it for such For first it makes the Holy Scripture guilty of Imposture and that not in a small matter but such whereupon depends the authority of all the revelations made therein by God to mankind for upon the truth of those relations in Scripture wherein these Miracles are recorded as matter of Fact depends the certainty of the Divine Mission of Moses and the Prophets our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles and consequently the authority of the Doctrine which they revealed 2dly It takes away the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we have to discern whether the effect it relates be a Miracle or not The only thing whereby we can know it is from the Scriptures manner of relating it if it relates one thing for a Miracle which is not all may be for ought we know of the same Nature And so farewel both the belief of Miracles and the Scripture it self I presume that he does not play with us in a matter of this importance i. e. That he does not mean by the Scriptures relating such things as Miracles onely that it relates the production of them in such Terms as Idiots and Illiterate Persons may from thence conceive that they are super-natural Effects for then all he says will be very true but withal very impertinent but that it sets them down for Effects Miraculous and Supernatural as much as
provision of our daily bread as the Israelites had in the Wilderness Elijah in Horeb when the Ravens were his Purveyours the Widow with whom he lodged whose Barrel of Meal was preserved from wasting or lastly the four or five thousand fed by our Saviour in the Gospel which I suppose was a work of Nature but related in Scripture as a Miracle because it mentions not how the Corn grew in the hands and mouths of them that did eat it 2. The Natural import of the Words disproves this conceit To be related as a Miracle is to be recorded for an effect of God's own immediate Hand and supernatural Power To be immediately refer'd or ascribed to God without mention of a Train of mediate causes is quite another thing There it is expresly or by consequence declared that the Work is above Nature here it is left in Medio without any determination from the manner wherein it is related whether it be a natural or supernatural effect of the Divine Power For instance the Scripture says in one place Thou makest Darkness and it is Night in another He sent Darkness and made it Dark In the former it speaks of the ordinary in the latter of the Egyptian darkness and both it immediately refers to God mentioning no natural causes of the one or the other Both of them it may thus ascribe to God though the one be the Effect of Nature and the other a Miracle and therefore to ascribe any Effect immediately to God is not to relate it as a Miracle 3. This will farther appear from the very reason of the thing it self The Scripture may justly ascribe to God all the Effects of Nature without mentioning any train of suborbordinate causes and yet cannot thereupon be justly concluded to relate these things as Miracles And this because first God is the Author of Nature by his Power and the Governour and President of it by his superintending Providence therefore every Effect in Nature may be justly ascribed to him as it's Author 2dly The Scriptures designs to speak of the Effects of Nature only with regard to the Power and Providence of Almighty God therefore it may justly ascribe them to him without mention of the train of natural Causes whereby he mediately produces them If then any Effect may be in this manner ascribed to God and yet he be no farther the Cause of it than as he is the Author and Governour of Nature by his Power and Providence if so then it is no just Conclusion That the sacred Writers relate any thing as a Miracle because they immediately refer it to God without meniion of the train of natural Causes subservient to him in the Production of it 4. But to give as full satisfaction as may be in this Point and withal to shew that all this notwithstanding there are some Effects so related in the Holy Scripture as that it may be justly conceived to have recorded them for Miracles I shall state What it is for the Scripture to relate any thing as a Miracle It is not enough as we have seen already that it ascribes the Effect to God as its Author nor that it immediately ascribes it to him without mention that it is produced by the mediation of second Causes For every thing proceeds from him whether it be by the course of Nature or a Work of his supernatural Power and therefore is to be ascribed to him and the Scriptures ascribing of it to God without mention any other Cause does not necessarily imply that no other Cause had any hand in the Production of it But to relate a thing as a Miracle is to relate it for an Effect of Gods own immediate Hand or an Effect above beside or contrary to Nature And this may be done two wayes 1. By express Declaration 2. By relating it in such a manner and with such circumstances as from thence we may rationally conclude the Effect to be miraculous For the first there may seem to be very few instances if any wherein we can certainly assure our selves that the Holy Scripture declares any Effect to be a Work above Nature For though it may and often does use the Word Miracle yet that being Ambiguous it may still be uncertain whether it be to be taken for any thing more than an Effect Wonderful and Surprizing indeed yet purely Natural All which notwithstanding in some places we may truly vouch the express declaration of the Holy Scripture that such and such Effects are miraculous Joh. 2.11 After the relation of our blessed Saviour's Turning the Water into Wine the Text says This beginning of Miracles did Jesus So also John 4.54 after the Cure of the Nobleman's Son This is again the second Miracle that Jesus did In these two places the Scripture does in a manner reflect upon the Works it had related and declares them to be supernatural But by the Word Miracle may possibly be meant no more than an Effect Strange and Wonderful not a Work above Nature unless we can give some certain proof of the contrary And I think this one Consideration may be sufficient to evince it The Design of the Scripture in relating these Works of our blessed Saviour is to propound them to us as undoubted Evidences of his Divine Mission Now Evidences of that they could not be unless they were Works above Nature because an Effect of Nature cannot prove Gods immediate power and presence nor consequently confirm the truth of any Prophets Commission from Heaven to reveal his Doctrine For the Scripture therefore to relate these Works of our Blessed Saviour as undoubted Evidences of his Divine Mission will argue that the Scripture where it stiles these Works Miracles Signs and Wonders must mean strictly such as exceed the power of Nature Otherwise it would impose upon our belief and oblige us under pain of Damnation to embrace a Doctrine as Divine upon such Evidences as are in no wise sufficient to confirm the Authority of the Person that reveals it And upon this Ground we might discover many more instances of Effects expresly declared in Scripture to proceed from God's immediate extraordinary Power For it holds as well in the Miracles of the Apostles as our Blessed Saviour's and in Moses's too the Scripture relating them as wrought to evidence his Commission from Heaven to institute the Law as well as those of our Saviour and his Apostles to evidence their Authority to Preach and Plant the Gospel But if there were no such express Declaration in the Holy Scripture there are yet 2. Many relations of Matters of Fact couched in such Terms as that we may justly conclude from thence that the Effects there spoken of are related as Miraculous and Supernatural As 1. Where the Effect is related as done without the use of Means So in our Saviours curing Diseases and indeed Working most of his Miracles by the Word of his Mouth turning the Water into Wine by the internal
Mr. Hobbs's Doctrine 2. Upon the use whereto he applies it Mr. Hobbs informs us What Works are by Men wondered at and reputed miraculous He shews by Instance That they are such as are rare and unusual or such as we cannot conceive to proceed from Natural Causes He does not say That this is all that goes to the making of a Miracle nor that this is the only Rule we have whereby to discern what Effects are such but that this is enough to make things seem to men to be miraculous and that a true Miracle is indeed an Effect rare and inexplicable and somewhat more If he mean otherwise he contradicts himself soon after when he defines a Miracle to be a Work of God not conceived only but really beside his Operation by the way of Nature ordained in the Creation and infers from thence That it cannot be the Effect of any thing but the immediate hand of God Yet to clear all That a man cannot conceive such an Effect to proceed from Natural Causes may bear a double sense 1. That he is not capable of assigning the Natural Cause of it or farther of apprehending how it can be effected by any 2. That he clearly and distinctly perceives that it is impossible to be produced by the Course of Nature I grant that this is enough to assure a man that it is a Miracle but if he concludes it to be so in the other case he is guilty of presumption in measuring the extent of the force of Nature by the narrow reach of his own knowledge or capacity This may prepare us to consider the use whereto Mr. Hobbs's Doctrine is applied by his Translator His Design is before he come to Spinoza's Arguments against the belief of Miracles to make a discovery of the Causes that introduced this grand Mistake into the World And the first as a Corollary from Mr. Hobb's Doctrine he makes to be Admiration and that proceeding from these two Causes Rarity and Ignorance That is all the effects which the deluded World has mistaken for Miracles are such as are only rare and unusual and inexplicrable and the Causes which make mankind so prone to admit them for Miraculous are our ignorance of the Causes and want of experience and observation of the Effects of Nature The second cause which he Assigns of the belief of Miracles is Superstition viz. That it is our hopes and fears which make us conceive every unusual Event in Nature to be the effect of an extraordinary Divine Power fore-bodding to us some good or evil And here he takes Spinoza in hand and we come at length to the main part of his Work to which the rest is only Preliminary and with what Coherence and how much to his purpose hath already been shewed Before I joyn Issue with him about the main Point in Controversy I shall premise only this short observation in regard to what he says of the Causes of the belief of Miracles It may very well be granted him that the generality of Mankind who are the Ignorant and unthinking Sort are very prone to admire and wonder at every considerable Effect of Nature and to look upon it as proceeding from an extraordinary Power and the immediate hand of God And that the Causes of this may be their want of knowledg and experience and their superstitious Hopes and Fears But to insinuate thereupon the same to be the only ground of the belief of any Miracles is very Presumptuous as well as Irrational unless it could be evidently made out that all Miracles are impossible and to see how effectually that may be done is our next Work viz. to examine the Method wherein Spinoza and from him the Author of this Collection attempts to demonstrate it Spinoza begins with a brief Account of the chief Heads of this as he calls it popular mistake and the first Authors of it These he makes to be the People of the Jews who to magnify their own Nation as under a more peculiar care of the Divine Providence than any other and to set forth the greatness of the God they adored above the Gods of the Heathen recounted to them what mighty Works he had done for them and how all the parts of Nature which the Heathens Worshipped were under his Command and Controul The particulars of this Error which he recounts are these That the ordinary sort of Men think that God's Power and Providence does then most eminently appear when any thing happens contrary to what they conceive to be the Course of Nature That they think Nature's swerving from her own Laws to be the best Argument for the existence of a Deity That they take those persons for Atheists who attempt to deduce a Miracle from Natural Causes That they think God sits idle when nature acts in her usual way and Nature is suspended whenever God pleases to interpose That they form in their brain a Notion of two Powers numerically distinct the one of God the other of Nature understanding not what they mean by either And that all this they do partly out of superstition partly out of a desire to oppose themselves to Men of more Wise and Philosophical heads I need not stand to examine the Truth of this Account it appears to be purely Declamatory and not which might have been more justly expected a fair opening of the state of the Question and a Declaration what those of his Adversaries hold concerning it who take up the belief of Miracles upon better grounds than vulgar Prejudice and Superstition I shall have Occasion to do that for him in what follows He proceeds therefore and proposes to do four things 1. To prove that nothing in the World happens contrary to Nature but that Nature keeps an eternal fixt and immutable Order 2. To prove that by Miracles we cannot know the Essence nor the Existence nor consequently the Providence of God but that all these may be better known by the fixt and immutable Order of Nature 3. To shew by instances out of the Scripture that by the Decrees and Volitions and consequently the Providence of God it understands nothing else but the very Order of Nature which necessarily follows from his eternal Laws 4. To treat of the manner of interpreting the Scripture Miracles and what is chiefly to be observed in the Relations about them or as the Traslator to shew that most Men have erred in the manner of interpreting the Miracles recorded in the holy Scriptures Of these Four the first onely tends directly to prove his Assertion the second Obliquely strikes at the being of Miracles as it makes them no Evidences of the immediate Power and Presence of God and so wholely useless and insignificant as no Proofs of what they are designed for The other two tend only either to draw the Scripture to his side or to elude the force of the Arguments brought from thence against him 1. He is to prove That
same universal Purpose and Decrees of God might settle the order of the Suns motion and thereupon it be necessary and true ab aeterno that the Sun shall move in this Order and yet withal ordain that at such times notwithstanding the Sun should stand still or go back and thereupon it be as necessary and true ab aeterno that at those points of time the Sun should go back or stand still The Laws therefore of Natural Agents may in this sense be the Decrees of God and involve eternal necessity and truth and yet it may be possible for some certain effects to fall out contrary to them viz. without that compass within which they are limited to take effect and no farther But if Spinoza will have it That whatever God wills to come to pass in such a time must therefore be always or that whatever Order God settles for such a determinate compass must because he wills and settles it hold eternally I deny that in this sense every Law and Decree of God involves eternal Necessity and Truth It is eternally necessary and true That whatever God Decrees to be shall be if he decree any thing to be and endure to perpetuity it is eternally true and necessary that it shall be perpetually if he decree it to such a compass it is ab aeterno necessary and true that it shall hold so long and his Decree or the truth and necessity of the Effect consequent thereupon is not violated if it hold no longer So much therefore may be said in Answer to his first Argument to prove that Nothing can happen contrary to Nature c. The Sum is That he mistakes the meaning of the Terms of the Question That he makes Nature the same with God and so besides his taking the word in a sense of his own he in effect rejects the Existence of a Deity in Order to overthrow the belief of Miracles Lastly That in the sense wherein I have considered his Argument it may be true and yet his Conclusion not follow from it His Second Argument is Because the Power of Nature is the power of God and therefore as infinite as himself E. Nothing can fall out without its compass or contrary to it His ground whereupon he proceeds in this Argument is to be sure the very same conception of the Divine Nature viz. That Nature is nothing but an infinite variety of Modifications of the Divine Essence and the power of it consequently nothing but the infinite fecundity of the Divine Essence determining it necessarily to exert it self in all the infinite variety of the modes of its being I shall therefore onely give this Argument so much consideration as it may require setting aside his Principles The power of Nature is the force that natural causes have to act each in their several manners and the vertue and efficacy of the whole arising from the joynt concurrence of the several parts in their distinct Operations This to speak properly is all resolved into a Vismotrix impressed upon matter enabled to act by Gods Power and determined to do it by his Will This therefore certainly must be different from the power of its Author in as much as the powers must be different if the Subjects differ to which they belong But granting that the power of Nature is virtually and origionally though not formally the Divine Power exerting it self in Nature as its Instrument Yet it no more follows thereupon that the power of Nature must be infinite then it follows that because the motion of the Sun is the motion of Nature therefore it is of as great extent as the motion of the whole frame of Nature besides Or because the Power that moves the hand is the power of the Soul that therefore the whole Sphere of the Souls Power in the Body is no larger than the hand The Argument is from a particular to an universal Gods power though simple and indivisible is yet unlimited It may act far beyond that compass wherein it does and therefore infinitly beyond the limits of Nature It exerts it self both in a natural and supernatural way and both kinds of effects proceed from one and the same indivisible omnipotence which is no more multiplied by the variety of effects that flow from it than the power of the Soul as it moves the hands and the feet the eye and the tongue These are all the Arguments he brings for the proof of his first Proposition The rest is the Conclusion he draws from the whole viz. What a Miracle is That it being proved that all Supernatural Effects are impossible a Miracle can be only an effect inexplicable by our own observation or the Principle of Nature known to us Having therefore proved that supernatural Effects are not impossible and answered his Arguments for the contrary I may take leave to draw a Conclusion contradictory to his That a Miracle is not only what he says but an Effect beside above or contrary to the Order of Nature The second thing he undertakes is To prove that by Miracles we cannot know the Essence Existence or Providence of God but that all these may be better known by the fixt and immutable Order of Nature His Design in this seems to be to destroy the Authority and Credit of Miracles by shewing that they are not proofs sufficient of what they are designed for But in the framing of this Proposition he mistakes the end for which they are design'd For 1. The design of Miracles is not to make a discovevery at least immediately and by themselves of the Essence of God They are proper and meet evidences of the truth of any Revelation and if in that Revelation it please God to make any supernatural display of his own Nature then Miracles may be said mediately to discover to us the Essence of God otherways they demonstrate no other Attribute of God but his power viz. as it is able to suspend the Operations of Nature or to act above it 2. Neither do they tend in any peculiar manner to prove the Existence of a Deity but rather suppose it viz. That there is a Supream Being who is the Author of Nature who gave it such a Power and set it such Laws whereby to act which Power and which Laws a Miracle being either above or contrary to proves thereupon not that God is but that it is he who then acts by his own immediate hand and not Nature But for any proof it gives us of the Being of a God it is onely in the same way that every natural Effect demonstrates it by leading us to a first Cause 3. Miracles are indeed sufficient Evidences of the Divine Providence that God does take upon him and actually exercise the Government of the World that he does not leave Nature to her self but sometimes interposes and sets her aside That he does not sit an unconcerned Spectator of the Actions of Men but sometimes in a most signal manner
was to be Worshipped I pass by what he says of Solomon and the Author of the 73 Psalm their doubts were about such things wherein Miracles were not proper means to inform them viz. Why the wicked prosper in this life What he has besides under this Head is 1. A profane abuse of the Scripture instead of an Answer to those plain Expressions therein where God is said to have wrought his Miracles that he might make his power to be known and that the Israelites might know that he was God This he says is not as if the Scripture meant that Miracles are in themselves convincing Arguments but onely that the Holy Spirit makes use of them as Arguments ad hominem that is for want of better Evidences he is fain to take all the advantage he can of their pre-conceived Opinions however irrational and absurd and makes these his Topicks as most effectual to perswade or convince them and in this sense he interprets what St. Paul says that to the Jews he became as a Jew to the Greeks as a Oreek that is argued with both not from any true and rational Principles but by making the best use he could of their prejudices and prepossessions to gain them to his side 2. That it is not consistent with true Philosophy that God in the Order and Course of his Providence should be conceived to take greater care of one person or Nation than another viz. he is not only bound to provide for all whatsoever means are necessary for their happiness but also obliged not to give any one Man over and above any degree of Grace which he does not equally impart to all the World To answer these two Positions fully we should be obliged to examine Spinoza's second and third Chapter of his Tractatus Theologico-Polit whereto he refers us for the demonstration of both I pass on therefore to the third thing he proposes to make out viz. That the Scripture by the Decrees and Commands and consequently the Providence of God understands nothing else but the fixt and immutable Order of Nature This he attempts to prove two ways 1. By Instance 2. Because the Scriptute relates several Circumstances in the production of those Effects that are commonly held to be supernatural His Instances are some that I mentioned above in my Answer to the Premonition viz. God telling Samuel He would send him a Man out of the land of Benjamin which was onely Sauls coming to him to enquire about the Asses God being said to turn the hearts of the Egyptians so that they hated the Israelites who yet it appears were moved to hate them upon Politique Accounts Gods saying He would set his Bow in the Sky and yet the Rainbow and undoubted Effect of Nature So also the melting of the Snow called Gods Word and the Wind and Fire his Ministers I grant that the Scripture in these Instances by Gods Decrees or Commands means no more than the Laws of Nature but his Argument ought to conclude universally for which a few instances in such particulars wherein it holds are not sufficient It is enough for me to name some things which the Scripture relates as the Decrees and Purposes of God which yet could never take effect by the mere Course of Nature As for Instance That a Virgin should conceive and bear a Child That three Men should be cast into Nebuchadnezzar's Furnace and the same Fire kill those persons that came so near to the Mouth of the Furnace as to throw them in and yet not so much as singe a hair of their heads though thrown into the midst of it That the Sun should stand still at the word of a Man Fire come down from Heaven at the command of another the Sea be stilled the Dead raised the Devils cast out at the Word Touch and Shadow of others All these Effects the Scripture sets down as wrought by the Decree and Order of Almighty God but not I presume by the Course of Nature In a word the Answer has been given before That the Scripture a scribes all Effects to God natural or above Nature and as from it's ascribing the Effects of Nature to God without mentioning how he produces them we cannot justly conclude that it records them for miraculous so on the other hand from its speaking of supernatural Effects in the same manner we have as little reason to infer that it means nothing by them but the Order of Nature His second Reason is because the Scripture relates several Circumstances in the production of Miracles which Circumstances he says do shew that these Miracles required Natural Causes So the Sprinkling of Ashes required to produce the Plague of Scabs an East Wind to bring the Locusts and a West Wind to drive them away an East Wind likewise to drive back the Red Sea Elijah's laying his Body upon the Body of the Shunamites Child in order to raise it to life again If he argue to the purpose he must grant that these Circumstances which he makes requisite in the Order of Nature to produce these Effects were also proper and suffiâ—ient in the Order of Nature to produce them either wholely or in part And indeed the Wind may seem a very proper Instrument to bring and carry away the Locusts and to drive back the Sea but the raising of the Wind and determination of it is ascribed to another Circumstance not very proper to be the efficient Cause of it viz. the stretching out of Moses's Hand and his Rod. And this commonly was the first Circumstance in every Miracle which Moses wrought and therefore though it were not sufficient to produce those Effects immediately and by it self yet it must be supposed proper to set all the other subordinate Causes on Motion For their requiring natural Causes because related with some Circumstances concurring to their production must imply that these Circumstances were the Natural Causes requisite And if so then Moses's Rod had many great many occult yet Natural Qualities very-hard indeed to explain or conceive and very admirable though not miraculous as of raising and laying Winds and Storms of Thunder and Hail turning the Water into Blood bringing Frogs out of the River producing Lace out of the Dust Water out of the Rock c. To be short the Circumstances commonly mentioned as concurrent to the production of Miracles are so far from proving that they had Natural Causes that they prove the contrary For if they had any Natural Causes these Circumstances must be all or part of them but they are such as are in no wise qualified to produce the Effects ascribed to them in the Order of Nature therefore must be qualified for it by a Supernatural Power which can produce quidlibet ex quolibet and make any thing instrumental to what Purposes and Effects it pleases For Instance the Clay and the Spittle were the immediate Instruments applied by our
any in the whole Bible And if he means thus I have already hinted the ill Consequences of his Doctrine and how disagreeable his Conclusion from Mr. Burnett's Principles is to that which Mr. Burnett himself draws from them and shall proceed now to shew how unnaturally it is drawn from such premises I shall not stand to make any tedious Reflection upon each particular in the summary Account which I have given above of what he has out of Mr. Burnett but I shall apply my self chiefly to the Consideration of that whereupon he seems wholly to build his Conclusion All that I shall say to the rest is this Touching the design of the Sacred Writers when they speak of natural things I grant it to be such as is there suggested And That in subordination to that Design they may be conceived to explain the visible Works of God in a manner suitable to the received Opinions of the Vulgar i. e. To speak their Sense and Dialect about Natural Things when they do occasionally speak of them and to comply therein with their common prejudices as Moses seem to do Gen. 1.16 where he ranks the Moon with the Sun as the other great light i. e. the next or only one besides of considerable magnitude speaking there agreeably to the appearance of sense and the apprehension of the vulgar grounded thereupon Yet not that they are obliged to comply with all their prejudices neither For this is one That every considerable Effect in Nature is miraculous and supernatural And the Design of the Sacred Writers does not oblige them to condescend so far to the apprehensions of the vulgar as to relate every effect for Miraculous which they conceive to be so Their Design is Not to instruct us in the knowledge of Nature but to excite Piety and Devotion in us The utmost therefore that Design will oblige them to in this regard is to make no mention of the Train of second Causes in the Productions of Nature which effectually answers the first part of their Design and to ascribe all Effects to God as their Author which as fully answers the second and nothing of all this amounts to a Relation of the Effects of Nature for Miracles as will appear immediately To the next thing That they wrest the general causes and ends of the whole Creation in favour of the peoples prejudices as if all things were ordained only for the good and benefit of Mankind I deny that the Scripture wrests the ends of the Creation for this were to make the parts of the World be Created by God for other ends and purposes than he created them for All the Scripture does is that it mentions only those ends of Nature out of many for which it is ordained in the Divine Wisdome that relate to the good and benefit of Mankind as for instance those ends only of the Heavenly Bodies That they are for lights in the Firmament of Heaven and for Signs and for Seasons and for Days and for Years yet it does not deny but that there may be many other which to consider is not pertinent to its purpose But the Principle from whence he draws his Conclusion is in the last words of what he has out of Mr. Burnett viz. That the Authors of the Holy Scriptures make no mention of the ordinary Train of second Causes in the productions of Nature but recur immediately to God himself the first Cause Author and President of it and compendiously refer all things to his immediate Power and to his irresistible Will and Command Their recurring immediately to God himself and referring all things to his immediate Power is to be understood in this sense Not that the Scripture declares these Effects to proceed from nothing but the immediate hand of God for this is to declare them to be spernatural and such then they are unquestionably But That it ascribes them only to God and makes no mention of any Train of second Causes subservient to him in their production For Instance the Scripture immediately refers the Effects of Nature to God himself in those places of the 147th Psalm where it says He giveth snow like wooll he scattereth the hoar-frost like ashes He casteth forth his ice like morsels He sendeth out his word and melteth them he bloweth with his wind and the waters flow So when God says to Noah I do set my bow in the cloud and to Samuel To morrow about this time I will send thee a man out of the land of Benjamin These Instances are his and Spinoza's as appears p. 17th and 18th below in his Treatise And the Scripture refers these Effects immediately to God as it mentions him only as the Author of them and no other mediate cause not that it says that he alone Acts in the production of them for this were to relate them for Miracles This therefore being stated his way of Arguing will appear to be this The Authors of the Holy Scriptures make no mention of the ordinary Train of second Causes in the Productions of Nature but recur immediately to God himself c. Ergo they relate many things as Miracles which yet notwithstanding are the Effects of Nature The Connexion of this antecedent and consequent is by Vertue of this Proposition That the Authors of the Holy Scripture must be conceived to relate those Effects as Miracles which they immediately ascribe to God without mention of any second Causes subservient to him in their production The falshood whereof I shall evidently discover 1. By Instance 2. From the natural import of the words 3. From the reason of the thing it self 4. By shewing in some Instances what it is for the Holy Scripture to relate any thing as a Miracle 1. By Instance Infinite would be the number of Miracles Recorded in Scripture if this were the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereby we are to know what Effects are related therein as such The Scripture teaches us from the mouth of our Blessed Saviour to pray to God immediately for our daily Bread for our Food and Raiment for the annual increase of our Corn Wine and Oyle for the former and latter Rain in their Season It takes no notice of the ordinary way whereby Nature it self supplies us with these Necessaries how our Corn grows in our Fields how the Vine sends forth her Grapes how the Clouds drop Fatness But in a word refers all to God without any more ado He it says Visiteth the Earth and blesseth it He maketh it very plenteous he crowneth the year with his goodness In a word He openeth his hand and filleth all things living with plenteousness Yet I suppose it were very hard to infer that the Scripture sets down all this as supernatural and miraculous That it obliges us to conceive not the Flood only but even the former and latter rain to come down by Miracle That it prompts us to expect as supernatural a
tacit Act of his Will c. 2. Where Mention is made of Means used but those such as cannot be conceived to be in their own Nature proper or sufficient to produce the Effect As the Clay wherewith our Saviour cured the Eyes of the Person born Blind the Spittle wherewith he loosed the tongue of the other that was Dumb c. These effects may be justly affirmed to be related in Scripture as Miracles not upon this account that the Scripture refers them immediately to God without mention of any train of Natural Causes subservient to him in their Production it appears we have some surer Grounds whereupon to proceed in examining what Effects in Scripture are related as Miracles though that which he would possess his Readers with the Opinion that it is the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we have be as has been shewed not only false but ridiculous and absurd From what has been said I may rationally draw these two consequences 1. That for the Scripture to refer any Effect immediately to God is not for it to relate the Effect as Miraculous and therefore from its referring the Effects of Nature immediately to God we cannot infer as he does that the Scripture relates many memorable things as Miracles which yet notwithstanding proceeded from the fixt and immutable Order of Nature 2. That there are yet many Effects plainly related in Scripture for Miracles by it 's express Declaration and it 's relating of them in such Terms from whence we may by undeniable Consequence gather as much And so supposing that the Scripture is a true History for which we have infinitely more evidence than for any other History in the World it follows evidently against his main Assertion from the relations of these miraculous Effects in Scripture that there really have been Miracles in the sense wherein he denies them i. e. Works beside above and contrary to Nature But this Corollary though very pertinent to our purpose is ex abundanti All that we were obliged to was to shew that the Conclusion which he draws from the Principles he takes out of Mr. Burnett is false and illogical Since therefore Mr. Burnett asserts positively that there are Miracles as is shewed above and nothing here produced out of him can infer or insinuate the contrary we may justly demand both in his Name and in behalf both of Religion Reason and good Logique that this part of the Premonition be returned into the Place from whence it came where it may stand with more Truth and Coherence and the Conclusion of the Translator left to stand apart by it self as a bold and I may say Impious Assertion without any Proof But not to wrong him he has some Succedaneous Arguments in the close of the Premonition but these ' as I before hinted are only some brief Touches of what we have after more at large out of Spinoza viz. That for God to work by a power immediate or supernatural is inconsistent with and Point-blank repugnant the Fundamental Laws and Constistutions of Nature It sounds somewhat like to the King's Prerogative being inconsistent with the Fundamental Laws of Property and Priviledge That these Laws are the Acts of the Divine Wisdom extend themselves to whatever events he hath Willed and Decreed that the power of Nature is infinite as being one and the same with the Power of God He has one thing which he asserts besides that among all the Miracles related to be done in favour of the Israelites there is not one that can be apodictically Demonstrated to be repugnant to the established Order of Nature Now here I am not bound to Demonstrate it for his sake for two Reasons 1. Because it were to prove a Negative 2. Because his main Ground or Spinoza's rather why he denies all supernatural Effects is not upon account of his own great reach in Natural Philosophy whereby he could undertake to solve Mechanically all the effects related in Scripture for Miraculous but from Arguments purely Metaphysical proving in his Opinion the impossibility of any such thing as a Work above Nature For to this he holds and not the other as appears from p. 21. of the Treatise where he concludes absolutely from his Arguments against the possibility of Miracles That all the Events that are truly related in Scripture to have come to pass proceeded necessarily according to the immutable Laws of Nature And that if any thing be found which can be apodictically Demonstrated to be repugnant to those Laws or not to have followed from them we may safely and piously believe the same not to have been dictated by Divine inspiration but impiously added to the Sacred Volumes by sacrilegious Men. So that unless the Scripture Miracles will submit to his Touch-stone unless they will come and lay open their Occult Qualities and the whole plot and confederacy of those natural Causes that combined to Effect them he has an Index Expurgatorius to blot their Names out of the holy Scripture and a Court of Inquisition for those that relate them to arraign them for Sacriledge and Impiety But I pass on to consider each part of the Treatise in order The Treatise is divided between Mr. Hobbs and Spinoza Mr. Hobbs speaks as far as to the middle of the third page out of the Chapter about Miracles in the third Part of his Leviathan He first explains the signification of the Word from its Etymology and other words in sacred and profane Writers of like import with it From its Etymology he deduces that it signifies A Work of God which men admire or wonder at Then proposes to enquire what works are such and reduces them to two kinds 1. Such as are rare and the like thereof seldom or never seen 2. Such as we cannot conceive to be produced by natural Causes but only by Gods immediate hand He gives some Instances of both An Oxe or an Horse speaking preter-natural Births the Conversion of a man into Stone and the first Rainbow that appeared That such Effects as these seem Miraculous because rare or no natural cause of them conceivable On the contrary the Works of Art however wonderful not reputed to be Miracles because their Causes known Upon the same ground he observes That the same thing may seem to be a Miracle to one Man and not to another in proportion to their different degrees of Knowledge and Experience So Eclipses Miracles to the vulgar not to Philosophers Simple Men made to believe that others can know their most secret Actions by Inspiration when the more wary and prudent perceive the juggle So far Mr. Hobbs here in his Leviathan he proceeds to assign another property of a Miracle viz. That it be wrought to confirm the Divine Mission of some Prophet or other and then to give a definition of it but there his Translator leaves him and passes on to Spinoza Before we follow him thither we may reflect a little 1. Upon
Saviour to the Eyes of the Blind and Tongue of the Dumb-man The mention whereof in the account of these Miracles if it prove that they required Natural Causes then these were the Causes requisite these they had and these immediately produced the Effects This they could not by the force of Nature therefore by Miracle and so his Argument destroys it self But farther what if many are produced without any Circumstances at all but purely at the Word and Will of the person that works them This he says we cannot be assured of from the Scripture because there may have been some though not mentioned there he refers to Exod. 14.27 compared with Ex. 15.10 But what if the Scripture does not only not make mention of any but in a manner declares there were none So in our Saviours stilling the Storm the very Reflection that his Disciples make upon that Miracle proves that it was wrought by his bare Word and not by the Application of any Means much less Natural Before he draws his Conclusion from these Arguments he answers an Objection from Scripture viz. That Famins are said to be caused by the sins of Men and the like and Rain and Plenty restored by their Prayers c. His Answer is that the Scripture does here speak ad hominem and with the same Propriety as when it says that God is angry sorrowful repents or the like and that it is not true that any of these are the Causes of the Effects ascribed to them Here 1. Methinks he is wary in his Answer He might have granted that Famine is sent for the sins of Men and Rain and fruitful Seasons for a return to their Prayers and Repentance and yet have denied that either of these is wrought by Miracle For Nature is ordered and directed by the Wisdom and Providence of Almighty God as well as preserved and upheld by his Power and therefore his Wisdom may so direct it as often even by the Course of Nature to execute his divine purposes whether of Judgment or Mercy He sees our Actions and hears our Prayers from all eternity and therefore may as he has the whole Order of Nature before his eyes direct and determine the certain and necessary Events of it to their proper Seasons and make them Instrumental to the accomplishing of his purposes whether of shewing favour or executing wrath upon the Sons of Men. Thus therefore he need not be so strict as to deny any possibility of God's punishing us for our sins in the Order of Nature for fear lest it should betray him unawares to the concession of a Miracle Natural Causes indeed our Sins or Pâ—ayers are not of these Effects nor yet Supernatural neither but moral only and meritorious as God upon view of either determines to punish or reward us But suppose it were not so 2. He gives but a very mean Solution of the difficulty that the Scripture speaks improperly here and in condescension to the Capacities and Opinions of the Vulgar as it does when it says that God is angry sorrowful or repents We grant the Scripture may be conceived to be obliged to speak in this manner concerning the incomprehensible Nature of God and such of his Perfections the modes whereof it is not necessary we should have explained to us how they are and act in him but yet it is not necessary that it should speak of every thing in the same manner or that every thing that it says should be shuffled off by this or the like suggestion Nothing is more natural and easie to be conceived than that God does punish or reward our good or bad Actions and that in this life and that his Justice and Wisdom will oblige him to do it as he takes upon him the Government of the World though it be very hard for the Vulgar to conceive how he does it without anger or displeasure and the contrary affections Therefore the Scripture may be conceived to speak of the one in condescention to our Capacities though yet no reason why it should be presumed to speak of the other in like manner I proceed to his fourth and last undertaking viz. To treat of the manner of interpreting the Scripture Miracles and what things are chiefly to be observed in the Relations about them Or as the Translator to shew that most Men have erred in their way of interpreting the Miracles recorded in the Holy Scripture To set us right he directs us in the reading of the Scripture-narrations about Miracles to enquire into two things 1. The particular Opinions and Prejudices of the Relator 2. The Idioms Phrases and Tropes of the Hebrew Tongue The first because generally all Historians relate the events they speak of suitable to their own Conjectures Opinions and Prejudices The other because otherwise we may from the Scripture-Style conceive some things to be related for Miracles which really are not For the first he instances in Joshua 10. v. 12 13. where the Account of the extraordinary length of that Day is given according to the common opinion of the Sun 's and not the Earth's motion For the Second in some allegorical places out of the Prophets Zachariah 14. v. 7. Isa 13. v. 10.48 v. ult By these two insinuations he would elude the force of all the clear and plain narrations about miracles in Scripture To the first and the instance he brings for it I answer the truth of the Miracle which Joshua relates is not at all prejudiced though it were true that the Earth moves and not the Sun for the course of Nature was stopped whether in the motion of the Sun or the Earth and therein consists the truth of the Miracle As to the relation of it it was not necessary either that Joshua should himself be so great a Philosopher or so far instructed by an extraordinary Revelation as to put up his request to God that the Earth should stand still and not the Sun or that the Account of it which he gives should be otherwise than according to the appearance of sense and the apprehensions of the Vulgar grounded thereupon To the second the truth of the Scripture-Miracles depends not upon any allegorical expressions in the Prophets but upon the naked Relations of matters of Fact in the Historical Writers so that though in the former we are to proceed with some Caution and not to take every thing for Miraculous which is spoken of in an high strain of expression yet in the latter we find no such danger of being imposed upon by the Tropes and Figures of the Hebrew Tongue all things being delivered in the Historical part of Scripture with the greatest plainness and simplicity I have run through the main of Spinoza's Chapter which consists in the proof of his four Propositions at first laid down What is behind is 1. An account of his different Method in this Chapter from that which he takes in his first and second Chapters about Prophecy and
formed in his Brain of the Divine Will and Understanding This conceit he does not farther explain or make out in his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus and therefore to run up his Argument to the head I shall consult his Opera Posthuma for a Scheme of his Principles from whence to deduce it There in the First Part of his Ethicks which treats de Deo he has this Doctrine That there is but one Substance in the World and that is God That God is a Substance absolutely infinite i. e. a Substance endued with an infinite number of Attributes each infinite each displaying his infinite Essence two whereof are known to us Cogitation and Extension That from the necessity of the infinite Essence and Attributes of God do proceed as properties from an emanative cause infinite Modes wherein the Divine Nature and Attributes do subsist and act That Nature and all created Beings are only these various Modes wherein the Divine Essence and Attributes do necessarily display themselves In particular that all Bodies and finite Spirits are only various Modes of those two infinite Attributes in God Extension and Cogitation And from these Principles we may indeed deduce not only his conception of what it is in God to understand and to will but many other Consequences admirably agreeable to Religion and Right Reason As 1. That God is an extended Substance and extension infinite 2. That God is the emanative cause of all finite Beings and they therefore really and identically contained in the Divine Nature and the same with him 3. That God subsists in all Bodies and finite Spirits as a Substance under its necessary Modes flowing from its Essence and therefore both he himself material and bodily as being extended and every body in Nature a part of him So that now we clearly see the ground whereupon Spinoza asserts That nothing can happen contrary to Nature viz. because God and Nature are one and the same God Nature subsistent and Nature God modified And why he says That for God to will or decree any thing is for the thing to be contained in his Nature as an eternal truth flowing from the necessity of it viz. because his Will is only that of an emanative cause and every thing which we conceive produced by the Divine Will is so only in regard that it flows necessarily from his Essence as light in the Sun and heat in the Fire from their very nature And so likewise his understanding of the same thing is only that he sees its necessary Existence proceeding from the necessity of his own Nature Here we have a full discovery of his Sense and Scope in this Argument and it plainly terminates in one of these two Atheism or Idolatry For to make God and Nature the same thing is either to advance a Creature into the place of God or what Tully says of Epicurus Oratione relinquere Deum re tollere I shall not therefore prosecute his Argument so far as to confute him through the whole Set of his Principles nor take my self to be obliged in order to prove the possibility of a Work above Nature to go so far about as to prove first the Being of a God above it But his Argument may deserve a little Consideration setting aside his Principles and that only in order to state how far the Laws of Nature may be granted to be the Decrees and Volitions of God and whether and how far thereupon they involve eternal necessity and truth His Argument therefore is in form this Whatever God Wills or Decrees involves eternal necessity and truth The Laws of Nature are the Decrees and Volitions of God E. They involve eternal necessity and truth E. Nothing can fall out contrary to them The Laws of Nature may be considered as in Nature it self or as in the Author of it In Nature it self they signifie the determinations of Bodies to act in such or such a manner In the Author of it they signifie those Decrees whereby the Order of Nature is established and particular Bodies determined to act in such a particular manner In this Sense I grant that the Laws of Nature are the Decrees and Volitions of God And how they are so and how far thereupon they may be conceived to involve eternal necessity and truth may appear from these Considerations 1. That there is one grand Universal Law Decree and Purpose of the Divine Will whereby he eternally set down with himself the Order wherein to work all things This Conception is most agreeable to the simplicity and immutability of the Divine Nature To his simplicity that as his Nature so the Act of his Will should be perfectly one and not multiplied in infinitum in proportion to the variety of Effects ordained and regulated by it To his immutability that we should not suppose him to be daily enacting new Laws and Decrees but that he works all things by a Decree co-eternal to himself And this Conception is cleared by our parallel apprehensions about the Divine Understanding The Objects thereof are temporary yet the Act of his Knowledg whereby he sees them eternal they are manifold and various yet that simple and uniform Therefore as by one Act of his Understanding he sees ab aeterno all things future in their several times so by one Act of his Will he ordains them all 2. That in this universal Law are included Secundum nostrum concipiendi modum many particular Laws and Decrees establishing the Order of particular Events necessary and contingent natural and above Nature in their particular times and places 3. That these particular Laws and Decrees have each in subordination to the universal a limited and determinate compass of times places and events wherein they take effect 4. That yet each of them does certainly take effect within that determinate compass to which it is limited And therefore 5. That a Proposition declaring that such a Law and Decree will certainly take effect is true and the truth of it necessary and ab aeterno by vertue of that Law and Decree 6. That yet as the Law it self and the Decree is so is the necessary and eternal Truth of that Proposition viz. It is necessary and true ab aeterno that this Law and Decree shall take effect within that determinate compass of times places and events whereto it is limited and no further Now the Laws and Decrees by which the Order of Nature is established are such particular Laws and Decrees and such is their eternal Truth and Necessity For Instance The motion of the Sun is an Ordinance in Nature proceeding from Gods Will and Decree Yet so limited in subordination to his universal Law and Purpose to a determinate compass as not to take effect at some points of time within that period for which Nature is established I mean at that time when the Sun stood still at Joshua's word and when it went back so many degrees for a sign to King Hezekiah So that the
rewards or punishes them here in this life Yet the demonstration of Gods Providence is not the proper and primary end of supernatural Effects but 4. A Miracle is properly intended to prove 1. Immediately the immediate power and presence of God Acting himself in an extraordinary manner in the working of it 2. By Vertue of this evident Demonstration of Gods immediate extraordinary presence the Divine Authority and Mission of that person whom God has been pleased to make his Instrument in the effecting of it at whose word or request the Order of Nature is suspended which we cannot suppose God would permit either for no end at all or for one so repugnant to his Sanctity and Goodness as to assist an Imposture Thus much therefore we may know by miracles not what God is in his Nature nor his Existence any better than we may know it by any Effect of Nature but his Providence his extraordinary presence and power and the Authority of that person whose Divine Mission it attests We are next to enquire whether his Arguments are more sufficient to disprove the authority of Miracles in this regard His arguments for the Truth of his second Proposition are from Reason and Scripture From Reason he attempts to prove it three wayes 1. Because the belief of the possibility of a Miracle does vertually introduce meer Scepticisme and consequently is so far from proving the Essence Existence or Providence of God that it takes away the certainty both of the existence of a Deity and every thing else 2. Because a Miracle is a work that transcends our Capacity to understand it and therefore what we understand not it self cannot lead us to the understanding of any thing else 3. Because a Miracle is a thing finite and therefore cannot be a fit Medium to prove the being of an Agent of infinite Power 1. The belief of the possibility of a Miracle virtually introduces meer Scepticisme and so takes away the certainty both of the being of God and every thing else This Argument strikes as much at the belief of Miracles themselves as of any thing else upon their Credit and Authority for there can be no Reason to believe any thing which to believe obliges me to doubt of every thing else as impossible to be certainly known The ground whereupon he asserts that the belief of Miracles leads us to Scepticisme is because it takes away the certain Truth of those Notions from whence we conclude the being of a God or any thing else that we know and that this it does in as much as it supposes a Power in God able to alter the Truth of these Notions for this too he must be able to do if able to change the course of Nature By these Notions may be understood two things 1. The Principles of Truth where upon we build all our knowledge 2. Our own Idea's and apprehensions of things The former are either the common Principles of Natural Light viz. Axioms evident upon the first apprehension of the Terms as That a thing cannot be and not be at the same time the whole is greater than any part c. Or 2. the definitions of things and propositions ascribing to them their Nature and Properties as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rationale Triangulum habet tres angulos aequales duobus rectis c. Or 3. Propositions containing the mutual respects of things as that Cruelty and Injustice are repugnant to the Nature of God Theft and Murder to the Nature of a sociable Creature c. Now these principles of Truth are all necessary and immutable and the Truth of them does not depend upon the being or order of Nature a possibility therefore of change in the order of Nature does not imply that by the same Power the truth of these Notions may be altered They are first necessary and immutable because it implies a contradiction for them to be false v. c. for the whole to be no greater than any part Man not to be a rational creature God to be cruel or unjust c. 2. They are true independently upon the being or order of Nature If God should destroy the whole frame of Nature yet it were true notwithstanding that the whole Body were bigger than any part If he should reduce Mankind into nothing it were still true notwithstanding That the nature of Man consists in the Vnion of a rational Soul and a Body endued with life and sense God may turn one thing into another and make the same Matter appear under a Form above or contrary to what it should have by the course of Nature but he cannot make it be and not be be of this Nature and of another at the same time He can suspend the Actions of his Creatures but yet cannot make them Act and not Act both together In short however God by his Power may alter or suspend the Order of Generations in Nature yet this Principle will hold true that in an order of successive generations of Men there must be some first Man and this first Man must have a Cause that is not Man and this Cause must either be it self or lead us at last to an infinite Supream Being So that the existence of a God may be deduced from certain and necessary Principles though the Order of Nature be capable of being changed by his Almighty Power The altering therefore of the course of Nature makes no alteration in the principles of Knowledg But does it not infer a Power in God to change our Notions and Apprehensions of them and of every thing else A Physical Power indeed it does as it proves him Omnipotent but this will not drive us to Scepticisme while we are certain that it is as much repugnant to his Veracity and Goodness as compatible to his Power barely considered For it is impossible that a Being infinitely Good and Holy should impose upon his Creatures and implant such Notions in their Minds as would necessarily induce them to believe a Lye or so alter their apprehensions of things as to make it impossible for them to make a true Judgment by the use of their own reason The belief of Miracles therefore does not lead us unto Scepticisme and so does not take away the certainty of the Being of a God but yet perhaps it may not be a fit Medium to prove either his Existence or his Proovidence or to declare bis Nature to us And this upon two Accounts 1. Because a Miracle is a Work that transcends our capacity to understand it and therefore what we understand not it self cannot lead us to the understanding of any thing else 2. Because a Miracle is a thing finite and therefore cannot be a fit Medium to prove the being of an Agent of infinite Power To the First a Miracle is a Work that transcends our capacity to understand it i. e. it is beyond the compass of our Knowledge to deduce it from natural Causes and good reason because
it is beyond their power and efficacy to Effect it But yet so far it is within our Capacity that it is possible for us to know whether it be an effect supernatural or not and when it is known to be such it is sufficient to demonstrate the immediate operation of God's Power and Providence To the Second nothing is more false or groundless than that Assertion It is so far from being true that a finite Effect cannot be a Proof of an infinite Cause that every finite Effect is so either immediately as when the Effect though finite exceeds the force and efficacy of any finite being in the Order and Sphere wherein it acts or mediately when the Effect is produced by a train of finite Causes which yet must have had their own being and their first motion or power to act from an infinite Agent The argument for an Infinite from the existence of finite beings proceeds thus every finite being is contingent and so might not have been therefore the reason of its being must not be in it self but in something else viz. the Cause that produced it Again every finite being has limits of Perfection these cannot be set by it self but by something else which gave it such a degree of Perfection and no greater and this must be the cause that produced it If this Cause be finite too it must proceed from another and the Question will recur till we stop at last in a Cause self-existent and infinite So much therefore may be said in answer to his Arguments from reason for the former part of his second Proposition viz. That by Miracles we cannot know the Essence Existence or Providence of God To what he says for the other part viz. That all these may be better known by the fixt and immutable Order of Nature the Answer may be shorter His reason is because the Laws of Nature are infinite eternal and immutable and therefore in some measure indicate to us the infinity eternity and immutability of God or rather to make him speak more plainly out of his Opera Posthuma because God and Nature are all one and the more I know of Nature the more I understand of the modifications of the Divine Essence But if he tells us that the belief of Miracles leads us to Scepticisme we may reply that this Discovery of the Divine Essence which he pretends to make from Nature will rather carry us either to Atheisme or Idolatry I proceed to his Arguments from Scripture which are two 1. He argues from Deut 13. v. 1 2 3. Because a Miracle as is plain from that place may be wrought by a Person that designs to introduce the worship of a false God 2. He argues from the corrupt notions the Israelites had of God and his Providence notwithstanding so many Miracles wrought among them The words in Deut. 13. v. 1 2 3. are these If there arise among you a Prophet or a Dreamer of Dreams and giveth thee a Sign or a Wonder and the Sign or Wonder come to pass whereof he spake unto thee saying let us go after other Gods which thou hast not known and let us serve them thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that Prophet or Dreamer of Dreams for the Lord your God proveth you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your Heart and with all your Soul And that Prophet or that Dreamer of Dreams shall be put to death c. From hence he argues a Miracle may be wrought by one that designs to introduce the Worship of a false God Ergo by Miracles we may be as easily induced to embrace the Worship of a false God as of the true E. God cannot be made known to us by Miracles This is a difficulty commonly propounded for these Words in Deut. viz. How Miracles can be an undoubted evidence of the authority of a Prophet and the truth of his Doctrine yet it be possible for a Miracle to be wrought by a false Prophet in the highest degree viz. a Preacher of Idolatry And the best way to give a clear and satisfactory Answer to it will be to consider the utmost force of it as it is urged from this place The Israelites to whom these Words were spoken had already a Law given them and the Authority of it attested by unquestionable Miracles the same Law repeated again in this book of Deut. with a repetition likewise of the History of those mighty Works which had been wrought for it's confirmation Their Religion therefore being thus settled to fortifie them against all Temptations that might draw them to the Worship of the Gods of the Nations round about them they are fore-warned in this place not to give ear to any Person that should entice them to Idolatry though he should work a Miracle to confirm the Authority of his false Doctrine for that God might possibly permit such a Person to work a Miracle meerly to try the stedfastness of their Faith and Adherence to his Worship This is the Case wherein those Words Deut. 13. must be understood to be spoken and this is all that can be rationally drawn from them that God may permit a Miracle to be wrought by a false Prophet after he has established the true Religion and fore-warned his people not to believe a Miracle against it We are to enquire therefore whether if this be possible Miracles can be sufficient evidences of a true Prophet The Argument is in form this If God after he has established the true Religion and fore-warned his people not to believe a Miracle against it may permit a false Prophet to work a Miracle to try the stedfastness of their faith then Miracles are not sufficient Evidences of a true Prophet But God may in this case permit a Miracle to be wrought by a false Prophet Ergo. If the consequence is That Miracles are not always sufficient Evidences or not in this particular Case I readily grant it If That they never are in any case which must be the Conclusion if to the purpose I deny it and the reason of my denial of it is this because notwithstanding an Impostor may work a Miracle in this case and so the Miracle he works be no evidence of a true Prophet yet in any other case notwithstanding the force of these words it may be and I may positively say is impossible for a true Miracle to be wrought by an Impostor and therefore all other Miracles which are not reducible to this Case may be certain and infallible Evidences of a true Prophet For Instance two sorts of Miracles are excepted from this Case 1. Those Miracles suppose that were wrought among the Israelites after this warning given them not to believe any person that would seduce them to Idolatry though he should work a Miracle by persons that did not attempt to seduce them from the Worship of the true God 2. Those Miracles which were wrought at any time by any