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
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
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
persons whose Doctrine the people before whom they were wrought had not been fore-warned by God not to believe And that neither of these could be wrought by an Impostor but both were sufficient Evidences of a true Prophet I shall demonstrate evidently from these Principles 1. In every Miracle or supernatural Effect God must be present not consenting and assisting only but working it himself by his extraordinary Power 2. This God cannot do viz. alter the course of Nature for no end or for any that is mean and trivial 3. Nor can his end be to deceive or impose upon those persons before whom it is wrought 4. If his end cannot be to deceive us and yet he cannot Work a Miracle but for some great end it follows That every Miracle wrought by any person pretending thereupon a Commission to reveal any Doctrine must either be ordained by God to ratifie and confirm his Commission and this Miracle cannot be wrought by a false Prophet or if it be not ordained by God to confirm his Commission but may be done by him though he be a false Prophet it must be onely in such a case where sufficient warning has been given to those before whom the Miracle is wrought that they are not to believe the Authority or Doctrine of that Prophet though he work a Miracle 5. Therefore in this one Case where sufficient warning is given us not to believe such a person though he work a Miracle God may work a Miracle by a false Prophet and therefore it is no sufficient Evidence of a true In any other case it is impossible he should work it by a false Prophet and therefore it is not sufficient Evidence of a true All this necessarily follows from the Wisdome Veracity and Holiness of God His Wisdome cannot permit him to work a Miracle by any man for nothing or upon any trivial account and his Veraciy and Holiness cannot permit him to bear witness to a Liar and Seducer working a Miracle and pretending thereupon to a Commission from Heaven to Preach his Doctrine which he does in working a Miracle by him unless in such a Case where he gives us warning not to believe him upon the Authority of his Miracle And in that Case he does not bear Witness to a Liar because he fore-warns us that his Miracle is not done to attest the Authority of that Person by whom he does it And so though it were the setting of his Seal to his Commission to use that expression yet we are sufficiently secured from being imposed upon thereby because fore-warned that in this case his Seal is to be no Evidence to us though otherwise it be the cleerest and most convincing Evidence imaginable A Miracle therefore where warning before-hand is given against it may be wrought by a Seducer and Impostor but where we are not fore-warned against it it must be wrought by a true Ergo Though in that Case a Miracle is no Evidence of a true Prophet yet in every other Case it certainly is and consequently Though an Impostor may work a Miracle yet a Miracle is in most cases an undoubted Evidence of a true Prophet Now the warning or notice given us in this case may be either expressed or implied Expressed as in the place fore-mentioned under the Law or where we are forbidden to hearken to false Prophets and false Christs which shall do great Signs and Wonders or to an Angel from Heaven that should Preach another Doctrine then that we have received under the Gospel Implied as where the Doctrine and Institution of the Gospel is declared to be the last Will of Almighty God and a Law to endure without alteration or repeal to the end of the World for if God declare it to be such this implies that no Doctrine contrary to it no other Doctrine is to be embraced though the person preaching it should work a Miracle to confirm his Authority All other Miracles therefore are Evidences of a true Prophet except where such warning is given And those I reduced to two sorts 1. Those that were wrought among the Israelites after the warning given them Deut. 13. by any person that did not attempt to seduce them from the Worship of the true God for against such a person working a Miracle they had no warning and therefore his Miracle was enough to command their belief 2. Those wrought at any time by any persons against whose Doctrine there had been no warning eign to the persons before whom the Miracles were wrought And under these two kinds are placed all the Miracles whose Authority Spinoza would destroy by this Argument To begin with Moses's they were wrought before the Isralites had any warning to reject the Authority of any Miracles whatsoever and if after they were wrought not to sedvce them to Idolatry but with the contrary design viz. to settle the Worship of the true God among them So also Elijah's to reclaim that people from Idolatry And the Miracles of our blessed Saviour and his Apostles will not I suppose be said by any one to be wrought to seduce the Jews from the Worship of the true God So that if all these Miracles must be excepted from the Case wherein a Miracle may be wrought by a false Prophet his Argument from the possibility of it out of Deut. 13. against the authority of all Miracles falls to the ground His other Argument from Scripture is from the corrupt Notions the Israelites had of God and Providence notwithstanding all the Miracles wrought among them He instances in their Worshipping the Calf in Moses's absence In the doubts the Author of the 73 Psalm says he had about a Providence and Solomon's Opinion that all things were governed by chance which he confesses he once held To this I answer 1. I have already intimated that Miracles in themselves do not discover to us what God is in his Nature any farther than as it is done in the Revelaion which they confirm 2. Therefore I hope he will not say that the Revelation which the Israelites had concerning God was such as was not sufficient if they would have attended to it to have taught them that God was not to be Worshipped under the resemblance of a Creature much less his glory to be turned into the similitude of a Calf 3. The mighty Works that God did for the Children of Israel were such as might easily have convinced them that such a base Creature was not the God that brought them forth out of the land of Egypt 4. Therefore he ought rather to impute it to the great stupidity and blindness of that People there being newly converted from the worship of the Egyptian Apis and their forgeting of God their Saviour who had done so great things for them than to any insufficiency either in the Miracles to demonstrate God's Power and Providence to them or in the Law he had newly given them to instruct them how he
Prophets but this is proper to his Tractatus Theologico Polit. 2. He attempts to prove from Scripture the Immutability of the Order of Nature repeating also some of his former Arguments for it 3. He closes all with a passage out of Josephus agreeable to his Opinion His places of Scripture which he alledges are Psal 148. v. 6. He hath established them for ever he hath made a decree which shall not pass Eccl. 1. v. 9. That there is no new thing under the Sun and other places parallel to them To the first the Order of Nature may be said to be established for ever and yet that Term imply no uninterrupted or eternal duration of it see Exod. 21.6 1 Sam. 1.22 Deut. 29.29 Levit. 23.14 c. To the second it is possible notwithstanding that place that there may something new happen even according to the Order of Nature for Solomon observes there no more than this that ordinarily in Nature there is a constant vicissitude a coming and returning of the several Species of Things for all which it is possible within the Period of Six thousand years that Nature may produce something new and not seen or heard of before and if by Nature something thus new may be produced there is no Reason from this place but the like may be done by Miracle too To Josephus's Authority it is enough to oppose the learned Mr. Gregory's remark of him in his Opera Posthuma p. 33. That he makes it his business to lessen and detract from the greatness of the Miracle which he relates out of the Scripture only to gain a more easie approbation of his History among the Heathen and this Mr. Gregory makes out by several instances one whereof is the passage here quoted by Spinoza To Spinoza's Quotation out of Josephus the Translator adds one or two more out of Valesius St. Austin Mr. Burnett and Dr. Sprat Mr. Burnett I have shewed above in the very next Words almost to those which here he quotes out of him asserts possitively that there are Miracles I need not tire my self to examine whether the rest are as directly against him as I make no question they are Upon the whole then I have made it appear that the whole Treatise is only a Collection out of other Authors That all of them except Spinoza are against the opinion for which they are produced And whether I have given a full Answer to his Arguments I leave to the candid and impartial Reader to determine FINIS The Treatise about Miracles a Translation out of several Authors The Authors Spinoza Mr. Hobbs and Mr. Burnett Part 3. cap. 37. Lib. 1. c. 11. p. 114. Mr. Hobbs and Mr. Burnett against the opinion for which they are produced How Mr. Hobbs's Doctrine destroys the Authority of Miracles Lib. 1. c. 11. p. 138. The first part of the Premonition taken out of Mr. Burnett The Summ of it The design of Mr. Burnett in what he speaks there Gen. 1. v. 9. Gen 6. v. â— 1â— Gen. 7. v. 11. The conclusion which the Translator draws from Mr. Burnett's principles This conclusion quite contrary to Mr. Burnett's It destroys the authority of the Scripture and the belief of Miracles It does not follow from Mr. Burnett's Principles How far each Particular in what he has from Mr. Burnett is true Gen. 1.14 15. The Principle from whence he draws his Conclusion Psalme 47. v. 16 17 18. Gen. 9.13 1 Sam. 9.16 The ground of the Connexion of his Conclusion with the Principle from whence he draws it This ground proved to be false 1. By Instance Psal 65. 9 11. Psal 145.16 2. From the Natural import of the words Psal 104. v. 20 105. v. 28. â— From the reason of the thing What it is for the Scripture to relate any thing as a Miracle Corollary 1. â—â—â—â—llary â— The rest of the Premonition considered The Sum of what he has from Mr. Hobb's in the beginning of the Treatise Treat p. 2. Reflection upon what Mr Hobb's says The use whereto the Traslator applies what he takes from Mr. Hobb's Tr. p. 3. Where he takes Spinoza in hand Tr. p. 3.4 5. Tr. p. 6. Four Propositons laid down by Spinoza 1. Proposition What is here meant by Nature and the Laws of it The Ground of the Possibility of Miracles A Miracles implyes no Contradiction in the Nature of the thing It implies no Contradiction for Matter to be 〈…〉 Nor for the Form Sec. of Natural Bodies to be Supernaturally produced or destroyed Exâ—d 〈…〉 John 2. 2 Kings 20. â— 11 Josh 10. v. 13. 1 Kings 18.38 2 Kings 1.9 12. Dan. 3.27 Exod. 10.12 14.21 All Motion in Matter capable of being suspended or destroyed The production of a Miracle not repugnant to the Nature of God P. 7 Tr. p. 6. Spinoza's Arguments for the Truth of his first Proposition Arg. 1. In this Argument he takes the Word Nature in another sense than the Question admits Tractat. Theolog. Polit. c. â— p. 100. His Proposition true if he take the Word in this sense but not to the Question Eph. 1. v. 11. His Argument 〈…〉 proceeds upon his own Principles terminates in flat Atheisme or Idolatry Tractat Theologico Polit. c. 4. p. 70. Ethic. p. 1. Pâ—op 1â— 1â— 16. De Naturâ Deorum l. 1. His Argument setting aside his Principles may be true and yet not infer the truth of his Conclusion How the Laws of Nature are the Decrees of God and eternal Truth Spinoza's second Argument for his first Proposition Tr. p. 7. Tr p. 8 Proposition 2. Tr. P. 2. In the framing of this Proposition he mistakes the end for which Miracles are designed His Arguments for his 2. Propos from Reason and Scripture His first Argument for his 2 Propos from Reason The belief of Miracles does not introduce Scepticisme Arg 2. Tr. p. 10. Arg. 2. Tr. p. 11. Arg. 1. from Scripture Tr. p. 13. Though a false Prophet may work a Miracle yet Miracles sufficient evidences of a true Prophet Deut. 13. Matt 24.24 Gal. 1.8 Heb. 1 2.7.16 17. Argument 2. from Scripture Tr. p. 14. Psal 106.20 Exod. 22.4 Psal 106.21 Tr. p. 15. Psal 106.8 Ex. 10.2 Tr. p. 16. Proposition 3. Tr. p. 16. Arg. 1. Tr. p. 17. 1 Sam. 9.15 16. Psal 105.24 Ex. 1. Gen. 9.13 Tr. p. 18. Psal 108.18 and 104.4 Is 7.14 Dan. 3. Josh 10. Arg. 2. Tr. p. 19. Ex. 9 8.10.14.14.21 2 Kings 4.34 Luk 8. v. 25. Tr. po 2 Proposition 4. Tr. p. 21. Tr. p. 26. Tr. p. 27.