I f
'v
April 1926
T H E K I N G ’ S B U S I N E S S
204
It must be confessed that Hume’s argument is very plaus ible and subtle. "Nature’s iaws are uniform; miracles imply a violation of that uniformity— it is easier to believe a hundred men honest but mistaken than to believe one such absurdity to be possible!” No room remains for the expo sure of the sophistry of Hume’s argument. Already it has been partly answered by showing that a miracle is not a violation of natural laws. But a few suggestions may be added. One of the hinges of Hume’s argument is this, that a mir acle is contrary to experience. Of course if miracles were not contrary to our common experience they could have no power as a sign of divine interposition. But were they contrary to the experience of those who witnessed them? If I am to believe nothing that is contrary to my experience, the door is shut to all grand discoveries, and corrections of erroneous opinion. The savage in equatorial Africa is justified in denying that water is ever solid so that its surface will sustain many tons, for it is contrary to his experience: and if he sees the magnet lift and hold a heavy weight without hands or visible means, or a balloon Inflated with hydrogen gas dart upward with heavy ballast in the basket, he is justified in disbelieving his own senses, for his experience of the uniformity of nature’s laws is, that what is heavy falls to the earth. And here is a suspension of the laws of gravity. This objection argues absurdity: for it renders incredible all exceptions to the otherwise uniform experience of men. This is unfair. On a basis o f simple science, when any new fact contradicts our hitherto uniform experience, instead of denying the fact, we make our science broader, and look for some new law or force, unknown or not understood before. Just this, God means we shall do when we behold a miracle: stop and ask what new force is at work, which is not found in the ordinary uniform operation of mechanical laws: and what means this intervention of a superior hand to control and reverse nature's ordinary movement. Hume’s argument will have little weight with those who understand Mr. Hume, and see how he was forced by his own philosophy to this position. One of his unfortunate admirers asknowledged that the disposition to doubt every thing was so interwoven with his whole character, that he seemed to be uncertain even of his own existence. He was the modern Pyrrho, and not an unworthy successor of that ancient doubter who was not sure of anything— who did not know anything, and was not sure he did not know— who doubted whether even the world Itself were not an illusion, and whose friends accompanied him in his walks lest he should doubt the reality of a precipice and so walk off its edge to his own ruin. Hume’s arguments failed to satisfy his own mind. Hear his own words speaking of his speculations: “ They have so wrought upon me and heated my brain that I am ready to reject all belief and reasoning, and can look upon no opin ion even as more probable or likely than another1. Where am I or what? From what causes do I derive my existence, and to what condition shall I return? Whose favor shall I court, and whose anger must I dread? What beings sur round me, and on whom have I any influence, and who have any influence on me? I am confounded with all these questions, and begin to fancy myself in the most deplorable condition imaginable, environed with the deepest darkness and utterly deprived of the use of every member and faculty.” It partly refutes Hume’s view of miracles to show how he came to hold it. His theology compelled his scepticism; (Continued on page 243)
r IV Ü
K I*
m
The Gilliams Service, New York The Bathing Ghats o f the Ganges are unique In their architectural design, and serve as a place o f concourse for the throngs who frequent the water fron ts of these river cities o f India.
sands suffered torture and death, when, to have confessed the miracles of our Lord to have been impostures would have been deliverance,— and yet no disciple ever made a confession such as this! Most remarkable of all, even the Jewish Rabbis, in the Talmud, acknowledge these miracles, but pretend they were wrought by magic or by the use of a secret charm which Jesus stole out of the temple. Celsus, learned and able as he was among the assailants of Christianity, both allows the facts of the Gospel history and concedes that Christ wrought miracles, but ascribes them to magical arts learned in Egypt. Hierocles, the persecutor, does not deny these miracles, though he ridicules the idea of worshipping Christ. Julian, the apostate, confesses that Christ cured the lame and blind, and cast out demons, but thinks these works did not make Him worthy of such fame. "• Modern foes of Christianity do not venture often to attack our faith from this quarter; it is too well defended. No, they put on the air of gracious, condescending con cession: they allow the testimony to be honest and ample, but mistaken. Mr. Hume’s fertile and ingenious mind sug gests a short path by which to escape the necessity of faith: “ deny that any testimony can prove a miracle,’ ’ and it is done! And the modern sceptic is tempted to ask with Isaac, when Jacob ■got ready his venison so soon by making a tame lamb from the fold answer for a wild deer from the fields, “ how hast thou found it so quickly, my son!"
r
î
mi 'l*\. Mm i
'.<1
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker