magic, that in perfect conformity with what they hold on this subject, they might attribute to magic all the Scripture miracles. These tracts are written also with very great subtilty, and might serve to remind us that the scholastic philosophy, one of the greatest triumphs of intellectual ingenuity which the human mind has ever been known to accomplish, was in great measure transmitted through the hands of the Saracens.

The object of Dr. Lee in translating these tracts from the Persian, is to instruct Christian missionaries in the nature of those opinions which they may expect to meet with among Mahometan nations: that they may so learn to make for themselves some special preparation for those particular objections to the Christian doctrines and evidences, and those particular arguments for the truth of Mahomet's mission, which on their arrival in the East they will actually have to encounter. But a correct solution of those particular objections which thus

a Controversial Tracts, pp. 211-213.

appear to be now actually raised by Mahometans against the conclusive nature of miracles, is beyond all question one of the most important points on which they can be called on to make such preparation. These particular parts, therefore of the present volume may not be without their own particular application to repress actually prevalent errors.

Still to me, however, the mere proof of the fact, that any subtile errors as to the nature of miracles are current in so large a portion of the world as is now devoted to the creed of Mahomet, would appear to demand of every reflecting mind an inquiry into the principles which we must take up for refuting them, even though we were unable to discern the actual means of turning those principles to a practical purpose in real discussion with a Mahometan disputant. The mere knowledge that the educated professors of a religion, credited by so many millions of the human race, hold any opinions concerning the nature of miracles, particularly when the same or similar opinions are known to have

been current in most ages throughout the world, is enough to induce us to discuss them accurately.

But it may, perhaps, be said that those principles of hesitation to admit as conclusive the evidence of miracles, which are considered in the following dissertation, are not the same with those adopted by the Mahometans. The doubts of the Mahometans, as was also the case with regard to many among the ancient heathens, arise from their believing that magic or enchantment may produce those works which we account to be miracles. The argument of my dissertation says nothing of magic: the question considered in it is not what man can achieve by means of any commerce with the occult powers of nature; but under what circumstances we may be satisfied concerning miracles that they possess undeniably the sanction of God, and cannot be attributed to superhuman agents acting independently of, or even against, His authority.

But though these two are, no doubt, different

questions, the argumentation which I adopt will apply to them both equally. Whatever is disproved of any superhuman being acting independently of, or in opposition to, God, is by the same arguments disproved also of any supposed power of magic. Magic also is nothing: we know that no commerce with any powers of nature can enable man to do anything which may justly rival the Scriptural miracles. But that other beings besides God may work miracles seems to be admitted even in Scripture itself, and in the sense in which the word "miracle" is used in this treatise, is assuredly a position which we cannot dare to deny. The discussion of this question, therefore, and of what proof we may still possess that the Scripture miracles are of divine authority, is a discussion which, while it carries along with it the whole question of magic, is in itself of incomparably the greater importance.

To recur once more to that particular bearing which this question has on the Mahometan argument. I have observed that the tendency

of that argument is to refer the performance of the Christian miracles to magic, and that this argument is to be refuted on the very same principles on which it will be here shown that they cannot be referred to superhuman agents acting independently of, or in opposition to, God. I would farther observe, also, that these very same principles afford an answer not only just, but also direct: and I think it almost evident that, if sufficiently pressed, the pious writer whose tracts against the Mahometans are preserved to us in this volume of controversies, would have brought in some shape this direct answer forward. But we have no reply by him to the second Mahometan tract which makes most expressly this charge of magic.

The reply to this second tract is from the hand of the editor. And it is here very re

b

markable that he evades altogether the Maho

metan questions on the conclusive nature of miracles. He appears to advise that in addressb Ibid. p. 534.

See Martyn, as above, p. 92.