FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183  
184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   >>   >|  
and action which are absolutely baffling. They can be eliminated from the narrative only by a procedure which might just as well eliminate the narrative. In many of the narratives there may be much that is true. In some all may be as related. In Jesus' time, on the witness of the Scripture itself, it was assumed as something no one questioned, that miraculous deeds were performed, not alone by Jesus and the apostles, but by many others, and not always even by the good. Such deeds were performed through the power of evil spirits as well as by the power of God. To imagine that the working of miracles proved that Jesus came from God, is the most patent importation of a modern apologetic notion into the area of ancient thought. We must remember that Jesus himself laid no great weight upon the miracles which we assume that he believed he wrought, and some of which we may believe that he did work. Many he performed with hesitation and desired so far as possible to conceal. Even if we were in a position at one point or another in the life of Jesus to defend the traditional assumptions concerning the miraculous, yet it must be evident how opposed it is to right reason, to lay stress on the abstract necessity of belief in the miraculous. The traditional conception of the miraculous is done away for us. This is not at all by the fact that we are in a position to say with Matthew Arnold: 'The trouble with miracles is that they never happen.' We do not know enough to say that. To stake all on the assertion of the impossibility of so-called miracles is as foolish as to stake much on the affirmation of their actuality. The connexion of nature is only an induction. This can never be complete. The real question is both more complex and also more simple. The question is whether, even if an event, the most unparalleled of those related in the Gospels or outside of them, should be proved before our very eyes to have taken place, the question is whether we should believe it to have been a miracle in the traditional sense, an event in which the actual--not the known, but the possible--order of nature had been broken through, and in the old sense, God had arbitrarily supervened. Allowed that the event were, in our own experience and in the known experience of the race, unparalleled, yet it would never occur to us to suppose but that there was a law of this case, also, a connexion in nature in which, as work of God, it occurred, and in wh
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183  
184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

miraculous

 

miracles

 

performed

 

question

 

traditional

 

nature

 
proved
 
experience
 

unparalleled

 

connexion


position

 

narrative

 

related

 

trouble

 

complex

 

simple

 

happen

 

procedure

 

affirmation

 
foolish

impossibility

 

called

 

actuality

 

induction

 

complete

 

eliminate

 

narratives

 

assertion

 
action
 

Allowed


supervened

 

arbitrarily

 

occurred

 

suppose

 

broken

 
eliminated
 

Gospels

 

Arnold

 

actual

 

absolutely


baffling

 
miracle
 

assume

 

weight

 

believed

 

wrought

 
hesitation
 

desired

 

apostles

 
remember