to have claimed to work nothing different or higher than it was generally thought that evil spirits were fully capable of working, and did, in fact, not infrequently work, it is very conceivable that many people, or possibly all, as Mill says, might not have thought it worth while to contradict them; and that the general impression among those who heard of them, or witnessed them, would be that, even on the supposition that they were, one and all, true as matters of fact, and as supernatural matters of fact, they proved nothing for that claim which was based on them, viz., that Jesus Christ was a Messenger sent from God.

We may go much further than this. Ignorant as we are to a considerable extent now as to what was the exact nature of the power attributed to evil spirits, there can be no doubt that a pretty accurate idea of the extent of that power was formed among the Jews generally, and especially by the learned and priestly class. Now, if the power claimed to have been exercised by Christ resembled in extent and nature the power ascribed to evil spirits, there can be no doubt that Christ's power, as claimed by Him, would not merely fail to convince the general mind that He was sent from God, but would go a very considerable way in the opposite direction; viz., towards convincing them that He was commissioned by the Devil. Such would be the inference generally drawn, and especially by the ruling priestly party. They would in all probability, so far from wishing to deny the alleged works of Christ, rather wish them to be accepted as matters of fact, and then triumphantly appeal to the people that these works were indeed, to a very full extent, confirmation of their view of Christ, viz., that He was an impostor and a deceiver of the people; and as such, sent by Satan to draw away the hopes and the faith of the children of Abraham from the true hope of Israel. They would be commented upon, not as proving nothing for Christ, but as proving a great deal against Him.

But whether they were supposed adverse to His claims, or merely as proving nothing for them, the whole force of the inferences based upon them by Mill rests upon the supposition that the supernatural power ascribed by national consent to evil spirits was no higher, and in no material respect different from that claimed by Christ, and known by His enemies and friends to be claimed by Him. If it was no higher, Mill's inference possesses great force; force we would not feel ourselves fairly permitted to deny, nearly, if not altogether equal to that asserted by him. But if the power, justly or unjustly, attributed among the Jews to the agency of evil spirits, were altogether inferior in degree, and in many important respects of a different kind from that claimed by Christ, and known to be claimed by Him, in that case Mill's inference possesses no force whatsoever. The claim by Christ to a supernatural power, conceded to be altogether superior to that ascribed to evil spirits, would and did excite comment and attention alike on the part of

friends and enemies as indicative, if true, of the entrance of a new and higher agency upon the field.

Now this is what we assert for the miraculous claims of Christ. We do not deny, of course, nor are we in the smallest degree concerned to deny, that some of the alleged supernatural works of Christ rank no higher than those which evil spirits were supposed to be capable of performing. The exercise of real supernatural power does not in the least measure imply that it should be confined to what may be generally accounted supernatural in the highest degree. We are not to expect that all the miracles of Christ should be miracles such as raising the dead or healing one born blind. We should rather expect miracle, in that field to which those of the New Testament are nearly confined, viz., the counteracting of the effects of disease and death, to range over the entire field of human malady; thus ranging, the supernatural power ascribed to Christ would exercise itself upon departments of that field where the power ascribed to evil spirits, and the power admitted to be within. the power of man also, were supposed to work. And we may thus reasonably expect that some of the works ascribed to Christ may be no higher, so far as their effects but not their agency is taken into question, than works which evil spirits were supposed capable of working, or which are supposed to lie within the power of imagination, working upon and subduing disease for a longer or a shorter time.

But we claim for the miracles of Christ, as a rule, that they were of a higher, and altogether different kind than that ascribed to the agency of evil spirits, or within the range of imagination; or of faith reposed upon ordinary men, or exercised in any way, or manner, by ordinary men. With regard to evil spirits, while in the general we allow that miracle was supposed to lie within their power, as well as within the power of the Spirit of God, we deny altogether that any such power, in its general working, as is ascribed in the Gospels to Christ, and known to have been claimed by Him, was supposed by national Jewish opinion, or the opinion of any known religious party or sect among the Jews, to be possessed by evil spirits. One usual alleged work of Christ, viz., the casting out of evil spirits from the bodies of men, was said by the Pharisees to lie within the power of the Devil; and accordingly, it was plainly, openly, and pertinaciously attributed by His enemies to the aid of the Devil (Luke xi. 15; Matt. xii. 24). "He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the prince of the devils," was the comment of the enemies of Christ on all such works of His! His power here was affirmed to be no higher in nature than that possessed by evil spirits; though even upon this field of demoniacal possession, a power was claimed by and ascribed to Christ higher than that ascribed by general Jewish consent to the reputed spirit exorcisors of their nation (Luke xi. 14; Matt. ix. 33).

The conduct of the enemies of Christ is very valuable in this

respect, that it shows their general mind as regards His alleged miracles. Where they thought it lay within their power, in consonance with Jewish opinion and their own teaching, to ascribe Christ's work to Satanic agency, they openly and greedily so ascribed it. They were glad to do so; they thought it for their credit and reputation to do so. It is, therefore, only the natural and the reasonable inference from their conduct in this instance to suppose that, wherever and whenever these same bitter enemies of Christ could, with any show of plausibility, ascribe His works of another kind to diabolical agency, they would do so.

Now, with the ascription of His power over devils to diabolical co-operation, they began and ended accusations of this kind against Christ. The Gospels, which tell us very freely and without any concealment the worst charges made against Him by His foes, never once hint that they ever dreamed of attributing a single work of His of a different kind to Satanic aid. There is not a hint to that effect in the four Gospels. There is not, we believe, among the Rabbinical writings subsequent to the lifetime of Christ, any mention that a tradition of the kind had been handed down to them from His contemporaries.

But silence of this kind is not all. We have positive evidence that it was universally conceded on the part of every section of the Jewish people that the supernatural power claimed by Christ, and reputed to have been exercised by Him, was of a kind altogether different to that ascribed, whether with truth or not, to diabolical power. We will first refer to some cases as showing this on the part of His enemies.

In the ninth chapter of John's Gospel we have that narrative of the cure of the man born blind, which has already been referred to in the course of these papers. Its minuteness and circumstantiality of detail make this record valuable in many respects. The cure of this well-known man near, or probably at one of the gates of the temple, drew upon it the closest scrutiny of the Pharisees of Jerusalem. They are unable to deny it as a matter of fact, or as a supernatural event. It was undeniable; and after the closest examination, was admitted. But then came the question, how to get rid of its obvious inference? It was an ugly fact staring them in the face, from which common minds were verging towards the opinion, or the suspicion, or the faith, that Jesus of Nazareth was what He claimed to be, and not what His enemies, the Priests and Pharisees, said He was. Even among the Pharisees themselves ideas of this intolerable kind were insinuating themselves (ver. 16). What was to be done? Insinuate or assert every imaginable plea by which the force of the miracle might be abated and set aside! This is done. One circumstance in the cure afforded a plausible handle for objection; viz., that it had been wrought upon the Sabbath day. This is accordingly laid hold of and dwelt upon as proving more against Christ than the miracle proved for Him.

Christ was "a sinner," a breaker of the "Sabbath day!" His origin is dwelt upon! "This fellow, we know not from whence He is!" The Man is attacked; but what of the Man's work? From the charge that He was a sinner, how easily and rapidly would the envenomed mind of the enemies of Christ run on, if that were possible, to the kindred charge that He was here but an emissary of the Devil, working wonders by diabolic aid! A charge of this kind would be almost forced into their mouth by their accusations of His sinning on this occasion by this very work. If it were indeed their opinion, or that of the people generally, that such works could be done by a lying spirit as well as by the Spirit of God, they would most certainly have said that He healed the blind man by the power of Beelzebub. But they say nothing of the kind. On the contrary they acknowledge that, while Christ was a sinner, it was God who had wrought this work! (ver. 24). Unable for a single moment to parallel this miracle with those supposed to be within the power of evil spirits, they assert the absurd and illogical proposition that God had done a work which apparently favoured one of the most blasphemous claims that could be set up against God! From this alleged miracle of Christ, we see that His bitterest enemies confessed that, between His works and those supposed to be within the power of evil spirits, there was a barrier of distinction which no malice or ingenuity could pass.

Just exactly as it was in the case of the alleged miracles of Christ, it was in the case of those of His apostles. Mr. Mill's view, allowing it to be just to the utmost, that miracles could, according to Jewish opinion, be worked by a lying spirit as well as by the Spirit of God, has no practical effect whatever, because the miracles claimed for the apostles were confessedly, in their general character, of a totally different kind from those supposed to lie within the power of the evil spirit. This is seen from the conduct and language of the Jewish Sanhedrim, assembled to deliberate about the miracle wrought by Peter and John on the lame man at the beautiful gate of the temple (Acts iv. 16-22). They did not deny the reality of the cure. They could not do so. But neither were they able to class it as, in its nature, proving nothing, because it was of such a kind as might have been wrought by an evil spirit as well as by the Spirit of God. Most gladly would they have done so if they could; for the object of their meeting together was to prevent the effect of this very work, which was operating on the minds of the people. One of the most effectual ways would have been, by showing to the people that the work was, in itself, of no different kind from those which they all allowed could be wrought by an evil spirit. But they can do nothing of the kind. The miracle, they one and all confessed was a notable miracle; out of that class altogether which were associated in their and the common mind with the power of evil spirits. Peter claimed it as work wrought by the "God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob "

(ver. 13). The people, aware of its circumstances, hailed it without a dissentient voice as a work of God (ver. 21). The rulers and elders and scribes, with Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest (vers. 5, 6), all of them men of the first influence and knowledge in the nation, and the bitterest foes to the spreading doctrines of Christ, did not dare to say, did not dare to hint, that the miracle was not wrought by God, but could have been effected by some other power. They allow it in the case of the apostles, as before they had confessed in the instance of a work wrought by Christ Himself, to have been "notable;" of the class of wonders wrought by their ancient prophets by the power of God, and cannot attempt to confound it with the works supposed by them to be within the power of the spirits of evil.

From these instances we see how it was with the miracles of the Gospel as regarded by its unrelenting and unwearied enemies. From the very outset of the Gospel it had enemies; malicious, ingenious, and powerful. They began their opposition to it by bringing Jesus Christ to death. Enraged to find that His death had not put a stop to it, but that on the contrary it thenceforward spread more than ever, they seek, in every way permissible to them by the dominant Roman power, to stifle it ere it should assume proportions against which they could not contend. It was amid such a people that the Gospel of Christ was cradled. It was preeminently in their metropolis, Jerusalem, that it was nurtured and grew, and from thence that it was propagated. And yet, when the leaders of the opposition to that Gospel come to confer together on its alleged miraculous works, they are compelled, so far from being able to ascribe them to Satan working for and through those deceived by him, to ascribe them to God. All the absurdity, or rather the impiety, of such a supposition, on their idea that Jesus of Nazareth was a deceiver, is overlooked and stifled by the overpowering nature of the works. These they must needs confess to be notable, divine, beyond any other power to effect but that of God. And so they are forced to occupy the position of men affirming that God had wrought works in and through men who either made or sustained claims of a kind the most opposite possible to His will and pleasure! The alleged miracles of the Gospel were indeed, on the confession of its enemies, altogether of a different kind from those which they supposed within the power of evil spirits (John ix. 16).

That which was thought of the miracles of the Gospel by its enemies was thought of them also by its friends. In fact, it was such thoughts of them that first made them friendly to Christ and His teaching. And this was the case alike with the educated and the uneducated among the early disciples. Thus Nicodemus, a man of remarkable erudition, a member of the Great Council of the Sanhedrim, a man acquainted thoroughly with the religious opinions of his people, knowing what was supposed to lie within the power