PAGE
Introductory[13]
The Argument
I
The gradual narrowing of the miraculous element in the Bibleby recent discovery and discussion.—Thealarm thereby excited in the Church.—Thefallacy which generates the fear.—Theatheistic conception of nature which generatesthe fallacy.—The present outgrowing of thisconception.[25]
II
The present net results of the discussion of themiraculous element in the Bible.—Evaporationof the former evidential value of miracles.—Furtherinsistence on this value a logical blunder.—Thetransfer of miracles from the artilleryto the baggage of the Church.—Probability ofa further reduction of the list of miracles.—Alsoof a further transfer of events reputedmiraculous to the domain of history.[37]
III
Arbitrary criticism of the Biblical narratives of theraising of the "dead."—Facts which it ignores.—Thesubject related to the phenomena oftrance, and records of premature burial.—Theresuscitation in Elisha's tomb probably historical.—Jesus'raising of the ruler's daughterplainly such a case.—His raising of the widow'sson probably such.—The hypothesis that hisraising of Lazarus may also have been suchcritically examined.—The record allows thissupposition.—Further considerations favoringit: 1. The supposition threatens no real interestof Christianity.—2. Enhances the characterof the act as a work of mercy.—3. Isindependent of the belief of the witnesses ofthe act.—4. Is coherent with the generalconception of the healing works of Jesus aswrought by a peculiar psychical power.—Othercases.—The resurrection of Jesus an event ina wholly different order of things.—The practicalresult of regarding these resuscitations asin the order of nature.[47]
IV
A clearer conception of miracle approached.—Worksof Jesus once reputed miraculous not soreputed now, since not now transcending asonce the existing range of knowledge and power.—Thistransfer of the miraculous to the naturallikely to continue.—No hard and fast linebetween the miraculous and the non-miraculous.—Miraclea provisional word, its applicationnarrowing in the enlarging mastery of the secretsof Nature and of life.[75]
V
Biblical miracles the effluence of extraordinarylives.—Life the world's magician and miracle-worker;its miracles now termed prodigies.—Miraclethe natural product of an extraordinaryendowment of life.—Life the ultimate reality.—Whatany man can achieve is conditionedby the psychical quality of his life.—Nothingmore natural, more supernatural, than life.—Thederived life of the world filial to the self-existentlife of God; "begotten, not made."—Miracleas the product of life, the work of God.[85]
VI
The question, old and new, now confronting theologians.—Theirrecent retreat upon the minimumof miracle.—The present conflict of opinionin the Church.—Its turning-point reachedin the antipodal turn-about in the treatment ofmiracles from the old to the new apologetics.—Revisionof the traditional idea of the supernaturalrequired for theological readjustment.[95]
VII
Account to be made of the law of atrophy throughdisuse.—The virgin birth and the corporealresurrection of Jesus, the two miracles still insistedon as the irreducible minimum, affectedby this law.—The vital truths of the incarnationand immortality independent of these miracles.—Thesetruths now placed on higherground in a truer conception of the supernatural.—Thetrue supernatural is the spiritual,not the miraculous.—Scepticism bred from thecontrary view.—The miracle-narratives, whileless evidential for religion, not unimportant forhistory.—Psychical research a needed auxiliaryfor the scientific critic of these.[107]
VIII
The cardinal point in the present discussion thereality not of miracles, but of the supernatural.—Fallacyof pointing to physical events asessential characteristics of supernatural Revelation.—Thecharacter of a revelation determinednot by its circumstances, but by its contents.—Moralnature supernatural to physical.—Naturea hierarchy of natures.—Supernatural Religionhistorically attested by the moral developmentit generates.—Transfer of its distinctive notefrom moral ideals to physical marvels a costlyerror.—Jesus' miracles a revelation, of a typecommon with others before and after.—Theunique Revelation of Jesus was in the higherrealm of divine ideas and ideals.—These, whileunrealized in human life, still exhibit the fact ofa supernatural Revelation.—The distinction ofnatural and supernatural belongs to the periodof moral progress up to the spiritual maturityof man in the image of God.—The divine possibilitiesof humanity, imaged in Jesus, revealedas our inheritance and our prize.[131]

INTRODUCTORY

n a historical retrospect greater and more revolutionary changes are seen to have occurred during the nineteenth century than in any century preceding. In these changes no department of thought and activity has failed to share, and theological thought has been quite as much affected as scientific or ethical. Especially remarkable is the changed front of Christian theologians toward miracles, their distinctly lowered estimate of the significance of miracle, their antipodal reverse of the long established treatment of miracles. Referring to this a British evangelical writer[1] observes that "the intelligent believer of our own day, ... instead of accepting Christianity on the ground of the miracles, accepts it in spite of the miracles. Whether he admits these miracles, or rejects them, his attitude toward them is toward difficulties, not helps."

By this diametrical change of Christian thought a great amount of scepticism has already been antiquated. A once famous anti-Christian book, Supernatural Religion, regarded as formidable thirty years ago, is now as much out of date for relevancy to present theological conditions as is the old smooth-bore cannon for naval warfare. That many, indeed, are still unaware of the change that has been experienced by the leaders of Christian thought, no one acquainted with current discussions will deny; the fact is indubitable. It is reviewed in the following pages with the constructive purpose of redeeming the idea of supernatural Religion from pernicious perversion, and of exhibiting it in its true spiritual significance. The once highly reputed calculations made to show how the earth's diurnal revolution could be imperceptibly stopped for Joshua's convenience, and the contention that the Mediterranean produced fish with gullets capable of giving passage to Jonah, are now as dead as the chemical controversy about phlogiston. Yet some sceptical controversialists are still so far from cultivating the acquaintance with recent thought which they recommend to Christian theologians, as to persist in affirmations of amazing ignorance, e.g. "It is admitted that miracles alone can attest the reality of divine revelation."[2] Sponsors for this statement must now be sought among unlearned Christians, or among a few scholars who survive as cultivators of the old-fashioned argument from the "evidences." Even among these latter the tendency to minimize miracle is undeniably apparent in a reduction of the list classified as such, and still more in the brevity of the list insisted on for the attestation of Christianity.

A transitional state of mind is clearly evidenced by the present division and perplexity of Christian thought concerning the Christian miracles. Many seem to regard further discussion as profitless, and are ready to shelve the subject. But this attitude of weariness is also transitional. There must be some thoroughfare to firm ground and clear vision. It must be found in agreement, first of all, on the real meaning of a term so variously and vaguely used as miracle. In the present imperfect state of knowledge it may be impossible to enucleate miracle, however defined, of all mystery. But even so will much be gained for clear thinking, if miracle can be reasonably related to the greater mystery which all accept, though none understand,—the mystery of life. This view of the dynamic relation of life to miracle[3] is here suggested for what it may prove to be worth.

The great and general change that transfigured theology during the nineteenth century was characteristically ethical. This, indeed, is the distinctive feature of the so-called new theology, in contrast with that which the Protestant Reformers inherited from St. Augustine. God and Man, Faith, Salvation and Inspiration, Redemption and Atonement, Judgment and Retribution,—all these themes are now presented in orthodox pulpits far more conformably to ethical principles, though in degrees varying with educated intelligence, than was customary in the sermons of half a century ago. "One great source and spring of theological progress," says Professor Bowne, in his recent work on Theism, "has been the need of finding a conception of God which the moral nature could accept. The necessity of moralizing theology has produced vast changes in that field; and the end is not yet."