EARLY COMMENTARIES ON HUME'S WRITINGS by Thomas Rutherforth 1751 5/1/95 Copyright 1995, James Fieser (jfieser@utm.edu). See end note for details on copyright and editing conventions. This is a working draft; please report errors.[1] Editor's Note: The opens their neutral review of Rutherforth's pamphlet with the following: "IN this discourse, the learned Dr. lays before his readers some observations upon the measures of credibility, in order to shew that the argument urged by Mr. against miracles, is inconclusive; and that no supernatural degree of testimony is necessaryily required to prove the existence of a miracle" (1751, Vol. 5, pp. 358-361). * * * * The Credibility of Miracles defended Against the Author of IN A DISCOURSE DELIVERED AT THE PRIMARY VISITATION OF THE RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD THOMAS LORD BISHOP OF ELY IN S/T\. MICHAELS CHURCH CAMBRIDGE AVG. XXIX ---- MDCCLI. ---- BY T[HOMAS]. R/UTHERFORTH\ D.D. C/HAPLAIN TO\ H/ER\ R/OYAL\ H/IGHNESS THE\ P/RINCESS\ D/OWAGER OF\ W/ALES\. ---- , P/RINTED BY\ J. B/ENTHAM\ P/RINTER TO THE\ U/NIVERSITY\; F/OR\ W. T/HURLBOURN\ B/OOKSELLER IN\ C/AMBRIDGE; AND SOLD BY\ W. I/NNYS IN\ P/ATER-NOSTER\ R/OW AND\ J. B/EECROFT IN\ L/OMBARD\- S/TREET\, L/ONDON\. ---- MDCCLI. * * * * TO THE RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD THOMAS LORD BISHOP OF ELY. MY LORD, AS I am encouraged to print the following discourse by the favourable notice, which you wee pleased to take of it, in your most excellent charge to your clergy, before whom I delivered it; this alone might be a sufficient reason for me to beg, that I may have the honour of sending it abroad under your Lordship's patronage. But I had another reason for desiring to address myself to your Lordship upon this occasion: it would be, I thought, the most public, and therefore the best, opportunity of testifying my just sense of the many and signal instances of goodness and generosity, which I have received from your Lordship. The favours, which you have been pleased to confer upon me, are great indeed in themselves, and may justly claim the most sincere acknowledgments and the best returns of gratitude, that I am able to make: but the graceful manner, in which they were conferred, has doubled the value of them. Your Lordship's noble and truly christian spirit has in this respect, as in many others, most eminently distinguished you from the rest of the world, by engaging you to seek for opportunities of exercising your bounty, and to prevent, not only the solicitations, but even the wishes of those, who stand in need of your protection and assistance. That they may long be blessed with such a patron and friend, as they are sure of finding in your lordship, and that you may long enjoy all the happiness, which providence can bestow upon one of its best and most faithful instruments in doing good; is, my Lord, the constant and devoutest wish of Your Lordship's most obliged and most dutiful servant THOMAS RUTHERFORTH. S/T\. J/OHNS\ C/OLL\. S/EPT. XVII.\ ---- /MDCCLI.\ {1} THE CREDIBILITY OF MIRACLES DEFENDED ---- JOHN XX. 30, 31. MANY OTHER SIGNS TRULY DID JESUS IN THE PRESENCE OF HIS DISCIPLES WHICH ARE NOT WRITTEN IN THIS BOOK: BUT THESE ARE WRITTEN THAT YE MIGHT BELIEVE, THAT JESUS CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD. THE sacred historian hath here informed us with what view he recorded the miracles of Christ: he designed to convince his readers, that the person, who could do such mighty works, must have a commission from God, to teach his will to mankind. And the defenders of christianity have always imagined, that the miracles, which are related in the new testament, and are there said to have been wrought by Christ and his apostles, may be urged as an undeniable evidence in favour of our religion; provided they can make it appear, that the reality of them is evinced by such testimony, as would be sufficient to establish the truth of any matter of fact, beyond all contradiction.{2} But the state of this question hath been lately much altered. Instead of being called upon to clear up the testimony, which supports the miracles of Christ and his apostles; we are now challenged to shew, that any testimony whatsoever can be sufficient to prove the truth of these, or of any other miracles. [2]"A miracle, we are told, is a violation of the laws of nature: for nothing is esteemed a miracle, if it ever happens in the common course of things. And consequently; since a firm and unalterable experience hath established those laws; there must be a firm and unalterable experience against every miraculous event. But in the judgments which we pass upon matters of fact, such an experience as this amounts to a full and direct proof. We have therefore, from the nature of the fact, a full and direct proof against the existence of any miracle. If then a miracle, with such a proof against it, can be rendered credible; it must be by an opposite proof, which is superiour. Therefore no proof from report can evince the existence of a miracle; unless it over-balances the opposite proof from the nature of the fact: or, no testimony can be sufficient to establish the belief of a miracle; unless the falsehood of the testimony would be more miraculous, than the event, which it endeavours to establish." {3} The confidence, with which this difficulty is urged against the belief of the gospel, hath made it our duty to examine into the merits of it. I intend therefore, in the following discourse, to employ your thoughts upon this subject, by laying before you some observations upon the measures of credibility, which will assist us in shewing, that this argument is inconclusive, and that no supernatural degree of testimony is necessarily required to prove the existence of a miracle. Where we have no knowledge or certainty of a fact, by having been eye-witnesses of it; the measures of credibility, make use of to form a judgment upon the truth of falshood of it, are the conformity or consistency of it with our experience; the conformity or consistency of it with our knowledge in general; and the testimony of other men, who vouch the evidence of their senses. Matters of fact have three different degrees of credibility, in the nature of the thing, arising from their conformity or consistency with our experience. First, there are some events which we have always found to be brought about steadily and constantly, at stated times, and in certain places, without the least irregularity or exception. The existence of these events is taken for granted; we assure ourselves upon the evidence of such an uniform experience, that they will happen at the usual {4} time and place, without requiring any testimony to prove it. We never think of disputing whether the sun will rise to morrow morning, or of disbelieving, that the tide came in yesterday. The exact likeness between these facts and others, which we have seen and known to be true, induces us to admit them without any hesitation: we take them for truth, because they have, in all respects, a full and perfect resemblance of it. Secondly; some events have a less exact and less striking likeness of the truth; we find them conformable to our experience in most respects, but not in all. It is most agreeable to what hath commonly been observed to happen, that, in England, there should be frost in some particular week of december, and thun