...no theologian of repute would in these days accept Hume's definition of a miracle as ' a violation of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity.' The reason is simply that a miracle so defined ' is relative,' as Butler has it, ' to a course of nature,'...

...extraordinary nor more beyond our comprehension." But what is miracle ? Hume himself defines it as " a transgression of a law of nature by a particular...or by the interposition of some invisible agent." But I am afraid this definition is not accurate, although he thinks that it is, and says so. The definition...

...reviewer deals rather uncertainly with the word "miracle." On page 160 he adopts Hume's definition, " A transgression of a law of nature by a particular...or by the interposition of some invisible agent." And on page 161 he adopts Butler's definition, " A miracle is relative to a course of nature, and implies...

...miracles. He says that " a miracle is a violation of the laws of Nature," and again, "A miracle is a transgression of a law of Nature by a particular...by the interposition of some invisible agent." Mr. Wallace shows that these definitions are both bad, and that they in fact beg the question by the improper...

...miracles. He says that " a miracle is a violation of the laws of Nature," and again, " A miracle is a transgression of a law of Nature by a particular...by the interposition of some invisible agent." Mr. Wallace shows that these definitions are both bad, and that they in fact beg the question by the improper...

...hitherto unduly narrow conception of the laws of nature. The alternative definition, that a miracle is " a transgression of a law of nature by a particular...Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent " (IV.p. 134, note), is still less defensible. For a vast number of miracles have professedly been...

...scepticism — his views as to the nature of MIRACLES, and the evidence by which they are supported. He defines a miracle to be " a transgression of a law...nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by an interposition of some invisible agent " (iv. 184). Let us consider the question in its philosophic...

...that the events should have happened but that they should have been miracuha.i, if ' transgressions of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity.' for the charm which the prospect of overcoming the separation between reason and instinct exercises...

...practice of believers in the miraculous, defines a miracle as a ' violation of the laws of nature, or as a transgression of a law of nature by a particular...or by the interposition of some invisible agent.'" It is to be observed that Prof. Huxley will not allow Hume's definition of a miracle, for it postulates...

...nature, in a particular instance. Hnme defines the miracle to be " a violation of the laws of nature ; " "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity." Essay on Miracles, Pt. I. This is incorrect. When our Lord raised Lazarus from the dead, he merely...