That they are not more frequently alluded to in the Acts is not surprising, when we remember that, according to the writer,--and he was an _eye-witness_ in some cases, as they occur in the _We_ sections,[352]--the Apostles themselves worked miracles. There was thus no occasion for them to appeal to those of Christ as proving the truth of what they preached; their own miracles being quite sufficient to convince anyone who was open to this kind of proof. But still the important fact remains that in the first recorded Christian address the public miracles of Christ were publicly appealed to. And this was within a few months of their occurrence; and at Jerusalem, where the statement, if untrue, could have been more easily refuted than anywhere else. [Footnote 352: Acts 16. 18, 26; 28. 6, 8-9.] Passing on to _St. Paul's Epistles_; it is true that they do not contain any reference to Christ's miracles, except of course the Resurrection. But as they were not written to convert heathens, but to instruct those who were already Christians, there is nothing surprising in this; and they do not mention any of His parables either. On the other hand, they do contain direct reference to _Apostolic_ miracles. St. Paul in two of his undisputed Epistles positively asserts that he had worked miracles himself; and he uses the same three words, _signs_, _wonders_, and _mighty works_, which are used in the Gospels to describe the miracles of Christ.[353] [Footnote 353: Rom. 15. 18, 19; 2 Cor. 12. 12.] The second passage is extremely important, since he speaks of them as the _signs of an apostle_; and calls upon his opponents at Corinth to admit that he was an apostle _because_ he had worked these miracles. And this implies not only that the miracles were done in public, but that his readers as well as himself believed that the power of working miracles belonged to all the Apostles. And it will be noticed that he is addressing the very persons among whom he declares he had worked the miracles; which makes it almost inconceivable that his claim was unfounded, quite apart from the difficulty of believing that such a man as St. Paul would wilfully make a false statement. From all this it follows that the first preachers of Christianity not only appealed to Christ's miracles; but also to their own, in support of their claims. And, as just said, how they could have done so, if they worked no miracles, is not easy to understand. We next come to a class of writings where we should expect to find Christ's miracles alluded to, and these are the first Christian _Apologies_. Nor are we disappointed. The three earliest, of which we have any knowledge, were by Quadratus, Aristides, and Justin; the first two being presented to the Emperor Hadrian, when he visited Athens, A.D. 125.