for such transcendent agencies; but this is supplied in excess (as regards what we have called the _constituent_ miracles of Christianity) by the case of a religion that was to revolutionize the moral nature of man. The moral nature--the kingdom of the will--is esentially opposed to the kingdom of nature even by the confession of irreligious philosophers; and, therefore, being itself a supersensual field, it seems more reasonably adapted to agencies supernatural than such as are natural. GENERAL RECAPITULATION. In Hume's argument,--_x_, which expresses the resistance to credibility in a miracle, is valued as of necessity equal to the veiy maximum or ideal of human testimony; which, under the very best circumstances, might be equal to +_x,_ in no case more, and in all known cases less. We, on the other hand, have endeavored to show-- 1. That, because Hume contemplates only the case of a single witness, it will happen that the case _Beta_ [of Sect. II.] where a multitude of witnesses exist, may greatly exceed +_x;_ and with a sufficient multitude must exceed _x_. 2. That in the case of internal miracles--operations of divine agency within the mind and conscience of the individual--Hume's argument is necessarily set aside: the evidence, the +_x_, is perfect for the individual, and the miraculous agency is meant for him only. 3. That, in the case of one primary miracle, viz. the first organization of man on this planet, the evidence greatly transcends _x:_ because here it is an evidence not derived from experience at all, but from the reflecting reason: and the miracle has the same advantage over facts of experience, that a mathematical truth has over the truths which rest on induction. It is the difference between _must be_ and _is_--between the inevitable and the merely actual. 4. That, in the case of another order of miracles, viz. prophecies, Hume's argument is again overruled; because the +_x_ in this case, the affirmative evidence, is not derived froms human testimony. Some prophecies are obscure; they may be fulfilled possibly without men's being aware of the fulfilment. But others, as that about the fate of Babylon--about the fate of the Arabs (the children of Ishmael)--about the fate of the Jews--are not of a nature to be misunderstood; and the evidence which attends them is not alien, but is intrinsic, and developed by themselves in successive stages from age to age.