Wesley Corpus

For if you say, “The writers following the apostolic Fathers do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts; therefore they had none;” by a parity of reason you must say, “The writers following the Apostles do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts; therefore the Apostles had none.” 4. Your next argument against the existence of those gifts is, “that the Fathers do not tell us the names of them which had them.” This is not altogether true. The names of Justin Martyr and Cyprian are pretty well known; as is, among the learned, that of Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria. (Pages 106, 212.) But what, if they did not? Supposing miraculous powers were openly exerted in the Church, and that not only they themselves, but every oine else, might see this whenever they pleased; if any Heathen might come and see whenever he pleased, what could a reasonable man desire more? What did it signify to him to know the names of those whom he heard prophesying, or saw working miracles? Though, without doubt, whoever saw the miracles wrought, might easily learn the names of those that wrought them : which, nevertheless, the Christians had no need to publish abroad, to expose them so much the more to the rage and malice of their persecutors. 6. Your third argument is, “The Christian workers of mira cles were always charged with imposture by their adversaries. Lucian tells us, “Whenever any crafty juggler went to the Christians, he grew rich immediately.’ And Celsus represents the Christian wonder-workers as mere vagabonds and common cheats, who ranmbled about to fairs and markets.” (Page 23.) And is it any wonder, that either a Jew or a Heathen should represent them thus? Sir, I do not blame you for not believing the Christian system, but for betraying so gross a partiality; for gleaning up every scrap of heathen scandal, and palming it upon us as unquestionable evidence; and for not translating even these miserable fragments with any accuracy or faithful ness. Instead of giving us the text, bad as it is, you commonly substitute a paraphrase yet worse. And this the unlearned reader naturally supposes to be a faithful translation. It is no credit to your cause, if it needs such supports. And this is no credit to you, if it does not.