Page:A brief discussion of some of the claims of the Hon. E. Swedenborg.pdf/14

 would now call out for miracles to attest the truth of our author's pretensions, would, if he had actually performed them, have been among the foremost to ascribe them to infernal agency: for naturalism must necessarily be inconsistent in reference to things of a spiritual nature.

Miracles merely awe the understanding, they do not convince the judgment. They may terrify the beholder, but they will not make him wiser. They may induce obedience from fear, but they will not originate virtue from love. Not withstanding the stupendous miracles performed by Moses before Pharaoh and the Israelites, we find that they served to harden the heart of the one, and certainly induced no improvement upon the other. They had not even the effect of preventing their idolatry in the wilderness, softening their obstinacy, or restraining their rebellion. Why was this? Because miracles only became necessary in ages of turpitude and darkness; and, therefore, it is only in such periods that they have been performed. Such phenomena are unsuited to modern times, when reason has obtained a superior developement in humanity; and they are by no means adapted to assist in the promulgation of those spiritual truths of genuine religion, for which we believe the illustrious Swedenborg to have been raised up. But why should miracles be considered necessary to prove the truth of his mission? Many of the prophets performed no miracles, and yet their authority is not doubted on that account. Of John the Baptist is is said that he did no miracle; yet, "Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than he:" nevertheless the declaration of his having seen the heavens opened, and