gradual, according to the degrees of cold; but whenever it
comes to the freezing point, the water passes in a moment, from
the utmost liquidity to perfect hardness. Such an event,
therefore, may be denominated _extraordinary_, and requires a
pretty strong testimony, to render it credible to people in a
warm climate: But still it is not _miraculous_, nor contrary to
uniform experience of the course of nature in cases where all
the circumstances are the same. The inhabitants of Sumatra
have always seen water fluid in their own climate, and the
freezing of their rivers ought to be deemed a prodigy: But they
never saw water in Muscovy during the winter; and therefore
they cannot reasonably be positive what would there be the
consequence.

90. But in order to encrease the probability against the testimony of
witnesses, let us suppose, that the fact, which they affirm, instead of
being only marvellous, is really miraculous; and suppose also, that the
testimony considered apart and in itself, amounts to an entire proof; in
that case, there is proof against proof, of which the strongest must
prevail, but still with a diminution of its force, in proportion to that
of its antagonist.

A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and
unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a
miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument
from experience can possibly be imagined. Why is it more than probable,
that all men must die; that lead cannot, of itself, remain suspended in
the air; that fire consumes wood, and is extinguished by water; unless
it be, that these events are found agreeable to the laws of nature, and
there is required a violation of these laws, or in other words, a