44 
I find to be “miracle.” On the contrary, I have entered it as one excep- 
tion to Ais doctrine that he has embraced in his definition of miracle the 
quality “evidential,” whereas I maintain that this quality is an “‘acci- 
dent ;” essential to none, but accompanying only “some” miracles. So 
that once more the “Reply” fails to answer the demand. 
6. But even the Doctor, if you only grant him a little time, can dis- 
cover some feeble beginnings of “evidential” in original exnibilation. 
Not, when by the omnipotent will of Jehovah, the material universe 
sprang from nothing into Kosmos, was it “evidential of anything.” But 
“now that we are certified of the fact, it is evidential of, 1, God’s exist- 
ence; and 2, almighty power.” It is matter of surprise that one so 
skilled in logic should find so little evidential power in exnihilation. 
Paul could find in it: 1. ‘“Kternal power; and 2. Godhead,’ and so 
potent did he regard it as a divine message, that he insists “they are 
without excuse” to whom creation delivered this message. ‘Tor the 
invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, 
being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power 
und Godhead ; so that they are without excuse.” Rom. i. 20. Perhaps 
if the “Reply” would consult some of the Professor’s Lectures on Theo- 
logy, it might be found that this stupendous event is evidential of some- 
thing more than, 1, “existence, and 2, almighty power.” What pro- 
gress, then, has the ‘‘Reply” made in supporting the position that orig- 
’ or in defending the Doctor's, 1, 
redundant definition ; 2, and incoherent argument ? 
In the conclusion Dr. Girardeau says: “If, however, Dr. Martin 
chooses to regard the miracle as not essentially evidential, he is entitled 
to his opinion. Only he must be content to occupy an exceptional posi- 
tion.” . 
1. [ have already shown that it is the Doctor who occupies that ex- 
ceptional position. 
2. So far, however, as he intended it as an argumentum ad hominem, 
Tam not unwilling at any time to be classed in the number of “excep- 
tional,” provided only I am found on the side of “truth and of right.” 
T trust I shall never abandon a position because it is “exceptional ;” or 
flee to another because that other may secure a position for the time in 
the ranks of the majority. It was the damning charge against the ‘chief 
rulers” that they had convictions of the right, but they “did not con- 
fess . . . for they loved the praise of men.”’ 
Some additional specimens of the Logic of the “Reply” shall now 
engage our attention. 
inal exnihilation “cannot be a miracle ;’ 
