45 
1. Defending himself against the criticism—‘redundant definition,” 
the Doctor insists that the references to the pillar of cloud and the 
manna that fell in the wilderness are sufficiently offset by the miracle of 
regeneration. ‘The point of my criticism was, that, if “wonderful” is 
properly in the definition (as belonging to the essence of the ‘miracle’ 
and not to the accident of some miracle, aud common to miracle with 
other events not miraculous), then, when the essence evaporated, the 
miracle itself would evaporate; and so that which was miracle at the 
beginning must have ceased to be such at the end of “forty years.” 
But this result of the Doctor’s definition proves that the term “wonder- 
ful” should not have been incorporated as a differentiating “mark,” 
either as “specific” or as proximately ‘generic,’ for it proves too much, 
viz.: That that which is miracle is no miracle, or that which is miracle 
to-day is no miracle to-morrow. The same was shown to be true of 
turning ‘‘water into wine,” if’ it should be repeated at every ‘‘marriage,”’ 
and in fact may be applied to any miracle. 
To all this the “Reply’’ makes answer : 
1. That I have ‘narrowly limited the wonderful to the unexpected.”’ 
This part of his defence has already been exposed. 
2. Then he asks: ‘ Will he [1] ever cease to regard his conversion as 
wonderful ?”” To which I reply: 
(1) Will the Doctor endorse this syllogism? viz.: Some miracles are 
wonderful events; pillar of cloud and manna are wonderful events; 
Firgo, they are miracles. If so, then he will doubtless approve this 
syllogism: Some buggies have tongues ; two-horse wagons and carriages 
have tongues. #rgo, they are buggies. Or will he endorse this? 
Some miracles (regeneration, ¢. g.) are continuously wonderful events; 
Pillar of cloud-and:- manna are not continuously wonderful events ; 
Ergo, they are miracles. If so, then he will doubtless smile approv- 
ingly upon this: 
Some women are continuously beautiful to the end of life; 
Mr. John Smith’s beauty evaporated long before he was forty years of 
age ; 
Ergo, Mr. John Smith was a woman. 
(2) From a certain point of view, it is very certain that every crea- 
tion is a “wonder’’: The rolling heavens; the tiniest grain of sand; the 
minutest animalcule; therefore, ‘wonder’ would not, from this point of 
view, differentiate miracle fromm non-miracle even in the ‘proximate 
genus.” 
(3) The daily preservation of a sinner’s soul in the estate of grace 
