46 
“to the end,” is as much a marvel of redeeming power (as much contra- 
natural), as the original introduction into that estate. The parallelism, 
therefore, between regeneration and the “pillar” and the ‘“manna’’ breaks 
down just where the Doctor’s defence most needs it to stand firm. 
Wonder, in this case, belongs to the very essence of regeneration itself, 
und not to the essence of the “miraculous” element of regeneration. 
My regeneration, therefore, was and continues to be a wonderful event, 
but, in defining it, I would not think of incorporating “wonderful,” for 
it would not be a differentiating mark—other events, not regeneration, 
and not miracle, are wonderful. Besides it differs from “pillar” and 
“manna” in not being repeated twice a day for forty years. Had I un- 
dergone regeneration anew once or twice a day for the last forty years, 
it would certainly have ceased long ere this to be a “wonder” to me or 
to any one else. I would then, indeed, ‘tbe an exception to the class— 
converted sinners,” for, according to the Scriptures, the soul of man is 
regenerated but once, and that for all time and for all eternity. 
(4) From the miracle point-of-view, that wonder is not of the essence 
of regeneration may be seen from these considerations, viz.: 1st. No one 
could be regenerated who did not instantaneously and contemporaneously 
strike wonder into the mind of beholders. 2dly. The act of regenera- 
tion on God’s part is always completed before wonder could be produced 
as an “effect” of it in the mind of the regenerate or of the beholder. 
3dly. No one could be regenerated, except in the presence of witnesses. 
4thly. Since regeneration itself cannot be the object of human vision, 
but can be known only by its “fruits,” and by “the witness of the 
Spirit,” therefore, the wonder could not be an effect produced in the 
minds of the witnesses by regeneration immediately, but only as an 
effect produced mediately by the effects of regeneration in the daily 
walk and conversation of the regenerated, for only thus can they ‘make 
their calling and election sure.’ The wonder-element then of the mira- 
cle of regeneration is an effect of an effect and not the essence. 5thly. 
“Klect infants dying in infancy,’ or adults converted in dying, since 
there would be no “human witnesses” of their regeneration, would not 
furnish the “miracle’’ element of regeneration. It would lack: (1) 
“Wonderful,” and (2) ‘‘Evidential.” 
(5) Let us apply the Doctor’s criteria: 
Ist. Creation, ‘when it occurred,” was not evidential (although after- 
wards it became evidential), therefore cannot be a miracle. 
Regeneration—of infants, e. g.—when it occurs, is not evidential 
(although, afterwards, it may become so should they live; if, however, 
