NATURAL LAW AND MIRACLE. 



53 



knowledge of nature, i.e., of God's orderly government of the 

 cosmos. 



The Chairman : It is, in my judgment, important to decide what 

 we understand by " miracle." Assuredly we are not specially 

 concerned with the terafa, that is, " wonders," or acts of prodigy, 

 M'hich Christ foretold would be performed by false prophets. Acts 

 of a marvellous character, such as might be wrought by deceivers, 

 may have their proper interest ; but it is not in order to an under- 

 standing of such acts that Christian apologists are to-day devoting 

 their earnest thought to the subject before us. Rather the enquiry 

 is as to the semeia, or " signs," performed by Jesus Christ — not to 

 signs in general, but to signs specifically attributed to our Lord — 

 that thought is devoted. AYe are concerned to understand, and 

 place in relation to questions of faith, deeds which, as claimed, were 

 done by the exercise of divine power, and at length recorded in the 

 Gos^eh]tuith the object of inducing men to accept Christ ; in other Avords, 

 of leading them, although originally biased against Him, to believe on 

 Him, to rely on Him, as the Son of God, according as we read in 

 John XX, 30, 31, cp. c. 29. Strictly speaking, investigations 

 regarding miracles pass by, or ignore, mere wonders, and concern 

 themselves with deeds and performances which manifestly challenge 

 a recognition of the hand of the Infinite. In this light, certain 

 narratives recorded in the Old Testament assimie an importance 

 alongside those of the Xew, and, above all such miracles, alike in 

 significance and influence, stands the victorious resurrection of 

 Jesus Christ from the dead. 



Eev. John Tuckwell, M.R.A.S., said that if we vrere to avoid 

 confusion in our discussion we must have a little clearer definition 

 of our terms. We must take care not to deny the reasonableness of 

 the distinction between the natural and the supernatural. By the 

 natural I suppose we mean all that belongs to the cosmos — the 

 organized creation — which will include the subjects of all our 

 sureness, whether physical or otherwise. But there is, of course, 

 something beyond. The supernatural must have existed before 

 the natural, and be the antecedent from which it has sprung. The 

 cosmos must have had a beginning, but before that beginning there 

 was the supernatural Creator, the Author of it. Again scientific 

 knowledge must be distinguished from science properl\' so called. 

 Science is a fixed C[uantity and cannot be added to imtil our Creator 



