Mr. Buckley.-— There is no clear proof that that was a miracle at all on 
their part. 
Mr. B. W. Dibden. — There is the witch of Endor. 
Mr. Buckley. — I cannot see— and I speak with great reverence — that 
God did not Himself permit that. There are a great many difficulties con- 
nected with the question ; but I cannot find any distinct and clear evidence 
of the devil having wrought an undoubted miracle, such as, in our idea, 
would be an interference with the ordinary laws of nature. I cannot find 
anything that the devil has ever done which comes up to my conception of 
a distinct miracle.* 
Bev. T. M. Gorman. — I am much surprised at the criticism which Mr. 
Buckley has uttered with regard to the witch of Endor. Let us consider 
what were the chief points in relation to that event. Saul was commanded 
under pain of death not to consult the witch ; but when the Lord did not 
answer him, he did so. Is it possible for any one to believe that God would 
cause Samuel, His prophet, to present a being from the other world to break 
the Lord’s own command ? That would be aiding in the breaking of His 
own command. The witch, by enchantments well known and constantly 
exercised in those days, did cause a spirit to rise, and that touches the 
whole question with regard to the working of miracles. 
Mr. Bow. — I have not very much to say in reply to the discussion which 
has taken place to-night. My object in writing this paper was to carry out a 
suggestion made by Dr. Thornton, that there was one subject upon which we 
had never touched, but which seriously affected the interests of Christianity ; 
I mean the question of historical criticism : consequently I wrote this paper, 
which goes over a wide space, but which of course cannot be supposed to 
treat the subject completely or exhaustively. The whole of the paper has 
been written in view of many of the attacks made upon Christianity. I have 
not mentioned them, because I wanted to produce a philosophical paper ; but 
any person who is well acquainted with modern controversies, will see that 
there is hardly any portion of the paper which has not a distinct bearing 
upon them. As to what has fallen from Dr. Currey, I think he sup- 
poses that we are more at issue than is really the case. In fact, 
he has mistaken the passage in Butler to which I alluded. I do not deny 
that I had the passage he refers to, in my mind ; but the one to which I 
specially referred was that in which he expresses his opinion, that to a higher 
order of intelligence than man, miracles may seem to be brought about 
by God in a natural order ; in one word, that which appears to be the dis- 
tinction between the natural and the miraculous, may, in the eyes of a higher 
order of intelligence, form one great comprehensive whole. I alluded 
also to similar views to those maintained in the Duke of Argyll’s Reign of 
Law , and in Mr. Warington’s book, which latter work I have heard 
* Most commentators consider the events detailed in St. Matthew, xii. 24 
et seq ., to support a view similar to that enunciated by Mr. Buckley. [Ed.] 
