290 
out the Roman world ! That is a miracle ; — let the infidel make what he 
can of the fact. We point now to the simple words of that same Jesus 
of Nazareth, that the gates of hell should never prevail against the system 
He was going to found ; and we are quietly confident ; we know, come what 
may come, — ruat ccelum, — science and human knowledge and power, and 
“ heaven and earth shall pass away, — but His words shall not pass away" 
Mr. Reddie.— I must apologize to Dr. Irons for interrupting him. He 
will quite understand that it was only because our time was pressing, and I 
was anxious to bring him back from very wide questions as to general 
nature to the subject of miracles. Taking his concluding observations, how- 
ever, I must say that I do not think that even they quite bear upon the 
precise question we have before us. They are most interesting and im- 
portant, I admit ; and no doubt, in a certain sense, the propagation of the 
Christian religion and the existence of the Jews among the nations, are what 
we might call, in common parlance, u standing miracles. ’ But we are now 
discussing “ miracles ” in the ordinary sense, as signified by a precise word, 
having a definite meaning. The question is not one of the super-naturalism 
of revelation, or of grace ; neither is it a question of the marvels of nature, 
many of which were referred to by Mr. Manners in very eloquent terms. 
A stranger present might suppose that nobody here understood what we were 
talking about, or really knows what a miracle is ; and yet every common 
person in Judea knew what a “ notable miracle ” was ! In order to discuss 
our subject, we do not require to know all the laws of nature. Nobody ever 
alleged either that miracles were violations of all the laws ofnature,orthat they 
are standing violations of any natural law. Such a statement, if ever put 
forward, would be inconsistent with simple fact. We have only to deal with 
miracles as exceptional violations of distinct and simple laws, with which we 
are perfectly well acquainted. For instance, the very first miracle that our 
Lord wrought, was to convert water into wine. Now, we know that by the 
laws of nature, water will remain water, and we cannot even conceive any 
“ higher law,” of any kind whatever— I put it to the most fertile imagination 
of the most imaginative man of science or modern theologian we cannot, I 
say, conceive any possible “ law ” by which water could ever become wine. 
I must further say, that I think it is a great mistake to attempt to defend 
miracles upon any such principle as that they may perhaps be the results of 
other “ laws.” The very gist of them, the very object for which they were 
wrought, (and I think, in saying this, I shall yet gain the assent even of 
those whom for the moment I oppose,) was to show that they were 
wrought independent of all law, by means of the direct power of God. Even 
the very opening sentence of our paper, speaks of them as the “ miraculous 
interpositions of the Almighty ; ” and that is exactly what a miracle is. I 
must, however, quarrel somewhat with Mr. English’s more formal definition. 
He divides miracles into three classes, direct, mediate and providential ; but I 
venture to say that only one of these classes is what we have properly to deal 
with. As an instance of a “ direct miracle,” he takes the act of creation as 
being the direct act of God. Well ; if so, then every marvel of nature, such 
