400 
the Scriptures do not assert that they have been wrought. If miracles were 
thus rendered common and ordinary, they would cease to have all their 
essential value. I understand by a miracle an act of God out of the ordinary 
course of nature, wrought in attestation of a revelation. But if Almighty God 
is constantly interfering with the laws of nature on trifling occasions, how 
am I to know when a miracle attests a revelation ? It is on this ground that 
I think it is a dangerous position to assume the existence of multitudes of 
miracles which are not recorded in the Bible for the mere purpose of helping 
us over Scripture difficulties. 
Mr. Moule. — Dr. Thornton places the numbers at the Exodus as the most 
difficult question to deal with. Let me read what he says in his 12th para- 
graph : — 
“ But we now arrive at a number which has been a difficulty and an 
offence to many, and is, so to speak, the very basis of the operations of 
Dr. Colenso and his followers against the authenticity of the Old Testament, 
— I mean the number of the Israelites who passed the Red Sea into the 
desert of Sinai.” 
But in his letter just now read I am glad to see that Dr. Thornton 
retracts the view put forward in his paper, and says it was a hasty state- 
ment. There, however, it stands as the basis of the operation ; and when I 
began to write my paper I felt that if I could show that his principles would 
not apply to that, his system would be upset. 
Mr. Graham. — I had some idea of not taking any part in this dis- 
cussion, because after Dr. Thornton’s paper came out, I felt that the positions 
which he took up in it were untenable, and I stated so to our then Honorary 
Secretary, the late esteemed Mr. Reddie, who asked me to put my views 
on paper and send them to him. I did so, and he sent them on to Dr. 
Thornton, and they appear in page 141 of the present volume of the J ournal 
of Transactions. I therefore thought it was almost superfluous for me to 
enter into this discussion now ; but at all events I shall endeavour not to 
repeat myself in what I now say. I think the subject assumes an altogether 
new character on account of the concessions which Dr. Thornton has made. 
(Hear, hear.) He states that what Mr. Gosse has written (and he has been 
pleased to allude to what I have written also) has modified his views. I 
would not for one moment connect Dr. Thornton with Dr. Colenso, for I 
regard his views as orthodox, probably just as orthodox as those of any of 
ourselves ; and I do not for one moment impugn his motives or the objects of 
his paper on the numerical system of the Old Testament. I think it is ex- 
ceedingly creditable to him that the reasoning of the two papers now before us 
should have modified his views. If I understand his concessions rightly, he 
wholly gives up certain positions which he had previously taken in his paper. 
I must disagree with Mr. Row in his view that the point relating to the 
600,000 Israelites who came out of Egypt under Moses was not the most 
important part of Dr. Thornton’s paper, for I take it that that is really the 
great subject that runs through the whole paper, and it certainly struck me, 
when it appeared, that it was the thing which was most objectionable ; and 
