I fully admit that reason is opposed to the supposition of such an order of nature as to require repeated interferences with it, assuming that what is intended is a frequent meddling with it to set it right, not constant presence and superintendence. Still more is it opposed to the idea of arbitrary interruption of law. The entire validity of these reasonings which we have been considering proceeds on the assumption that the argument requires this. I care not what some Christian apologists may have said on this subject. The New Testament affirms in the most unequivocal language that revelation is the steady carrying out of a pre‐determined purpose in God to make a manifestation of Himself not only to man, but to other rational beings besides man. The objection therefore falls to the ground. The assertion that it is impossible to conceive of the supreme Being acting otherwise than we see him act in nature, may be met by a direct denial. On the contrary the presence of evil, moral and physical, forms the greatest difficulty connected with the belief in theism. The elder Mill was so capable of conceiving that if a supreme Being existed, the order of the universe would have been so wholly different from its present order, that it led him to affirm that the proof of His existence was altogether wanting.(3) But intelligent Christians fully recognize in the immutable order and regularity of the universe and the eternal prevalence of law, the operation of His infinite wisdom and power. Unless there was such a general regularity and order in the universe, the evidential force of miracles would be deprived of all value.