e boy, but his recovery in connection with the
word of Jesus. What they felt they had to account for was not merely the
marvellous recovery, but his recovery at that particular time. Even
though it could be shown, then,--as it can never be,--that every cure
reported in the Gospels might possibly be the result of some natural
law, even though it could be shown that men born blind might receive
their sight without a miracle, and that persons who had consulted the
best physician suddenly recovered strength--this, we are to remember, is
by no means the whole of what we have to account for. We have to account
not only for sudden, and certainly most extraordinary cures, but also
for these cures following uniformly, and in every case the word of One
who said the cure would follow. It is this coincidence which puts it
beyond a doubt that the cures can be referred only to the will of
Christ.

Another striking feature of this miracle is that the Agent was at a
distance from the subject of it. This is, of course, quite beyond our
comprehension. We cannot understand how the will of Jesus, without
employing any known physical means of communication between Himself and
the boy, without even appearing before him so as to seem to inspire him
by look or word, should instantaneously effect his cure. The only
possible link of such a kind between the boy and Jesus was that he may
have been aware that his father had gone to seek help for him, from a
renowned physician, and may have had his hopes greatly excited. This
supposition is, however, gratuitous. The boy may quite as likely have
been delirious, or too young to know anything; and even though this
slender link did exist, no sensible person will build much on that. And
certainly it is encouraging to find that even while on earth our Lord
did not require to be in contact with the person healed. "His word was
as effective as His presence." And if it is credible that while on earth
He could heal at the distance of twenty miles, it is difficult to
disbelieve that He can from heaven exercise the same omnipotent will.

NOTE.--It is not apparent why John appends the remark, "This is again
the second sign that Jesus did, having come out of Judaea into Galilee."
He may, perhaps, have only intended to call attention more distinctly to
the place where the miracle was wrought. This idea is supported by the
fact that John shows, on parallel lines, the manifestation of Christ in
Judaea and in Galile