We therefore purpose a number of articles under the general title of

"New Testament Views of Christ." They will appear, we trust, with as

much regularity as the press of other matters will permit.

After the temptation, Jesus returned to where John was baptizing, and

began the work of gathering about Him His apostles. On different

occasions, as Jesus moved among the multitudes during this visit, John

pointed Him out as the Lamb of God. And John said, "I knew him not; but

he that sent me to baptize in water, he said unto me, Upon whomsoever

thou shalt see the Spirit descending and abiding upon him, the same is

he that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and borne

witness that this is the Son of God" (John i. 33, 34). Both before and

after this statement, John calls Him the Lamb of God. John knew that He

was to make the Messiah manifest to Israel by His baptism, for God had

told him so. He did not know Jesus to be the Christ till after His

baptism, yet he shrank back from the idea of baptizing him, and pleaded

his unworthiness. He was worthy, and specially appointed of God, to

make manifest the Messiah, but gave way under a sense of unworthiness

at the thought of baptizing his cousin, Jesus of Nazareth! What a flood

of light does this pour upon the private life of the Son of Mary! John

knew Jesus as a _man_; and while he doubtless had hopes that He was the

long-promised One, he did not _know_ it, and could not base his refusal

of baptism on that ground. John was baptizing for the remission of

sins, and required those whom he baptized to confess their sins, and

his knowledge of the spotless life of Jesus caused him to shrink at the

thought of administering to Him such a baptism. Thus impressed with the

purity and innocence of Jesus, it is not strange that he should call

Him the Lamb of God.

But innocence is not the only prominent feature in contemplating Jesus

as a lamb. The idea of sacrifice to which innocence and purity are

essential has pre-eminence. The first accepted offering on the earth,

of which we have an account, was a lamb. It was offered in faith; hence

by divine direction. That Abel saw anything in it beyond an act of

simple obedience to God in an arbitrary appointment, we have no reason

to believe. He did what God directed, and because it was directed. This

is the essential element of obedience in all ages, regardless of the

thing required. Nothing else can be the "obedience of faith."

What different conceptions had God and Abel of that sacrifice! Abel saw

in it only a "firstling of his flock." God saw in it His own Son--"the

Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world." Not only so, but on

this account was it directed. The fact that this was not revealed to

Abel, shows that God intends us to obey Him in what He directs, without

being concerned about the reasons He has for the requirement. He who

sees the end from the beginning makes the first in execution conform to

that which is to be last. Hence, the first act of worship, and every

subsequent act, from the divine point of view, harmonizes with the

perfection which in the fullness of times, was given us in Christ

Jesus. The lamb of Abel borrowed all its value and significance from

the Lamb of God. While we are enabled to see this through the

development of the scheme of redemption, he was not; and the fact that

his act of simple obedience in ignorance of God's far-seeing purposes

is recorded as an example for us, is of unspeakable value to the child

of faith.

During the four thousand years in which God was preparing the world for

Christ, both in patriarchal and Jewish worship, a lamb without spot or

blemish was the most prominent offering for sin. In every case the

offering was made as directed, and when made, the worshiper was assured

that his sin was forgiven. Christ is our sin-offering--the Lamb of God

that takes away our sins--and we must present Him before God as

divinely directed. We may build no strange fire on God's altars. We may

substitute nothing for Christ as an offering for sin, and no ways of

our own for God's way, in His presentation.

In viewing Christ as the Lamb of God--the Lamb slain from the

foundation of the world--the prominent feature of His saving

relationship to us is His _blood_. Hence we are redeemed, not with

silver and gold and perishable things, "but with the precious blood of

Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." As a Lamb,

Christ is sin-atoning. His power to save is not in the innocence of His

life, but the merits of His death. The sacrifice of an innocent life is

God's wisdom and power to save the world. Let us remember it was for

_us_ He was led as a lamb to the slaughter; that _our_ sins were laid

upon Him; that He was bruised for _our_ iniquities; that He bore _our_

sins in His bosom on the tree; that by His stripes we are healed; that

in His innocent life and sacrificial death, we behold the Lamb of God

that taketh away the sin of the world.

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

II.--CHRIST THE BREAD OF LIFE.

"I am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat the manna in the

wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which cometh down out

of heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living

bread which came down out of heaven; if any man eat of this bread,

he will live forever; yea, and the bread which I will give is my

flesh, for the life of the world" (John vi. 48-51).

When the Israelites came out of Egypt and started on their wilderness

journey to the promised land, they found themselves without sustenance.

The land furnished no supplies. In this respect they were cut off from

earthly resources. In their emergency they cried unto the Lord, and God

gave them bread from heaven. Each day they gathered the necessary

supply. The amount for the Sabbath was gathered the day preceding.

Beyond this there was no collection for future use. An effort to save

it proved a disgusting failure. Forty years did the daily supply of

manna fail not, till they reached the land that God had promised.

The bread on which God fed His people from the land of bondage to the

land of Canaan was a type of Christ. This is asserted by both Paul and

the Saviour. As such it is worthy of careful study.

1. The Israelites were wholly dependent on the daily bread which God

gave. This was a want which the world could not supply. They must feed

upon the heaven-supplied food or die. So is every one thus dependent on

the bread of life. The world can not supply the wants of the child of

God. He needs a daily food which the world does not produce. The world

is to him a spiritual desert. He can not look to it to meet the wants

of his spiritual nature. Being born from above, he has to live from

above. When he seeks to gratify the cravings of his carnal nature by

turning back to the flesh-pots of Egypt, he languishes and dies.

Be it remembered that this bread of life is Christ. It is not some

theory about Him. It is not some system of theology of man's

formulation. Men may feed upon systems and theories till their souls

are dwarfed and starved. Such feeding makes partisans and cold-blooded

sectarians, without imparting divine life to the soul. We must come

directly to Christ. Through His holy word we must study Him, assimilate

our lives to His, feed upon Him as the bread from heaven, and drink in

of His gracious spirit. The world took knowledge of the saints of old,

that they had been with Jesus. And so it may now easily decide as to

those of such holy companionship.

2. Christ is the bread of life. As such He has to be appropriated.

There is no virtue in bread to sustain life until it is appropriated

and assimilated to the system. Men may starve within reach of

abundance. God supplies the bread of life, but He does not compel men

to eat it. They are urged to eat and live, but they may refuse and die.

Oh, the millions in our land who are starving for the bread of life,

when it is offered them day by day! Unless we eat the body of the Son

of God we have no life. Our salvation, therefore, depends upon eating.

Yet there is no virtue in the act of eating. The virtue is in the thing

eaten. It is not putting on your coat that makes you warm, but the coat

after it is on. Faith is a condition of salvation; but there is no

power to save in believing. The saving virtue is in the thing believed.

So we may substitute nothing for that which God has given. We must eat

the bread which God provides, else all our eating will be in vain.

3. It is well understood by all classes that the wants of the physical

man need to be daily supplied. To meet these demands, is the chief

concern of the great mass of humanity. Observe that young man. He is in

the vigor of robust manhood. He has just enjoyed a night's refreshing

sleep and a hearty breakfast. His system seems to be overflowing with

an excess of vitality. He goes forth to his work boastful of his

strength. But how many hours is it till nature cries aloud for the

replenishing of his strength? How long can he live on the boastful

supply of his physical manhood? A few days finds him as helpless as a

babe. So essential is physical food to physical life.

Nor is spiritual food less essential to spiritual life. As new-born

babes we need the unadulterated milk of the word, that we may grow

thereby. As men and women, we need the strong meat adapted to our

maturity. The great mistake is in trying to live the spiritual life

without spiritual food. The strong men in Christ are the good feeders.

Those who feed upon the bread of heaven will develop in that which is

heavenly. No man has religion enough at the start to take him through

life, unless he dies early. The foolishness of the five foolish virgins

consisted in their not taking an additional supply of oil. So it is now

with every one who does not daily replenish his supply of spirituality.

He who tries to live without communion with God--in reading, in

praying, in meditation and obedience to the divine will--will end in

shameful failure.

Christian character is a growth, not a divine impartation. God does not

give spiritual strength in an arbitrary way. He provides the means to

that end. If we use them, strength results. If we neglect them, we die

in feebleness. The means in the figure before us is the bread of life,

and the bread of life is Christ. There is an absolute necessity,

therefore, for feeding upon Him. From Him all spiritual strength is

derived. He is the source of all life. He said to His disciples:

"Without me, ye can do nothing." As the branch draws its nourishment

and fruit-bearing qualities from the vine, so we draw all spirituality

and fruitfulness from Christ. We are fruitful in proportion as we abide

in the Vine; and we are strong in proportion to our feeding on the

bread of life.

4. God permitted Israel to gather manna for one day only at a time. So

in teaching His disciples to pray, the Saviour said: "Give us this day

our daily bread." Our bread of life is a never-failing supply. There

was no need of laying up manna, for God gave a fresh and abundant

supply every morning. This daily supply never ceased till their

pilgrimage was over. Of this they had assurance. Hence an attempt to

lay up a supply for future use was to distrust the God of their

fathers. The true bread of heaven is as unfailing as was the typical

bread of the wilderness. God's people will ever have an abundant supply

of that bread of which, if a man eats, he shall never hunger. Hence the

Saviour says: "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the

world."

5. The world has been greatly concerned about food for six thousand

years. The gratification of the appetite has both blessed and cursed

the race. Life has ever depended upon food; hence food has been the

chief concern of man. During the history of the world the race has been

ignorant of the processes of digestion and assimilation. They have

known nothing of the chemistry of this source of life. They have gone

on from age to age building up their bodies by taking food, wholly

ignorant of the process by which it was done. The value of the thing

eaten has never depended on a knowledge of the process by which it was

assimilated. We thank God that it is thus with the bread of life. We

may never expect to comprehend the "mystery of godliness" in this life.

Just how the bread of life enables us to live forever, we are not

concerned to know. It is enough for us to know that it is so. Let us,

then, appropriate this rich provision of God's grace, and the blessing

will be ours.

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

III.--CHRIST THE WATER OF LIFE.

"Jesus answered and said unto her, Every one that drinketh of this

water shall thirst again: but whosoever drinketh of the water that

I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall

give him shall become in him a well of water springing up unto

eternal life" (John iv. 13, 14).

"Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and

cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink"

(John vii. 37).

"And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of a

spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ" (I.

Cor. x. 4).

Twice was a rock smitten by Moses in the wilderness to supply the

Israelites with water. The first was at Rephidim, in the wilderness of

Sin, during the first year of their Exodus, before they came to Mount

Sinai. The second was at Kadesh, in the wilderness of Zin, in the

fortieth year of the Exodus. It is evident that the apostle refers to

the first of these, though we can hardly think, with most commentators

known to us, that he does so exclusively. The fact that the rock

followed them, as a type of Christ, in their wilderness life, demands

that it be from the beginning, rather than the end, of their journey.

And the fact that many who drank of it fell in the wilderness, requires

the same conclusion. But for reasons yet to appear, we think the two

are considered as one. The miracle was in all respects the same in the

second as in the first. There was the same dependence for life on the

second as the first. There was the same necessity that the second rock

or stream should follow them as there was of the first; for they were

yet a long way from Canaan, with a waterless desert before them. We

can, therefore, see no reason why the first should be a type of Christ

and not the second.

Was it the stream or the rock which followed the Israelites? Paul says

the rock. But commentators seem generally to agree that the "rock" is

here put by metonymy for the water of the rock, Barnes says, "It would

be absurd to suppose that the rock that was smitten by Moses literally

followed them in the wilderness." Just why it is more "absurd" to

suppose the rock followed them, than the stream from a stationary

fountain at Horeb, we are wholly unable to see. Let us look at the

facts and probabilities in the case.

We must keep in view the important fact, as mentioned in the last

chapter, that these people were _dependent on God_. They had seen the

mighty hand of God in their delivery, and now they were to be taught

dependence on Him, as the only source of life. They had, therefore, to

be sustained by miraculous food and miraculous drink. The country

supplied neither food nor water. The miraculous supply of water was as

great a necessity as that of bread. For two or three millions of

people, with their flocks and herds, a large stream, even a small

river, would be required. It is also true that their cattle had to have

food, as well as themselves. Just how this was furnished, we are not

told. Here is a large field for conjecture. It is generally held that

the river continued to flow from a stationary source at Horeb, and that

it irrigated the country in its following of the people, and thus

caused vegetation for the flocks and herds. But in the fortieth year

they are again found without water. Why was this? What had become of

the river that had followed them from the first year, if it was the

river, and not the rock, that followed them? On this point we can not

refrain from quoting Macknight and Barnes, as examples of how learned

commentators, led by a theory, sometimes drop their readers into a

perfect abyss of darkness. Macknight says: "For as Wall observes, from

Horeb, which was a high mountain, there may have been a descent to the

sea; and the Israelites during the thirty-seven years of their

journeying from Mount Sinai may have gone by those tracts of country in

which the waters from Horeb could follow them, till in the thirty-ninth

year of the Exodus they came to Ezion-gaber (Num. xxxiii. 36), which

was a part of the Red Sea a great way down the Arabian side, where it

is supposed the waters from Horeb went into that sea." Barnes says:

"Mount Horeb was higher than the adjacent country, and the water that

thus gushed from the rock, instead of collecting into a pool and

becoming stagnant, would flow off in the direction of the sea. The sea

to which it would naturally flow would be the Red Sea. The Israelites

doubtless, in their journeyings, would be influenced by the natural

direction of the water, or would not wander far from it, as it was

daily needful for the supply of their wants. At the end of thirty-seven

years we find the Israelites at Ezion-gaber, a seaport on the eastern

branch of the Red Sea, where the waters probably flowed into the sea

(Num. xxxiii. 36). In the fortieth year of their departure from Egypt,

they left this place to go into Canaan, by the country of Edom, and

were immediately in distress again by the want of water."

These comments involve several objectionable features. (1) The

Israelites were guided in their course by the pillar of cloud and fire;

not by the stream of water on its course to the sea. (2) Paul says the

rock followed them; not that they followed the river. (3) We can not

allow that when God sets out to work a miracle, He is defeated by

natural causes. The idea that the river ran into the sea, and left the

children of Israel without water, just because the situation would

naturally lead to that result, is to let go the miracle and have God

defeated, because the surroundings are not favorable! The idea that God

could cause a river to flow from a flinty rock, and then have to leave

it to seek its natural way to the sea, leaving His people destitute

when the surface of the country would be in the way of its natural

flow, is equaled only by admitting that God created the heavens and the

earth, but could not give sight to the blind or call Lazarus out of the

grave. We, therefore, repeat the question, If the river followed the

people, what became of it when they came into the wilderness of Zin?

On the hypothesis that it was the rock which followed them, just as

Paul says it was, there is nothing unreasonable in the supposition that

for some cause, not given, God withheld the flow of water to chastise

them for their wickedness, as He did in other ways, and make them

realize their dependence. As favoring this idea, when they were

destitute the second time, and cried unto Moses in their distress, God

told him to gather the people together and speak unto _the rock_. Not

only was there a suitable rock present for the second river of water,

but it seemed to be a particular rock. Hence designated "_the_ rock."

Our conclusion is, therefore, that the two rocks were one; that it

followed the Israelites during their entire journey to Canaan,

supplying the people with the _fresh_ out-gushings of its crystal

stream. That rock was typical of Christ, and the blessings of Christ

are never stale or stagnant, as the water from a fountain in Horeb

would have been, after winding its sluggish way through the parched

desert of Arabia.

"That rock was Christ." That is, it was a type of Him. All those

transactions were typical. "Now these things happened unto them by way

of types; and they were written for our admonition."

"A dry and thirsty land where no water is," well represents this world

to one who has not an ever-present Saviour as the fountain of the water

of life. As the Israelites would have perished without the crystal flow

from the flinty rock, so perishes the world without Christ. There is no

appetite more distressing than thirst. There is nothing more delightful

than the cooling draught to the parched throat. Oh, to those who thus

"thirst after righteousness," how delightful it is to be "filled"! "As

the heart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after

thee, O God." Only the thirsty can appreciate drink; so only those who

first feel the need of a Saviour can experience the joy of salvation.

Not only shall the thirsty soul be satisfied that drinks of the water

of life, but it shall "become within him a well of water springing up

unto eternal life." This refreshing and ever-present fountain of life

flows for all. "If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink." To

slake one's thirst at this fountain, is a foretaste of the river of

life that flows from beneath the throne in the eternal city of God.

Many who drank of the typical water of the wilderness, fell under the

displeasure of God, and died short of the promised land. Hence we

should be careful to live ever near to the water of life, that our

thirsty souls may be continually supplied, and our strength renewed.

Only by being constantly refreshed can we be saved from perishing in

the wilderness and kept unto the land of God beyond.

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

IV.--CHRIST THE SON OF GOD.

"Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Matt. xvi. 16).

"Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God abideth

in him and he in God" (I. John iv. 15).

"And who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth

that Jesus is the Son of God?" (I. John v. 5).

In one sense all men are sons of God. In a much dearer sense all

Christians are sons and daughters of the Almighty. But the relationship

of Christ to the Father is infinitely above this. He is _the_ Son of

God. God is His Father by direct production, without the agency of a

human father. The same divine power that can create life through the

agency of man, can create it without such agency. Hence there is

nothing to stumble over in the idea of the miraculous conception, to

one who fully accepts the God of the Bible in the character in which He

is revealed as a divine creator. To accept God as the creator of heaven

and earth, and then stagger at His performance of any miracle is a

logical absurdity.

Jesus claimed to be the Son of God in the high sense that involved

equality with the Father. He said: "I and the Father are one." On

account of this relationship, "He thought it not robbery to be equal

with God." His enemies understood that this equality was involved in

His claim; hence they charged Him with blasphemy in making Himself

equal with God.

This was a high claim on the part of the Nazarene. He claimed to be

more than a man. When some said that He was John, or Elijah, or

Jeremiah, or some one of the prophets, they underestimated Him

according to His claim. The greatest prophet, or inspired teacher, that

had ever appeared among men, _even if raised from the dead as the

special messenger of God to His people_, could not meet the demands

involved in the claim of Jesus, that He was the Son of God.

This high claim had to be sustained by two distinct lines of

testimony--miracles and a sinless life. The purpose of miracles is to

establish the claims of the miracle-worker and to glorify God. The

miracles of Jesus establish His divine mission and claim to the

Messiahship. No man could do the miracles He did "except God be with

him;" and God would not be with one who was advocating false claims.

The enemies of Jesus understood this; hence they said: "God heareth not

sinners." Miracles are the substratum of the foundation underlying our

faith.

While the divine claims of Jesus are attested by His miracles, the

evidence is crowned by His sublime character. His life is itself among

the most wonderful of miracles. As a child of poverty and a son of

toil, He lived thirty years among men. When He afterwards claimed to be

the Son of God, He had many bitter enemies. They persecuted Him even

unto death, and yet not one of them ever pointed to an act of His

private life as inconsistent with, or unworthy of, His divine claim.

This simple fact speaks volumes as to the purity of His life. The world

has contained but one such. The very life which His claims require is

the life revealed on the sacred page.

Infidels have ordinarily contented themselves with mere negations. They

seem not to realize the fact that in denying some things they are

logically bound to account for others. If we deny the claim of Jesus

that He is the Son of God, then we have to account for His miracles,

His life, the disposal of His entombed body, and the establishment and

development of His kingdom. These are facts. As such they have to be

accounted for. On the hypothesis that Jesus is the Christ, all

difficulty vanishes. On any other, it is more than the world has yet

been able to meet. Skeptics laud the character of Jesus as a model of

purity, such as the world has never elsewhere found, and yet deny the

claim on which was based His mission to men and on which He built His

church. How the establishment of a religion upon a known falsehood can

harmonize with a life of faultless purity, they do not pretend to tell

us, for it is a palpable absurdity. How His disciples could testify on

a point of fact in regard to which they could not be mistaken, and

surrender all worldly position and comfort, and life itself, to

establish a known falsehood in the hearts of men, in which they--the

witnesses--could have no personal interest, they leave in the Egyptian

darkness characteristic of their system. How can he account for

American history and American institutions who denies the existence of

Washington, or claims that he was a disreputable impostor? How, then,

shall he account for the history and institutions of civilization who

denies to Jesus of Nazareth existence as a man of that age and country,

or makes Him a base deceiver and vile impostor?

That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, is the fundamental, pivotal

fact in the Christian religion. It underlies every other feature of the

Christian system. On it turn the value and significance of every other

item of the faith. Everything takes position with regard to this, and

derives its value from it. With this, all else stands by divine

appointment, and bears the seal of heaven. Without it, the whole system

is but as the chaff which the wind driveth away.

When the proposition is established that Jesus is the Son of God, every

other feature of the Christian system rests upon _authority_. Nothing

else has to be proved as this does. Before establishing this proposition,

the word of Jesus settles nothing. After its establishment, it settles

everything. When we accept Him as the Christ, we accept all else on His

authority. Hence He says, "Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not

the things which I say?" "All authority hath been given unto me in

heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all

nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son,

and of the Holy Spirit." The making and baptizing of disciples rests

upon the authority of Jesus, and that authority is based upon His

Messiahship. So of every other item of the Christian system of faith.

The great inconsistency and consequent weakness of the religious world,

is in not accepting the simple authority of Jesus as conclusive and

wholly sufficient on any matter on which He has expressed the divine

mind. As the Son of God and coronated Lord of lords, His authority is

supreme, and His word is law. What He says is to be accepted as

infallibly true, and the end of all controversy. Whatever He directs is

to be done, simply because He directs it. Whatever else we may consider

a corroborative reason, the direction of Jesus alone is to determine

our action. Only this can be the obedience of faith. And in regard to

what He directs, there can be no compromise. The King speaks to be

obeyed, not to be argued with. It is His prerogative to command; ours

to obey.

Jesus made His authority the controlling principle in His religion.

Where this is maintained, the religion of Christ is preserved in its

purity. Where it is disregarded, anything follows that the tastes and

follies of men may demand. The religion of Christ is pure or corrupt in

proportion as His authority is observed or ignored.

The authority of Jesus can not be separated from His appointments. His

entire authority is embodied in each of His appointments. Hence he who

disregards an appointment of Jesus Christ, disregards His authority.

And he who disregards His authority, ignores His Lordship. The man who

deliberately refuses to do what Christ directs, ignores the authority

of his Lord, and dethrones the Son of the living God. Yet how much of

this do we see among men! Not only in the world, but in the church as

well. It seems strange that one should make a profession of the

religion of Christ, and yet thus ignore His Lordship. The authority of

Jesus against a life of indifference in the church, of non-attendance,

of want of coöperation in the work of the Lord, against carnality,

pleasure-loving, worldliness, the lusts of the flesh, want of

spirituality, and such like, is as direct and positive as that against

rejecting the gospel of Christ; and yet how many church members, all

over our land, are disregarding the authority of Jesus in these

matters. Those who make a profession of religion and live in the church

without continuing to honor the Lord Jesus by regarding His authority

and complying with His will, would better have never known the way of

life. The authority of Jesus follows us to the grave, and is never

relaxed for a day. His will, not ours, is to rule in our life. Our

desires, however strong, are to be subordinated to the mind of Him who

gave His life for ours, and said, "all authority in heaven and on earth

is given unto me."

It is the height of inconsistency, therefore, to exalt the name of

Jesus in words and professions, and speak lightly of, or disregard any

one of His appointments. It is not only inconsistent; it is disloyal

and wicked. This is the great stumbling-block in our way to the

indorsement of Mr. Moody and such men. We care not what else he may be,

we can indorse no man who tears in two the commission of Jesus Christ.

He who refuses to "speak as the oracles of God speak," in order to

promote his work, is not doing the work that God would have him do. We

can not honor Christ without honoring His teaching, and we can not

honor His teaching by withholding a part of it from those inquiring the

way of eternal life. We can honor Jesus as the Son of God only by

declaring His whole counsel, and yielding submissively in all things to

His divine authority.

This acceptance of Jesus as an infallible teacher, as one whose every

word is to be believed simply because He said it, and whose every

direction is to be observed simply because He directs it, whose spirit

is to be possessed and cultivated to the transforming of the life, till

we grow into the divine image and become partakers of the divine

nature, is all involved in the "good confession": Jesus is the Christ,

the Son of the living God.

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

V.--CHRIST THE SON OF MAN.

"The foxes have holes, and the birds of the heaven have nests; but

the Son of man hath not where to lay his head" (Matt. viii. 20).

"Who do men say that the Son of man is?" (Matt. xvi. 13).

"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must

the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth may in him

have eternal life" (John iii. 14).

It is a matter of profound gratitude that our Saviour was a man. "The

Son of man," as well as "the Son of God," was essential to His great

work of bringing salvation to the race. In one sense we are all sons of

man, but not as He was. He was not simply the Son of Mary and her

ancestors. He was the Son of humanity. He was equally akin to the race.

He touches humanity at every angle and on every side. While He was the

Son of David according to the flesh, He is the kinsman of the race as a

partaker of our common nature. "Since the children are sharers in flesh

and blood, he also himself, in like manner, partook of the same." He

ignored all accidental relationships closer than this shared by the

race. The members of His own household obtained not a blessing which He

did not as freely bestow on others. The fact that He did not manifest

greater partiality toward His mother has been a matter of comment. The

simple fact is, that the relationship with which we are concerned, and

of which the inspired record treats, is to the race; hence it is not

concerned about His personal family affections. His brothers and

sisters and mothers are those who hear His word and keep it.

The world has ever had too far-away ideas of God. It has contemplated

God at a great distance. It puts Him beyond the stars. Indeed, the

stars fade away from view in the distance behind us, as we ascend in

imagination to the dwelling-place of the Most High. The world can never

be suitably impressed with God's presence while it holds Him at a

distance. He can never be sensibly near unto us while we keep Him

beyond the stars. Nor can we be influenced by the idea of His presence

till we learn that "he is not far from each one of us."

God tried to impress His people anciently with the idea of His presence

by various visible manifestations. Abraham realized time and again that

God was his present companion and friend. When Jacob saw the ladder

reaching to heaven, and angels ascending and descending on it, he said,

"Surely, the Lord is in this place." And when Moses drew near to see

the burning bush, a voice from its flame demanded the removal of the

sandals from his feet, for the ground on which he stood was holy

ground.

God impressed Israel with the awfulness of His presence as a Lawgiver,

whom the nations were to honor, by His voice from Mount Sinai which

"shook the earth." The glorious manifestation of God's presence at the

tabernacle, in the midst of the camp of Israel, impressed them with the

fact that the God of their fathers was with them; that He was in their

midst; that He had not forgotten His covenant; and that He would be

with them to sustain them in every emergency till the end. With all

this, they often forgot God and went astray. What would they have done

without it?

In the person of Jesus, God perfected the divine purpose of bringing

Himself into a realized nearness to the human family. He clothed

Himself in our humanity, and became one with us. We are thus enabled to

look upon Him, to contemplate Him, not as a great, self-existing

Spirit, incomprehensible and awful, but as a _man_. Jesus was a man;

and "in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily." He is God

manifest in flesh. And as God is thus manifest, would He have us

apprehend Him. Just, therefore, as we can appreciate the nearness of

Jesus as a loving and sympathizing kinsman, may we appreciate the

nearness of His Father and our God.

It is evident that men need a God to whom they can get sensibly near.

There is no profit in the worship of a God of abstractions. There is in

it no food for the soul. What is there to satisfy the languishing soul

in a prayer to the "Great Unknown and Unknowable"? They that come to

God must believe that He _is_. And that "is" is a personal divine

being, into whose arms we may cast our helpless selves, and on whose

bosom we may pillow our weary head; instead of a great, bewildering,

incomprehensible abstraction, "without body, parts, or passions."

We are brought into a sacred nearness with God in the life of Jesus.

From His bed in the manger to His rest in a borrowed grave, we have a

life of abject poverty. He was the friend and companion of the poor.

The world is full of poverty, and ever will be. But the poorest of

every age and country find a companion and friend, of like sufferings

with themselves, in the person of Jesus. The cares and sorrows of life,

resulting from poverty, of which the world knows most as a daily

burden, were fully realized by Him; and in it all He is a deeply

sympathetic friend.

Jesus was a man of labor. The hands so often extended to bless

humanity, and through which the cruel nails were driven, were hardened

by daily toil. He never did a day's work with which His employers found

fault. Long after He had built mansions in the skies for them that love

Him, were the houses of His own workmanship standing in Galilee; but

when He laid aside His tools to do the work of His Father, no man ever

pointed to an earthly house and said, "This job is not in harmony with

His claims to be the Son of God." He knew what it was to be tired and

hungry. He doubtless knew the meaning of hard work and low wages. It

follows, therefore, that every son of toil, every burdened and weary

life, has for a gracious Redeemer and providential Saviour one who was

"a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief."

Jesus was a man of temptation. He was tempted as no other man was ever

tempted. The devil is the author of temptation, and he had a peculiar

interest in the temptation of Jesus. Through temptation comes sin. Sin

is the yielding of the will under temptation to do wrong. The devil had

a special interest in inducing Jesus to sin. He was the representative

of the race. Their fortunes were all involved in His. The consummation

of His work as a Redeemer required a sinless life. Hence if Jesus could

be induced to yield to temptation, the world's hope of salvation was

forever gone. It is evident, therefore, that the devil exhausted his

resources to accomplish that end. Consequently He was "tempted in all

points like as we are," and infinitely beyond what we know of

temptation. And He who withstood Satan in every onset has promised to

be with us to the end, and suffer us not to be tempted above what we

are able, if we only keep Him between us and the enemy of our souls. It

is a source of profound gratitude that we have a Saviour who has felt

in all its forms the tempting power of sin, who is full of sympathy for

us in our temptations, and who has promised to ever be in such our

faithful friend. Hence the great apostle to the Gentiles, whose life

was full of temptation and trial, gives us a reason why we should "draw

near with boldness unto the throne of grace," that "we have not a high

priest that can not be touched with the feelings of our infirmities;

but one that hath been in all points tempted like we are; yet without

sin." This very fact in the character of our Saviour gives us humble

boldness to approach the throne of grace that nothing else could give.

When we have given way under temptation, and our souls are burdened

with a sense of sin, we can come to God through the mediation of Jesus,

with a confidence that His sympathy for us has been perfected by the

experience of His own earthly life. For Christ was perfected for the

special parts of His work by His mission among men. "For it become him,

for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing

sons unto glory, to make the author of their salvation perfect through

sufferings." "And having been made perfect, he became unto all them

that obey him the author of eternal salvation."

In order to accomplish the great work of redeeming the race, Christ had

to be a _man_. He had to be human, as well as divine. Hence it was just

as essential that He be the Son of man as that He be the Son of God. He

had to make an offering for sin, and that required a human body. Hence

he says, "Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not. But a body didst

thou prepare for me." He had to be human in order to die, and divine in

order to conquer death. Hence, while we exalt His divinity, we must

none the less appreciate His humanity. We must not cease to contemplate

our Lord and Saviour as the Son of man.

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

VI.--CHRIST THE GREAT TEACHER.

"We know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do

these signs that thou does, except God be with him" (John iii. 2).

"And it came to pass, when Jesus ended these words, the multitudes

were astonished at his teaching: for he taught them as one having

authority, and not as their scribes" (Matt. vii. 28, 29).

"Never man spake like this man" (John vii. 46).

On "the great day of the feast"--the feast of the tabernacles--in the

second year of His ministry, Jesus was performing many miracles, and

there was great commotion among the people as to whether He was the

Christ. The chief priests and the Pharisees sent officers to take Him.

But they returned without Him. Then the chief priests and Pharisees

said, "Why did you not bring him?" They simply reply, "Never man so

spake." These were, doubtless, resolute men who were accustomed to

obeying orders. But in this case they did not obey orders, nor even try

to do it. Their excuse for not doing so was peculiar. They gave no

ordinary or natural circumstances as hindering the execution of orders.

They made no plea to exculpate themselves. They simply said, "No man

ever spake like this man." How, then, shall we account for this? There

was simply an unearthly majesty in the person, the manner and the words

of Jesus, that awed them into inaction. The very fact that such men

were so unnerved by the presence and words of Jesus, gives us an idea

of His majesty as a teacher, and of His power over men. Thus it was

that He could cleanse the temple, overturn the tables of the

money-changers, drive out the whole crew who were making merchandise of

the house of God, and no one resisted. When did the world produce

another man whose presence alone awed bold officers of the law into

disregard of duty, and the chastised multitude into non-resistance?

Jesus was the world's great teacher, and yet He was never taught. This

fact was recognized by those who knew His history. "The Jews therefore

marveled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?"

Jesus explained it by saying, "My teaching is not mine, but His that

sent me." This is the only satisfactory explanation that can be given.

That Jesus was a man of unequaled wisdom, surpassing infinitely all the

great philosophers of renown, is freely admitted by the best informed

of modern skeptics. That the world has been influenced by His teaching

infinitely beyond what it has been by that of any other man, is not

denied. That the world regards His teaching to-day, after eighteen

hundred years from the day of His death as a malefactor and His rest in

a borrowed grave, as it has never regarded the teaching of another man,

is also an admitted fact. How shall we account for such

teaching--teaching of such accumulating power over ages and generations

of men--when He Himself was untaught? The world can not answer the

question except as Jesus answered it: "My teaching is not mine, but His

that sent me."

Christ was the only teacher among men who never made a mistake. After

nearly two thousand years, during which His teaching has been subjected

to the severest scrutiny, He stands without conviction as to a single

error. Its ethics, its morals, its righteousness, its philosophy, its

wisdom, its accuracy, have stood the test of the most rigid investigation.

How can this be accounted for on the hypothesis that Jesus was only a

man? The greatest of all other men, with the advantage of the world's

best facilities, and under teachers of renown, have furnished the world

with teaching full of mistakes and imperfections. If Jesus were only a

man, how came it that He was so infinitely superior to all other men?

And if thus superior in wisdom, righteousness and purity, how belie

Himself in claiming to be infinitely more than a man? It were

impossible. The two things are mutually destructive. Jesus furnishes

the only explanation: "My teaching is not mine, but His that sent me."

Jesus is _the_ teacher of the science of salvation. Others before Him

taught the things pertaining to salvation, but their teaching was all

by the Spirit of God, framed with reference to what His was to be.

Others, after Him, taught the way of life, but they taught it as they

received it from Him. When He ascended to the Father He sent the Holy

Spirit as His advocate. The Spirit imparted to the apostles what He

received from Christ. He took the words of the coronated Christ and

gave them to the apostles, and they spake as the Spirit gave them

utterance (see John xvi. 7, 15). It follows, therefore, that the

teaching of the apostles is as infallible as that of the Christ, for it

is simply His.

It was not the purpose of Jesus to teach the wisdom of this world. He

was not of this world, and His teaching was not with reference to this

world. He came from another world, and the things pertaining to another

world were the ultimatum of His teaching. The way of salvation is

purely a matter of revelation. Man knows nothing about it except what

God has revealed through Christ. The same is true as to that from which

we are saved, and that to which we are saved. We know nothing of God,

heaven, hell and eternity, except that which is revealed. All that we

know of sin and its remedy we learn from the great Teacher. The nature

and the consequences of sin we learn from the same source. The

revelation of God is at once the source and limit of our knowledge of

sin and righteousness, and their consequences. In the whole scheme of

redemption Christ is the central figure; and on it He is the great

teacher and supreme authority.

Christ, as a teacher of law and morals, legislates for the heart. Men

can take cognizance only of deeds. They can not know the heart. Hence

they can judge it only by outward manifestations. But Christ knew what

was in man. Hence He could legislate for man's thoughts, as well as his

deeds. Hence He says: "Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt not

commit adultery: but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a

woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his

heart." Even the law of the Ten Commandments legislated against

adultery only as an outward act, but Christ legislates against the

thought. In this respect, as in many others, He is unique as a teacher.

Finally, He taught by His own authority. This was the cause of the

astonishment at the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount. "The

multitudes were astonished at His teaching; for He taught them as one

having authority, and not as their scribes." The scribes taught that

which "was said to them of old time," and the traditions of men, but

Christ said, "I say unto you." Mark this feature in that discourse. A

dozen times does he say, "_I_ say unto you." This was in harmony with

that which was predicted of Him as a teacher. "Moses indeed said, A

prophet shall the Lord God raise up unto you from among your brethren,

like unto me; to him shall ye hearken in all things whatsoever he shall

speak unto you. And it shall be, that every soul which shall not

hearken to that prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the

people." And in the presence of Moses and Elijah, the great teachers of

the past, the divine Father said: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am

well pleased; hear ye him." All this recognizes one of the fundamental

principles in the Christian religion--the supreme authority of Christ.

The world seems slow to learn that what He said He said by His own

authority, whether personally or through the apostles and prophets;

that it needs no other support, and that it is the irrepealable

_law_ of the kingdom of God. Because we are not under the law, but

under grace, many conclude that we have a religious latitude in which

we may legislate for ourselves, forgetting that Paul says we are "under

law to Christ."

In our supreme ignorance we need a teacher--an infallible teacher; and

that we have in the person of Jesus. In order to become wise unto

salvation, we must hear and learn of Him. In believing what He says,

and doing what He directs, we have His divine assurance of salvation

from sin and a home in heaven.

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

VII.--CHRIST THE DELIVERER.

"And he [Jesus] came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up; and

he entered, as his custom was, into the synagogue on the sabbath

day, and stood up to read. And there was delivered unto him the

book of the prophet Isaiah. And he opened the book, and found the

place where it was written,

The spirit of the Lord is upon me,

Because he anointed me to preach good tidings to the poor:

He hath sent me to proclaim release to the captives,

And recovering of sight to the blind,

To set at liberty them that are bruised,

To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.

And he closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant, and sat

down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fastened on him.

And he began to say unto them, To-day hath this scripture been

fulfilled in your ears" (Luke iv. 16-21).

This sublime passage is a quotation of Isaiah lxi. 1-3. It contains

several words indicating a character in which the Messiah was to

appear, strikingly appreciated by the Jews at the time of the prophecy.

Especially from the time of the Babylonish captivity did the Jews make

prominent the idea of a deliverer in the person of their promised

Messiah. "_Release_ to the _captives_" and "_liberty_ to the

_bruised_"--ill-treated by their captors--was to them a precious

proclamation, looked forward to with great anxiety, when deliverance

should be proclaimed and Israel should again be the free and favored

people of God.

Since this characteristic was so long appreciated as a matter of

prophecy, and Jesus announced its fulfillment in Himself, it is a

befitting occasion on which to briefly notice the relation of Christ to

prophecy. The understanding of this relationship is important at any

time, because it furnishes a valuable class of evidence as to the

Messiahship and divinity of Jesus. It is especially so at this time,

since infidels are making a special effort to destroy the value of

prophecy in this respect; and some from whom we should expect better

things seem to be assisting in the work.

A great deal of importance was given to Messianic prophecies during the

days of the Saviour and the apostolic age of the church. Indeed, this

was the main source of evidence to the Jewish mind that Jesus was the

Christ. And the use made of it by Christ and the apostles shows that it

was abundant.

When Jesus talked with two of the disciples on their way to Emmaus, on

the day of the resurrection, He said to them: "O foolish men, and slow

of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Behooved it

not the Christ to suffer these things, and to enter into his glory? And

beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them

in all the scriptures the things concerning himself." Here Jesus

Himself states that Moses and all the prophets prophesied of Him. And

when He had returned to Jerusalem, and stood in the midst of the

eleven, He said to them: "These are my words which I spake unto you,

while I was yet with you, how that all things must needs be fulfilled

which are written in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms

concerning me." Thus the books of Moses, and all the prophets, and the

psalms, contained teaching concerning the Christ, according to Jesus'

own statement; and it was all in the form of type and prophecy. Indeed,

types are but forms of prophecy.

Jesus charged the Jews with not believing Moses, and gave that as the

reason why they did not believe on Him. He said: "For if ye believe

Moses, ye would believe me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not

his writings how shall ye believe my words?" Like modern skeptics, they

did not believe the writings of Moses concerning the Messiah--did not

believe that they referred to the Messiah; hence their value was

destroyed, and they did not believe in Jesus. Had they believed these

prophecies they would have believed on Christ.

On the day of Pentecost Peter convinced the three thousand by argument

from prophecy concerning the Christ. In his sermon in Solomon's porch

the argument was likewise based upon prophecy. Paul's manner of

preaching (see Acts xvii. 1-3) was to show the prophecies of the Old

Testament concerning the Messiah and then show that these were

fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth. Therefore the conclusion was

necessitated that He was the Christ. As this was Paul's method, he

evidently attached to prophecy the highest possible value. That all the

apostles did this is evident from the statement of Peter. Speaking of

their being "eye-witnesses of His majesty," and of the infallible signs

He gave of His divinity, he says: "And we have the word of prophecy

made more sure; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a lamp

shining in a dark place."

How are we to determine the Messianic prophecies? We unhesitatingly

reply, by the example of Christ and the apostles. Three important

points are established by their testimony: (1) They teach that such

prophecies are numerous, and made by Moses, David, and all the

prophets. (2) They quote or refer to specifically, and thus apply,

quite a number. It is evident that these are Messianic, because so

applied. (3) Since Christ and the apostles designate a large number as

Messianic, we are safe in concluding that others are so that are of

like character. They are infallible judges, and they furnish us a

criterion by which to judge.

It is not true, as claimed, that in order to a Messianic prophecy, the

prophet making it must so understand it at the time. On the contrary,

Peter tells us that they searched diligently to ascertain the things

and the time of them referred to in their own prophecies concerning the

sufferings of the Christ and the glory that was to follow. (See I. Pet.

i. 10-12). They, therefore, did not understand the things or the time

referred to. Since they did not know these, they did not know that the

prophecy referred to the Messiah. The same Peter did not understand

some of his own utterances on the day of Pentecost. His language here

makes the promise of salvation to Gentiles as well as to Jews. But he

did not so understand it till he had a special revelation at Joppa and

the house of Cornelius.

Nor is it true, as claimed, that a Messianic prophecy must have been so

understood by the people before its fulfillment. Many of the Messianic

prophecies were not understood as such in Old Testament times. The

Saviour charged this want of understanding upon His disciples, and told

them that if they had correctly interpreted Moses and the prophets, in

this very respect, they would have known that His death was required by

such prophecies, and they would not have received the story of His

resurrection as an idle tale. Moreover, He charged the Jews that this

failure to understand Messianic prophecies, as such, was the ground of

their not believing on Him. (See John v. 45-47).

In regard to types, which is a feature of prophetic teaching, and a

strong chapter of evidence as to inspiration, Clark Braden says: "There

are but few real types in the Bible; that is, there are but few things

that men devised and acted with the intention of symbolizing or

typifying anything future. There are exceeding few that were devised or

acted with that as their sole object." It would be difficult for one to

crowd more flagrant error into the same space than the above contains,

if he were to make it a specialty. It contains the following positions,

all of which are false: (1) That there are but few types in the Bible.

(2) That types are _devised_ by _men_. (3) That types were "devised and

acted" by the same party. (4) That they were "devised and acted" by men

with the intention of typifying something future. (5) That this, in

order to their value as evidence of inspiration, should have been

"their sole object." This will do quite well for five lines. We would

suggest that _God_ devised types, not men. While men were the actors,

they were not the originators. While men may not have intended to

typify anything in the case, God did. While types were intended by God

to typify something future, this was not "their sole object." God had

in them a purpose for the actors in addition to their typical

significance. The purpose they then served detracts not from their

value as types. As to the comparative number, we prefer Paul as

authority. Speaking of the wilderness life of the Israelites, from

their baptism in the cloud and in the sea, he says: "Now these things

happened unto them by way of types [_tupoi_], and they were written for

our admonition." This history contains numerous types, Paul being

judge. Indeed, the patriarchal and Jewish religions were mainly

typical. When Noah built the ark to the saving of his house, it is not

probable that he thought of anything typical. Certainly that was not

the only purpose, nor the main purpose. But Peter says it was a type,

all the same.

The fact that God's people did not understand the full significance of

their worship, did not destroy its character or its value. The same is

true now. While God's oppressed people worshiped in types and symbols

which foreshadowed the perfection to come, they were taught by the

spirit of prophecy to look with longing anxiety to the coming of a

deliverer. While, in debate, we may not rely on a large number of

prophecies as Messianic, because the proof is not conclusive, it does

not effect the fact that many of them have that character.

To appreciate Christ as a deliverer one must realize his own

bondage--the slave of sin, and sold under its power. There is no

appreciation of the Deliverer till there is a longing for deliverance,

and no longing for deliverance till there is a hatred of bondage. Hence

one must have a just sense of the heinousness of sin before he can

appreciate Christ as a Saviour.

In coming to this world to deliver us, Christ had, in a sense, to come

within the dominion of Satan, and under the assaults of sin. This is

typfied by Moses going into Egypt to deliver his brethren. He had to

place himself under the reign of Pharaoh, and in order to deliver his

brethren he had to deliver himself. The Son of God took upon Him our

humanity. This He had to do to make a sacrifice and be a mediator for

us. In doing this He placed Himself under the tempting power of sin,

and was tempted in all points as we are. He had to save Himself from

this condition before He could save us. This was done through death and

the resurrection. With Him the old life ceased at the cross, and the

new one began from the grave. He conquered Satan--dragged the captor

captive--and was forever delivered from his tempting power. "He died

unto sin once," says Paul; and we die to sin just where He did, being

put to death by the cross. We are buried with Him, and rise with Him to

walk in newness of life. Thus the new life begins with us just where it

began with Him--from the grave--the grave of baptism in which we are

buried together and rise together. The denominational world want to

make the new life begin from the cross. But it did not thus begin with

Jesus, and Paul says it does not thus begin with us.

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

VIII.--CHRIST THE GREAT PHYSICIAN.

"They that are whole have no need of a physician; but they that are

sick. I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to

repentance" (Luke v. 31, 32).

"For this people's heart is waxed gross,

And their ears are dull of hearing,

And their eyes they have closed;

Lest haply they should perceive with their eyes,

And hear with their ears,

And understand with their heart,

And should turn again,

And I should heal them" (Matt. xiii. 15).

"He hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted" (Luke iv. 18).

Several times, either directly or indirectly, Christ alludes to Himself

as a physician. In this character He is worthy of careful study.

The first thing in order to appreciate a physician, is to realize that

one is sick. The Saviour says the well need not a physician. It is

equally true that the well care not for a physician. Sin is the disease

of which Christ, as a physician, is the healer. The disease is deadly.

The smallest amount is fatal. The Great Physician alone can heal it.

There is no other remedy. When a man is once affected, however much he

may keep it under control, and prevent its increase, there is never a

diminution of the disease till the remedy of the Great Physician is

applied.

There is much senseless talk about depravity that necessarily implies,

though its advocates may not so intend, that sin has comparatively

little condemnatory force. The idea so often expressed that one must be

"a great sinner in order to need a great Saviour;" that if he is only

"partially depraved, he needs to be only partially saved;" that he must

be "totally depraved in order to be totally lost;" that he must be

"totally depraved in order to be wholly dependent on Christ for

salvation," and such like, necessarily puts a light estimate upon sin.

The idea is, that if one has but a comparatively small amount of sin,

he is not wholly lost and utterly helpless, and wholly dependent on

Christ. When the simple fact is, that sin is so heinous in its

character and condemnatory in its consequences, that any amount of it,

whether much or little, renders one as helpless and hopeless and

dependent on Christ as if he were totally depraved by nature and doubly

defiled by a life of sin. There is, therefore, no necessity for total

depravity, in order that man be in an utterly lost and helpless

condition without Christ. A grain of strychnine is just as fatal as an

ounce, without an antidote.

In order that we appreciate a physician, and avail ourselves of the

benefits of his skill, we must have faith in him. Without faith that

his skill is superior to ours, and that he can help us, we will not

call upon him. If we have faith in him we will do as he directs. The

highest evidence of faith in a physician, and the surest way of being

benefited by his skill, is in going precisely by his directions. Some

years ago the writer had a long spell of typhoid fever. His physician

came to see him one hundred and thirty times. After he became

convalescent, his physician said to him one day, "In looking back over

your case, I can attribute your recovery to but two things--your

unyielding resolution and confidence, and your faith in your

physician." What did he mean by faith in my physician? What had that to

do with it? He explained. "For," said he, "you followed my directions

minutely in everything, and for more than seven weeks the least wabble

would have turned the scale against you." This was a fine illustration

of faith, but theologically he attached to the word a very different

idea.

Such must be our faith in the Great Physician that we apply to Him for

the treatment of a sin-sick soul. And having called upon Him, we are to

follow His directions. On one occasion He said to the Pharisees, "Why

do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" So in

this case He would say, "Why do you call on me as a physician, and do

not as I direct you?" As well apply to an earthly physician and expect

to be healed by faith in his skill, without taking his medicine or

following his directions in other respects, as to expect the Great

Physician to heal you in the same way. This illustrates the absolute

folly of expecting to be "justified by faith only" in the Great

Physician of souls, before and without doing as He directs. Our faith

in a physician is valuable only as it induces us to take his remedies.

When it leads to this, it has fulfilled its only office. When it does

not lead to this, it is worthless. So of our faith in Christ. The only

value of faith is in its leading to the observance of the divine will.

The faith that does this saves, because it leads us to where God saves

us. God promises salvation in the doing of His will. "Not every one

that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven;

but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven." Faith leads

to the doing of the Father's will. In this it performs its only office,

and in this it saves. Faith can have value only as it leads to the

appropriation and use of the remedies prescribed.

It is often the case that a physician is stationary, and his patients

have to come to him in order to get the benefits of his treatment. In

such case, the acts necessary to take us to him are essential to our

recovery, though they have no virtue whatever except as means of

reaching him. So of coming to Christ. Christ does not come to the

sinner, as orthodox prayers at the mourners' bench imply; but He

invites the sinner to come to Him. "Come unto me, all ye that labor and

are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." "And you will not come to

me that you may have life." Believing on Christ is one thing, and

coming to Him is quite another. One must first believe before he will

come. Yet, in addition to believing, the orthodox world, so-called,

utterly fails to tell us how to come to Christ. They cry, "Come, come,"

but tell us not how. Christ plainly teaches that we come to Him in

obedience. We are baptized into Him; into His body. We put Him on by

baptism. Being baptized into Christ is Paul's explanation of how we

become the children of God by faith. "Ye are all sons of God, through

faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ

did put on Christ." We come to Christ, then, in baptism. This is the

first overt act in the "obedience of faith." Our faith, repentance and

baptism bring us to Christ; then He, as the Great Physician, heals our

sin-sick soul. There is no healing virtue in these things that bring us

to Him; but they are conditions of our healing because they are means

of our reaching the Physician.

The remedy for sin is the Physician's own blood. That is the only thing

in the universe of God that can heal the disease of sin, and remove the

ruinous consequences. "The blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanses

from all sin." The blood of animal sacrifices could not take away sin.

"For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take

away sins." Since animal sacrifice could not meet the demands of the

law, God prepared a body for His Son in which to make a sacrifice.

"Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not,

But a body thou didst prepare me."

Hence we are redeemed from the curse of sin, not with corruptible

things, "but with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish and

without spot, even the blood of Christ." "And without the shedding of

blood there was no remission."

It is plain, therefore, that the blood of the Physician is the only

remedy. This remedy is freely given when we come to Him.

Jesus said: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so

must the Son of Man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth may in him

have eternal life." The Israelites were commanded to look upon the

brazen serpent; and they that looked were healed. They had to have

faith, in order to look with a view to being healed. Looking was the

thing commanded. It was the result of faith. In looking they were

healed. But there was no virtue in the looking. Looking, in and of

itself, had no power to heal. Still it was essential to the healing.

Neither had the thing looked upon any power to heal. There was no

virtue in the serpent. The healing power lay back of that. It was in

God, who had promised. God did the healing. But while there was no

healing virtue in the look nor in the thing looked upon, they were

necessary to the healing, because to this end were they commanded. They

were, therefore, necessary to bring one to the point in the obedience

of faith where God promised to heal. So it is with the Great Healer of

souls. They that believe shall _in Him_ find the healing power. Their

faith leads them to Him, where the healing power is applied, as the

look brought the Israelites to the healing power of God. Our obedience

that brings us to Christ is the outgrowth of our faith, just as their

look was the outgrowth of theirs. There is no healing virtue in the one

nor the other, but they were and are necessary to bring the believer

where the healing virtue is.

After all that is said about being saved by faith, and by other things,

it is simply true that _Christ_ saves us. _He_ is our Saviour. And He

saves us by means of His own blood.

"There is a fountain filled with blood,

Drawn from Immanuel's veins;

And sinners plunged beneath that flood

Lose all their guilty stains."

It is thus that Christ is precious to us as the great Physician of

souls. We should give heed to His inviting voice, place ourselves under

His continued care, follow His directions, and we shall enjoy a healed

and healthful state of the soul.

"The great Physician now is near,

The sympathizing Jesus;

He speaks, the drooping heart to cheer:

Oh, hear the voice of Jesus."

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

IX.--CHRIST OUR MEDIATOR.

"For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men,

himself man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all; the

testimony to be borne in its own time" (I. Tim. ii. 5-6).

A mediator is one who comes between alienated parties to effect a

reconciliation. He must be the friend, the advocate and equal of both

parties. Failing in one of these, he is incapacitated. No one would

accept a mediator whom he believed would be wanting in any of these

respects in his relations to him. No one is fit to mediate who is not

qualified to do justice to both parties. This he can not do unless he

knows the rights of both and is the friend of both. He must be unbiased

in his judgment and impartial in his friendship. He must be considered

the equal of both, in so far, at least, as his knowledge of them and

his ability to judge between them is concerned.

A mediator between God and men implies alienation between them. The

history of the race shows this to be true. The time was when they were

one; when not a feeling or a shadow came between them. The bliss of

Eden reached its daily acme when the footfall of God was heard amid its

bowers. The hour that He joined their company was that of supreme joy.

But man sinned, and then the presence of God was shunned. That which

was delightful before is painful now. Such is the principle of

congeniality; and such the consequences of sin--to make of heaven a

hell. This fact alone should teach us that it lies not within the

limits of divine power to make a heaven for sinful men. Separation from

God is hell; and with the soul defiled by sin, union is worse than

separation.

After the fall of man he could no longer stand in the immediate

presence of God, as he was wont to do before. Sin can not approach the

divine presence, hence he needed a mediator, one to stand between him

and an offended God, through whom he might again be heard and blessed.

Mediators of an imperfect and typical character were had in that age of

preparation for the coming perfection. But where could a perfect

mediator be found to stand between an offended God and rebellious man?

Where in all the universe could one be found the friend and equal of

both parties? Where could one be found that could stand on equality

with God, know what was just and right in regard to Him, and, at the

same time know the weaknesses, the wants and the rights of man? Where

was one who could poise with one hand the scales of God's justice and

gather fallen humanity to his bosom with the other? The boundless

dominions of God contained not such a being. Man could not thus act,

for the best of men are themselves sinners, and can approach God only

through a mediator. The best of men know nothing of God's side of this

matter, and they fall below equality with Him, as the earth is below

the stars. An angel could not stand between God and men, for he can not

descend to equality with fleshly natures, to know their weaknesses and

their wants; nor can ascend the heights of divine perfection till he

knows the mind and the rights of God. In the Divine Logos, and the

Divine Spirit we find, in a sense, equality with God, but no equality

with men. How, then, is this great problem, that on which the world's

salvation turns, to be solved? The human and the divine must be

blended. They must meet and dwell in one. This is accomplished, not by

lifting the human up to the divine, but by bringing the divine down to

the human. God glories in condescension.

The Word that was in the beginning with God, that was God in His divine

attributes, became flesh and dwelt among us. In the person of the babe

of Bethlehem we have a being that never before existed--a being both

human and divine. He brought from the skies the divinity of His Father,

and dwelt among men with the humanity of His mother. Hence the mighty

chasm between man and God, between earth and heaven, is bridged over in

the God-man, Christ Jesus. His divinity reaches half-way from heaven to

earth, and His humanity half-way from earth to heaven, and the two

unite in Him.

In the life of Jesus we see His two natures constantly manifested. As

He hungers and thirsts and sleeps; as He weeps over the sins of men,

and sorrows over their afflictions, we see His humanity. He seems to be

only a man. But when He stills the tempest on the Sea of Galilee, or

calls Lazarus back to life, we see His divinity. It is interesting to

study His life with a view to the manifestation of His two natures in

each event--their distinctness and their blending.

We may never know in this life the reasons for the blending of the

divine and the human in the person of the mediator. These things are

doubtless beyond the ken of an archangel, in all their fullness. Yet

from our point of view, obscured by our fleshly weakness, we may see

some reasons lying on the surface why this was a necessity. Some of

these let us consider.

Man fell through the weakness of the flesh and the power of temptation.

Satan works through the flesh to pollute the spirit. In order to be one

with us in our temptation, and perfect Himself as an experimental

sympathizer, our mediator must be tempted in all points like as we are,

that He may know how we feel under temptation. This demanded that He

take upon Himself not the nature of angels, but that of the seed of

Abraham. He must, therefore, be a man. But this temptation is to be

successfully met. It is to be without sin. No man had ever successfully

withstood the assaults of Satan. Our mediator was to do this. Hence the

necessity of divinity. He must be human to be tempted; He must be

divine to resist it. And to make His victory the more complete, He had

His flesh put to the sorest test. After a fast of forty days, when His

long pent-up hunger rushed upon Him as a lion upon its prey, Satan

approached and exhausted his strength to overcome Him. Not only did He

give Satan this advantage, such as he had never had nor needed over

men, but He even went out of the flesh, into the citadel of which Satan

held the keys, and came out a triumphant conqueror. Hence His humanity

in order to enter in; His divinity in order to come out.

The scheme of redemption contemplated a sacrifice for the sins of the

world. Men must get rid of sin. They had no power of themselves to do

this. Sin must be remitted. This demanded a sacrifice for sin. "Without

the shedding of blood there is no remission." The blood shed must be

the blood of humanity. It must contain the life under condemnation.

Hence the "blood of bulls and of goats could not take away sin." It

could not reach and cleanse the conscience. It was used as an imperfect

type, but the perfection required the blood that courses in human

veins; but the victim must be innocent. It must be absolutely free from

sin. Only a sinless offering can meet the requirements of the divine

government. Hence, in order to offer the blood of the condemned race,

our mediator must be human; in order to offer it in innocence, He must

be divine.

The completion of the preparation of our mediator for His work as such,

required His death and resurrection. It is shocking to the mind of some

to speak of Christ having to be educated and perfected for His office

of mediator, but this He asserts Himself. "For it became him, for whom

are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons

unto glory, to make the author of their salvation perfect through

sufferings." "Though he was a Son, yet learned he obedience by the

things which he suffered; and having been made perfect, he became unto

all them that obey him, the author of eternal salvation." This

officiating for man as mediator and high priest, is the only thing, as

we now remember, in which Christ is said to have been specially

qualified by His life among men. This is significant. The reasons for

it are easily seen in the foregoing. He had to become a man, and these

things peculiar to humanity He had to learn.

In offering Himself a sacrifice for sin, our mediator had to die. In

order to His work as such, of which His death was only preparatory, He

had to live again. His death was voluntary. He said, "I have power to

lay down my life, and I have power to take it up again." In order to

lay down His life, He had to be human; in order to take it up again, He

had to be divine.

Having accomplished His preparatory work, Christ returned to the Father

to make an atonement, and to sit henceforth as a mediator between God

and men. He was equal with God before He left the heavens; He became

the equal of man in His sojourn in the world. Hence He is now perfectly

qualified for His work. But we find that we can not dispose of this

subject in one chapter.

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

X.--CHRIST OUR MEDIATOR.--CONTINUED.

"But now hath he [Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by

how much also He is the mediator of a better covenant, which was

established upon better promises" (Heb. viii. 6).

Having considered Christ's preparatory work, His earthly mission, we

wish now to consider His office and work as mediator between God and

men. Christ sought no additional honor because of His message to men

and suffering on their account. On the contrary, He prayed: "And now, O

Father, glorify thou me with thine own self, with the glory which I had

with thee before the world was." But while He sought no additional

glory, He found additional work. The office He now fills existed not

till He ascended to the Father from an empty grave. He descended into

the dominion of death and robbed it of its power. He dragged the captor

captive, and gave gifts unto men. Ascending, as a conquering king, His

angelic retinue raise the exultant shout: "Lift up your heads, O ye

gates, and be ye lifted up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory

shall come in." "Who is this King of glory?" the guardian hosts shout

back. "The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle." Again,

the gates of the eternal city are shaken with the shout: "Lift up your

heads, O ye gates; even lift them up, ye everlasting doors; and the

King of glory shall come in."

Christ was coronated King of kings and Lord of lords. He began at once

His work of mediation. Through the Holy Spirit, sent as His advocate,

He convicts men of sin, and brings them into harmony and union with

God. His mediatorship involves a work of reconciliation. This is His

fundamental work. The old theology was that Christ labors to reconcile

God to men. Indeed, the world is not yet as free from the thought as

the truth and the honor of God demand. Whatever may be true of the

atonement, one thing is certain, it grew out of the love of God. "God

so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever

believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life." Any theory,

therefore, that does not harmonize with this is false. God already

loves the world. He loves sinners, even, who are not penitent. He is

not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to

repentance. How dishonoring to God, then, to represent Him as unwilling

to save agonizing sinners; so that the protracted prayers of the church

are necessary, and often unavailing! Paul says that God was in Christ,

reconciling the world unto Himself. The world had transgressed, had

gone away from God, and Christ's mission as mediator, is to bring it

back in agreement and submission to the divine will.

The importance of the mediatorial office of Christ is very improperly

apprehended. The necessity of a mediator between us and God can never

be fully realized in this life. This belongs to that association of

deep and profound mysteries emanating from the mind of God, that angels

intently desire to look into. We are permitted to see only the surface

in this life. But we know enough about the general character of His

work, to know, that it has a value far above the world's comprehension.

When one stands as our intercessor we are favored in proportion to his

standing with the other party. When one seeks a favor at the hands of

the chief executive of the nation, if he has no standing of his own,

all depends on the standing of his advocate. If the one interceding for

him stands high in the president's favor, and has great influence with

him, his request is favorably considered on account of his advocate.

When we consider the standing of the Son with the Father; that through

Him the Father has sought the reconciliation of the world; that He is

the "brightness, the Father's glory, and the express image of his

person;" we have perfect confidence that His pleadings will prevail.

But when the Father "so loved the world as to give his Son to die for

it;" when He so loves sinners that His great loving heart goes out in

yearnings for their salvation, why should His loving, struggling

children need an intercessor with Him at all? This has been one of the

questions of the ages. Theories more curious than satisfactory have

been promulgated concerning it by the different schools of theology. We

shall not presume to answer it, beyond the simple suggestion that this

was the special work for which the divine Logos that was in the

beginning with God, had to qualify Himself by special education. Hence

it is a matter not of difference between the love and goodness of the

Father and that of the Son, but of qualification by _experience_ in the

trials, temptations and weaknesses of the flesh. The consideration of

this fact would have saved the world from much vain speculation.

When Paul argues the importance of a mediator, it is not on the ground

that the Son loves us more than the Father, but on the ground that He

knows us by experience. "For we have not a high priest that can not be

touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but one that hath been in

all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us, therefore,

draw near with boldness unto the throne of grace." The fact that our

high priest, or intercessor, was "tempted in all points, like as we

are," is the reason why we may approach a throne of grace with

boldness. This boldness is simply a profound confidence based upon the

humanity of our mediator.

When we approach a throne of grace, conscious of sin and imperfection,

how little can we trust ourselves. We realize that we come empty-handed

before God. With the poet, each can sing:

"Nothing in my hands I bring,

Simply to Thy cross I cling."

We can plead no merit of our own. We have no legal claim on the

store-house of God's boundless mercy and love. But we remember that we

have a Friend; that this Friend has suffered the same trials and

temptations; that He knows by bitter experience just how we feel; that

He deeply sympathizes with us, and that He loves us with a devotion and

faithfulness beyond human experience or expression. Remembering this,

how can we feel otherwise than confident that an already loving Father

will hear our petitions in harmony with His will, and bless us as His

believing children? The efficacy of prayer, therefore, grows out of the

mediatorship of Jesus, and the confidence in prayer grows out of our

appreciation of the mediator and of His work. Hence a light

appreciation of the mediatorial work of Jesus leads to a prayerless

life.

Jesus Himself taught that there is no way of approach to the Father

except through Him. "I am the way, the truth and the life; no man

cometh unto the Father but by me." No man can approach God _in his own

name_. God does not look upon men in their own personality. He looks

upon them only _through their mediator_; and what He sees to commend,

is seen and commended only through, and on account of, their mediator.

In other words, God sees the mediator only, not them. Hence the man

that does not accept the mediator cuts himself off from God. He rejects

the only way of approach to God. He prevents God's considering his

case; for God considers us only through the mediator. It is this fact,

that God considers the mediator through whom the petition is made,

rather than the petitioner, that gives significance to the fact that

our prayers are to be _in the name_ of Jesus Christ; and that we ask

that our petitions be granted for "Christ's sake." At a throne of grace

we present the name of our intercessor. We ask in _his name_, not our

own. We present Him, not ourselves. We hide ourselves behind Him, put

Him in our place, and ask what God will do for Him. He authorizes us to

thus use His name, and the blessings bestowed are just to the extent

that that name prevails with God. Should Vanderbilt grant you the legal

right to use his name to the full extent of your desire in presentation

of checks, etc.; with his pledge to redeem all paper bearing his

signature in your hand, his whole fortune would be pledged to meet the

demands of your drafts upon him. Bankrupt financially, as you are

spiritually, you present your check for a large amount and it would be

rejected. But add to that the name of Vanderbilt, and your check is

honored. You draw the money not in your name, but in his. The bank sees

not you, but him. Now, just as you would thus present the name of

Vanderbilt, with full assurance of your request being granted to the

extent of his fortune, you to-day present the name of Jesus at the

court of heaven, and a heaven honors that name; its resources are

pledged to meet your petition. The name of Jesus, therefore, when thus

presented, means to us all that it signifies in the government of God.

To the extent that His name is honored are heavenly blessings secured

to us.

In the light of these sublime truths, we see the significance of the

Saviour's requirement that henceforth all prayer should be offered in

His name. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, if ye shall ask anything of

the Father, he will give it to you in my name. Hitherto ye have asked

nothing in my name; ask, and ye shall receive." What is called the

Lord's Prayer, is not in His name, because His mediatorship had not

then been established. But now it would be sinful to repeat that

prayer, as thousands do, and omit to offer it in the name of Christ.

The custom of Masons, and other secret orders, of having a form of

religion that ignores Christ, that does not recognize His mediatorship

and that is not offered in His name, is supremely wicked. It is a gross

perversion of the religion of Jesus. And how Christian men, even

preachers of the gospel, can find it in their hearts to acquiesce in

such a thing, is to us a profound puzzle. The institution that has no

place for my Master has no place for me.

The only way of approach to God is through Christ as our mediator; and

the mediatorial office of Christ is in the church, not in the world.

Hence, as God can be glorified only through Christ, He can be glorified

only through the church. Paul, recognizing this, says: "Unto God be

glory in the church, by Christ Jesus, throughout all ages, world

without end. Amen."

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

XI.--CHRIST OUR HIGH PRIEST.

"Now, if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for

under it hath the people received the law), what further need _was

there_ that another priest should arise after the order of

Melchisedec, and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron? For the

priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also

of the law. For he of whom these things are said belongeth to

another tribe, from which no man hath given attendance at the

altar. For it is evident that our Lord hath sprung out of Judah; as

to which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priests. And _what we

say_ is yet more abundantly evident, if after the likeness of

Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, who hath been made, not

after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an

endless life, for it is witnessed of him, Thou art a priest forever

after the order of Melchisedec" (Heb. vii. 11-17).

Each dispensation has had its priesthood. Each has had its priests and

its high priests. Each has had its priests, its altars and its

sacrifices peculiar to itself. Only priests in any age could worship

God; and acceptable worship must ever be in accordance with the law of

the priesthood.

During the patriarchal age the father of the family was priest. He

offered sacrifice for the family. The grandfather, great grandfather,

etc., was high priest over his posterity for all the generations

descending from him while he lived. Adam was high priest of the whole

race during his life. Then the high priesthood descended to each of his

sons for the posterity of each. So Noah was high priest of all the

post-diluvian world during his life. Then it descended to each of his

sons. Each son was high priest of his branch of the family, in all its

generations, during his life. In that age, therefore, as in this, there

was a universal priesthood. The priesthood of the Christian

dispensation is, in a certain sense, modeled after the patriarchal and

in contrast with the Jewish. It is after the order of Melchisedec, and

not after that of Aaron. Melchisedec was high priest of that division

of the human family to which Abraham belonged, and this distinguished

patriarch paid tithes to him. If we do not misinterpret the law of the

priesthood of that age, this could have been none other than Shem. Shem

was then living, and Noah was dead; and Abraham belonged to Shem's

posterity. Hence no one else could be high priest while Shem lived.

Many have thought that because it is said he was "without father,

without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor

end of life," that he could not be a man. But they fail to observe that

he was without these things _in the Aaronic priesthood_. For it is said

that he had a genealogy, but that it was not in the priestly family.

"And they indeed of the sons of Levi that receive the priest's office

have commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law,

that is, of their brethren, though these have come out of the loins of

Abraham; but he whose genealogy is not counted from them hath taken

tithes of Abraham." Shem had neither father nor mother, nor beginning

of days, nor end of life, in the sense that the Aaronic priests had

them; and this is all that is affirmed of Melchisedec.

When God called His people out of Egyptian bondage, and gave them the

law, He gave them a new priesthood. The priests were now all confined

to the tribe of Levi and the family of Aaron. Men could no longer build

their own altars and offer their own sacrifices. On the contrary, they

had all to bring their offering to the priests appointed of the family

of Aaron, and have them make the offering. With a change of the

priesthood came a change of the law. "For," says Paul, "the priesthood

being changed, there is made of necessity a change also in the law."

The law thus changed was the law of worship through the priesthood. And

as it was through this worship that pardon was obtained, the change of

priesthood changed the law of pardon. Hence the law of pardon under

each priesthood has been different from that under either of the

others. After the establishment of the Aaronic priesthood, a descendant

of Jacob could no longer build his altar and offer his sacrifice just

as he had done before the change. And now a priest under the Christian

dispensation can not offer acceptable worship as did either the Jew or

the patriarch. The worship that once brought to one the divine blessing

would now bring upon him a curse. How strange it is, then, that the

denominational world in large measure go back to a different priesthood

for their ideas of religion and salvation.

Under the law the kings and the priests were of two distinct tribes.

These were of the tribe of Levi; those of the tribe of Judah. Hence it

is written: "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a law-giver

from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the

gathering of the people be." Christ was of the tribe of Judah; hence

He, like Melchisedec, is both priest and king. He could not be a priest

of the Aaronic order, for he was of a different tribe--a tribe of which

Moses spoke nothing concerning the priesthood. Hence all the efforts to

make Him a priest of that kind are refuted by that simple fact. Many

insist that Christ was inducted into His priestly office at His

baptism, and many vain speculations are based thereon. But this can not

be. Christ was not a priest while He was on the earth, says Paul in

these words: "Now, if he were on earth he would not be a priest at all,

seeing there are those who offer the gifts according to the law" (Heb.

viii. 4). He could not be a priest on earth, because the Aaronic

priesthood was then in force, and He was not of the Aaronic family.

Since He could not be a priest while on earth, it is folly to talk of

His becoming a priest at His baptism. He could not become a priest till

the law of the priesthood was changed, and that was not changed till

after His death. The Aaronic priesthood was in full force till His

death. He was made high priest, not by the legal ritual, but by the

oath of God; and this oath was "_after the law_," not while it was in

force. The law continued till His death, hence it was after His death

that He was made high priest by the oath of God. He was a sacrifice

when He died, not a priest. He could not be priest and sacrifice at the

same time. After His ascension He, as high priest, made atonement with

His own blood which He shed as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.

Hence a number of facts show the utter folly of claiming that He was a

priest among men.

It is through Christ as high priest that we worship God. We can worship

acceptably in no other way. There are no other means of access to the

Father. Only through and by the priesthood can God be worshiped. Hence

the worshiper must become a priest, and then worship through Christ as

high priest. All pretensions to approach God in worship, without

recognizing Christ as our high priest and mediator, is only an

exhibition of an infidel farce. It is an insult to God, because a

rejection of His Son. Hence those who do not accept Christ as their

high priest cut themselves off from access to the Father. Christ

Himself says, "No man cometh unto the Father but by me."

Paul makes it a matter of rejoicing that we have a great high priest

who can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; one that has

been tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin. Such a high

priest knows how to sympathize with us, and to make for us all just

excuses.

The earthly high priest went once a year, on the great day of

atonement, into the most holy place, with the blood of others, to make

atonement for the sins of Israel; but Christ, as the high priest of the

good things to come, has entered the holy place on high, with His own

blood, to make atonement for the sins of the whole world. The offerings

made by the priests under the law pertained only to the cleansing of

the flesh; but the blood offered by our high priest "cleanses the

conscience from dead works to serve the living God."

NEW TESTAMENT VIEWS OF CHRIST.

XII.--CHRIST OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

"But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom

from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption:

that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory

in the Lord" (I. Cor. i. 30, 31).

In this language Paul affirms that Christ is our righteousness. This is

a momentous thought. It goes to the heart of the scheme of redemption.

How is Christ our righteousness? What does Paul mean by the

affirmation? The very life of Christianity is involved in the answer.

By one's answer we know just where to place him in regard to the vital

principles of Christianity.

That one must be righteous in order to be prepared for heaven, must be

conceded by those who accept the Bible as authority. "Know ye not that

the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God." And this must be

a positive, not simply a relative, righteousness. Men may be

comparatively righteous, and yet be wholly unprepared for the presence

of God. The righteousness required in order to a home in heaven is

absolute. All unrighteousness is sin, and one must be perfectly free

from sin to be accepted in the Beloved. No sin can enter heaven. One

can not stand in the presence of God, accepted through the

righteousness of Christ, with the least taint of sin upon his soul.

Hence perfect righteousness is required. One must be righteous even as

Christ Himself is righteous. Knowing this to be true, and knowing our

own imperfections and shortcomings, even in our best estate, it is no

wonder that the way is described as narrow. One can not but see at a

glance his utter hopelessness if he has to depend on himself. If Christ

has made any provision by which this righteousness can be attained then

one can not but appreciate what Christ has done for him and his

absolute dependence on Him for salvation.

Two distinct kinds of righteousness are clearly defined in the Word of

God. They are in striking contrast. One is approved; the other

condemned. One is of God; the other of men. One is of faith; the other

of law.

God's righteousness is not only a divine, holy principle of justice and

mercy, but is also a system or plan of salvation. When Jesus applied to

John for baptism, John declined. He was preaching the "baptism of

repentance for the remission of sins." He also required a confession of

their sins. They were baptized of him in Jordan, "confessing their

sins." While he did not know Jesus to be the Christ, he knew Him as his

kinsman, and he knew enough of the purity and sinlessness of His life

to think that He should not confess His sins to be baptized for their

remission. Besides he doubtless hoped that Jesus would be the favored

one on whom he was to see the Holy Spirit descending and abiding upon

Him. He, therefore, felt himself unworthy to baptize his cousin Jesus.

But Jesus said, "Suffer it now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all

righteousness." No matter what John's personal feelings were, or the

sinlessness and purity of Jesus, it became the duty of one as the

administrator and the other as the subject to observe this divine

appointment. Had their idea been that baptism was to be administered to

those free from sin, such an objection could never have been raised.

Here the word "righteousness" evidently refers to God's appointments in

the divine economy--the plan of salvation.

When Peter went to the house of Cornelius to break the bread of life to

the Gentiles, he said: "I now perceive that God is no respecter of

persons, but in every nation he that feareth God and worketh

righteousness is accepted of him." Here "righteousness" is something to

be "worked." It is, therefore, something to be done. In it men are

active. It is not, therefore, a quality in God or man, but something

that enlists the activities of men. It is a plan by the observance of

which men are accepted of God.

Speaking of his own brethren according to the flesh, Paul says:

"Brethren, my heart's desire and supplication to God is for them, that

they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for

God, but not according to knowledge. For being ignorant of God's

righteousness, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit

themselves to the righteousness of God" (Rom. x. 1-3). Here the

righteousness of God is contrasted with that of the unbelieving Jews.

They rejected God's, and set up one of their own. They did not submit

to God's righteousness. Here it is clearly a religious system, a plan

of salvation. They rejected God's plan and tried to establish one of

their own. In this they were zealous, but it was a misguided zeal.

In harmony with this idea of righteousness we understand the expression

in the first chapter of this epistle: "For I am not ashamed of the

gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that

believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is

revealed a righteousness of God by faith unto faith: as it is written,

But the righteous shall live by faith." Here we understand God's

righteousness to be God's plan of saving or justifying men by faith;

the plan to which the Jews would not submit in the tenth chapter.

Hence, in the gospel, God's system of justification by faith is

revealed in order to faith. Faith comes by hearing the word of God. In

the gospel God's plan of saving men by faith in Christ is revealed, and

this is the only place in which it is revealed. Consequently the truth

herein revealed produces faith. This results in the acceptance of God's

plan of salvation.

We have "the faith" as a system of salvation through Christ, and faith

as a personal state of the mind and heart. So, also, have we

righteousness as a plan of salvation which we accept from God, and

righteousness as a personal quality--a state of personal freedom from

sin. And the one leads to the other, as a revelation of "the faith"

produces personal faith.

This leads us to consider how we obtain that perfect righteousness,

without which we can not enjoy the blissful presence of God.

Paul's teaching in regard to the personal righteousness of the saints,

makes salvation by a mere reformation of life, an impossibility. The

importance of this fact can not be over-estimated. Many people seem to

think that a reformation in regard to moral conduct, is all that is

necessary to prepare to meet God. If they can only break off their

sinful practices, and practice morality, they think they have done all

that is really essential. In this there are two fatal mistakes. First,

no reformation is perfect. The best of men whose lives have been

moulded into the divine image, and are most conformed to the divine

nature, have their imperfections. The ripest saint upon the earth feels

that if his salvation depended on his perfect sinlessness in conduct

for the rest of life, the chances of heaven would at once become dark

and hopeless. The cheerfulness and bright assurance of the child of God

are not because he hopes to live a perfect life, but because his

imperfections will be taken away in Christ. And second, the most

perfect reformation would avail nothing. Could one so reform his life

as to never sin again, and practice virtue in place of the former vice,

it would fall far short of securing the end. However free from sin one

may live in the future, the sins of the past are upon him. These will

forever condemn him, unless they are removed. Our ceasing to sin will

not take away the old ones. The fact that a man refuses to contract any

more debts, will not pay a dollar of his old ones. So no amount of

reformation will make amends for the past. Our past sins must be taken

away, else they will condemn us in the day of eternity. We can not

remove them ourselves; we can not atone for our own sins. Here we are

utterly helpless. To what source, then, shall we go? Christ is the only

refuge. He alone can take away our sins; His blood alone can cleanse

from sin. "If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have

fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son,

cleanseth us from all sin." This is the "fountain opened in the house

of David for all manner of sin and uncleanness." "Though your sins be

as scarlet, he will make them white as wool." "He will put them as far

from us as the east is from the west, and remember them against us no

more forever." Thus it is that Christ is our righteousness. We are

righteous because He has made us such. He makes us such by taking away

our sins. When our sins are pardoned, we are as free from sin as if we

had never sinned at all. Hence as regards the guilt of sin, we are

perfect. We are made perfect in righteousness because Christ removes

all unrighteousness. We are, therefore, absolutely dependent on Him

for salvation. We have no righteousness of our own. Our robes of

self-righteousness are but filthy tatters in His sight. Those clothed

in the righteousness of Christ, that is, the righteousness which Christ

gives them, shall have right to the tree of life, and shall enter

through the gates into the eternal city. Their right is not one of

merit, but one that Christ has given. He is our righteousness, and

apart from Him none is possibly attainable.

Since we have to be perfectly righteous in order to be saved, and since

this is impossible on our part, when relying on ourselves, but is

obtained only by being pardoned through Christ, it follows that all

boasting is cut off. No man has occasion to glory except in the cross

of Christ. Hence the apostle concludes his argument by saying: "He that

glorieth let him glory in the Lord." It also follows that he who would

obtain personal righteousness, must submit to the "righteousness of

God"--God's plan of salvation. Through the one "righteousness," is the

other righteousness obtained.