motive, every duty, every joy and hope of the Christian as he is described in the New Testament. Christian love is there, not love merely in the abstract, (if such is in any case possible,) but love to Jesus Christ, and to all men because "in Christ" The grand question proposed is, "Lovest thou ME?" Christian obedience is not obedience merely to a code of moral precepts, but to Jesus Christ and "His commandments." Christian faith is not faith in "mysteries," or things unseen, or truths revealed, though such faith may be Christian, but its essence is faith in Jesus Christ the living Person; the supreme command being, "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ." The Christian's hope is "hope in Christ;" his joy, "joy in Christ;" his peace, "peace in Christ;" his labour, "labour in Christ;" his strength, "strength in Christ;" his life, "life in Christ;" his death, "death in Christ;" his immortality, "rising in Christ;" his salvation, "salvation through Christ;" and his heaven, "to be with Christ!" On the other hand, all that is evil and disastrous to the soul is summed up in being "without Christ." To reject Christ, not to believe in Christ, to be enemies of Christ, to despise Christ, to be ignorant of Christ, to lose Christ, to be commanded at the last to depart from Christ—these are the characteristics of the wicked and lost: for "there is no other name given among men whereby man can be saved than the name of Jesus Christ."
You will observe that I am not at present discussing what Christ has done for us, but what, as a matter of fact, Jesus Christ claimed from us and from all men, and recognised to be the religion which He came to establish upon earth. I repeat it, therefore, that whether these claims were founded on fact or fiction, whether the religion which He taught was true or false, in accordance with, or opposed to, the will of God, that nevertheless its sum and substance is supreme love to Jesus Christ.
Now, if this, or anything even approaching to this, is true, my reader will, I am sure, acknowledge that it is not possible to separate Christ from the Christianity of the New Testament. The person and the "religion" become, in fact, identical—so far at least that both must be received or rejected. That a code of morals may be extracted from the New Testament, and Jesus himself, as its centre, be put aside, is quite possible; or that the character of Jesus may be recognised as a perfect example of what He taught, a living embodiment of His "beautiful precepts," is also possible, without recognising His claim to the supreme love and unlimited obedience of every human being; but the question still remains, whether this "philosophic" or "rational" system—this Christianity is really the Christianity taught by Christ, or by Peter, Paul, and John? I do not argue as to which "religion," "system," or "Christianity" is the best, but ask only a question of fact, Which do you candidly believe to be the Christianity of the New Testament? If you hesitate ere you reply to this question of historical fact, open again the New Testament, with a manly resolution to examine it, and obtain information, and ask its pages, What is Christianity? Read even such passages as the following:—John x., xiv., and xv.; Acts. first four chapters; the Epistles to the Ephesians and Philippians—portions of Scripture which may be read almost in an hour or two. You do not require to master the whole world of truth which is there revealed, but only to notice the Sun of that world; and say, is it not faith in Jesus, love to Jesus, obedience to Jesus as to no one else in the universe except to God Almighty?
I at once frankly express my earnest conviction that this, if true, involves the truth of what are recognised to be the other "peculiar" doctrines or facts of Christianity—such as the divine, as well as holy and perfect character of the Person so loved;—His atoning work, as the grandest expression of His love to us, and that which most of all kindles love in us to Him;—the teaching of the Holy Spirit, through whom alone we, who are spiritually blind, can so perceive the spiritual character and glory of Jesus as to admire and love Him;—and prayer, by which we can hold actual, personal intercourse with, and thus come to know and love Jesus more and more from experience: these, I say, and other doctrines appear to me to be involved in the very idea that Christianity is supreme love to Jesus Christ. But I shall not consider any of them except one, the first and all-important, the very pillar and ground of the truth—viz., the divinity of Christ's Person. Let us therefore inquire—
II.
WHO WAS JESUS CHRIST?
A more important question cannot be proposed for our consideration! Who is this, I ask with absorbing interest, whom I am commanded to honour as I honour the living God? Who is this who claims my unreserved faith, my unlimited obedience, my devoted love? Who is this who promises to pardon my sins through faith in His blood; to purify and perfect my nature through faith in His power? Who is this in whom I am to abide in life; into whose hands I am to commit my spirit, and the spirits of all who are dear to me, in the hour of death; whose voice is to call me forth from the grave when He comes again, and who is finally to judge me, and to determine my eternal condition?
That Jesus Christ does make those claims upon us, and those promises to us, is certain; and it is equally certain that they have been, and are, joyfully acquiesced in by the Christian Church. The question, then, which I have proposed for your consideration, is confessedly one of equal importance with the truth of Christianity. We cannot, with sincerity and intelligence, profess a willingness to examine into the nature of the Christian religion, much less profess faith in it, and yet reject the consideration of the question regarding the Person of Jesus Christ as being unimportant or unnecessary.
But before proceeding further in this inquiry, let me remind you, and be myself reminded, of the moral importance of truthfulness. I do not allude to the truthfulness which despises all hypocrisy in word, and seeks to maintain with sacred care an exact harmony between what is believed in the heart, and confessed with the lip; or which boasts, perhaps, of the honesty that never conceals a creed, however offensive its doctrines may be to others. Let us not undervalue this kind of honesty when real. But, alas! how often is it only apparent, while the real feeling is selfish vanity craving notoriety, or moral indifference which is insensible to the pain of either the existence or confession of unbelief. And thus where that truthfulness of character exists, which cannot give to others a false impression of what is really believed, how often is there wanting the kind of truthfulness, so much rarer and more difficult to attain, so much nobler and more important to possess, which seeks to harmonise not only profession with belief, but belief with truth itself. For it is in the innermost sanctuary of the spirit, into which no human eye can penetrate, and where truth, as a holy messenger sent from God, presents herself, seeking for admission to dwell there, and take possession of the soul's temple for ever—it is there that the reality of a man's truthfulness, sincerity, and honesty must be tried and decided upon by the all-seeing Judge, who can alone search the heart. How do we deal there with what claims to be truth? With what spirit do we listen to her voice? With what care do we examine her credentials? These are questions settled in the secret of our own personal experience; and just as the process of investigation is conducted before the eye of conscience, can it be determined whether or not we are really honest. But as sure as there is in us a genuine truthfulness of spirit, it will, by a divine instinct, recognise truth when revealed. Like a string rightly tuned by God, the truthful soul will strike an harmonious chord with the note of truth wherever it sounds. The "single" eye will perceive the light from whatever quarter it shines. When, therefore, I ask my readers to consider, with sincerity and honesty, the teaching of the Scriptures regarding the Person of Jesus Christ, I crave from them that kind of honesty which is evidenced by the whole tone and spirit with which they deal with what professes to come from God, and what, therefore, claims their faith because it is true, and their love because it is good.
I. Consider this question in the light of His own teaching. By this I mean, read the Gospels, and from all Jesus said regarding Himself, say what impression did He intend to convey as to His own person. Remember I am not asserting the truth of His claims, but proposing merely to inquire into what His claims as a matter of fact were, in so far as we may fairly gather these from His own words. Nor do I dispute the possibility of giving a different meaning to His words, for I know, and most gladly acquiesce in the righteousness of the fact, that revelation is not demonstration, which necessarily overcomes even the truth-hater, but such evidence as by its nature may
