spiritual good. Is man popular? So was Jesus; and he used his influence to purify his Father's house. Is man forsaken by his last friend? So was Jesus; and he upbraided and murmured not, but sought consolation in communion with the Father. Does man visit and dine with the learned and the religious formalists of the age? So did Jesus; and in his conversation he maintained the claims of spiritual religion, and reproved man's hypocrisy and formality. Does man sit down in the cottage of the poor? So did Jesus; and he encouraged and comforted the inmates with spiritual instruction. Is man present when a group of friends are assembled on an occasion which warrants innocent enjoyment? So was Jesus; and he approved their social pleasures. Is man called to sympathise with those in affliction? So was Jesus; and Jesus wept! Thus by land and by sea, in all places and under all circumstances, wherever any of earth's children are called to act, Jesus-the model Man-is seen living and moving before them; and his voice falls upon their ear with the mingled cadence of authority and en couragement-"FOLLOW ME!"

The demonstration then is manifest, that through the medium of Jesus Christ, man has received a perfect system of instruction; and a final and perfect revelation of duty to God and man could be given in no other way.

CHAPTER XI.

CONCERNING SOME OF THE PECULIAR PROOFS OF THE MESSIAHSHIP OF CHRIST.

We have now arrived at a point in our subject where the light of history will aid in our investigations. The facts which history furnishes, and which will elucidate the present point of inquiry, are the following: First, the Jewish prophets lived and wrote centuries before the period in which Jesus appeared in Judæa. This fact is as certain as any other item of human knowledge.

A second fact is-The Jews, about the time of Christ's appearance, expected with more earnestness and desire than usual, the appearance of their Messiah, who, they supposed, would deliver them from subjection to Gentile nations, and place the Jewish power in the ascendant among the nations of the earth. They generally supposed that as a king he would reign with great dignity and power, and as a priest, preside over, not abrogate, the ceremonial law. Although some of the common people may have had some understanding of the true nature of the Messiah's kingdom, yet the prominent men of the nation, and the great body of the people of all classes, were not expecting that the kingdom of Christ would be purely spiritual, but that it would be mainly temporal. And, indeed, it was necessary that they should not have a clear conception of the worth and spirituality of

the Messiah's dispensation, previously to his coming; because if they had had such a concep tion, the imperfections and darkness of their own dispensation would not have been borne. It is contrary to the nature of mind when it is en lightened, to delight in, and employ itself longer about, the preparatory steps that led it to the light.

The facts in the case, then, were, first, the prophets lived and wrote centuries before the era of Christ; and, second, On account of intimations, or supposed intimations, in their prophecies, the Jews were expecting the Messiah about the time that Jesus appeared in Judæa. With the question concerning the inspiration of the prophets we have nothing to do. Whether they were inspired or not, their books contained the matter upon which the Jews founded their expectations of the appearance of the Messiah. With the question how the Jews could mistake the character of the Messiah, we have nothing to do; although the solution of the question would not be difficult. The simple facts which require attention are-The prophecies existed; and in those prophecies a Ruler was spoken of, of most exalted character, whose dominion would be triumphant, universal, and endless-whose doctrines would be pure and spiritual; and whose administration would be a blessing, not only to the Jews, but also to the Gentiles-and yet, his life would be humble, and not suited to the feeling of the Jews-his sufferings extreme; and that he would terminate the old dispensation, and die for the sins of the people.*

Now, in view of these facts, In what character

Isaiah liii. Dan. ix. 24-27. Micah v. 1, 2. Mal. iii. 1—3. Zech. ix. 9, 10. Isa. ix. 1-7.

would the true Messiah appear, when he assumed his duties as the Instructor of mankind?

If he had appeared and conformed to the views which the Jews entertained of a temporal Messiah, it would have been direct evidence that he was an impostor; because the Jewish views of his character and reign, as all can now see, were selfish, ambitious, imperfect, and partial. Now, a teacher sent from God to give the world a perfect religion, could not conform to such views; but an impostor, from the nature of the case, could have conformed to no other standard than the views of the people If an impostor wished to pass himself upon the Jews as their Messiah, he must assume that cha racter and conform to that conduct which he knew they expected in their Messiah. For an impostor to assume a different character from that which he knew the nation expected their Messiah would bear, would have been to use means to frustrate his own plans, which would be impossible; because man cannot have a governing desire for the attainment of an end, and at the same time use means which he knows will frustrate the accomplishment of his own object. An impostor, therefore, in the state of expectancy which existed at that time in Judæa, could not do otherwise than conform himself to the character which the nation were expecting their Messiah would possess

Mark the two points. The prophets gave a delineation of the character, life, and death of the Messiah. This delineation the Jews misinterpreted, or applied to several individuals; so that they were expecting in their Messiah a character entirely different from that described by the prophets.

Now, mark the application of these points. I Christ had conformed to the views of the Jews.

there would have been three direct testimonies that he was not from God. (1.) Because their views were partial, prejudiced, wicked. (2.) He could not have conformed to their views, and sustain at the same time the character of a perfect instructor.* (3.) He would not have fulfilled the predictions of the prophets concerning him. But, on the other hand, if he conformed to the prophets, and assumed the character of a perfect teacher, his rejection by the Jews was absolutely certain.t It follows, therefore, legitimately and conclusively, that Jesus Christ was the Messiah of God, because he pursued that course which would, from the nature of the case, result in his rejection by the nation; which conduct, in an impostor, would be impossible-but in the true Messiah it was the necessary course.

But further: it was necessary that Jesus should establish his claim as the Messiah by miraculous agency. But owing to the peculiar state of the Jewish nation at that time, there would be great difficulty in doing this, for the following reasons— If he, as Moses did, had come publicly before the nation at Jerusalem, and by miracles of great power, frequently repeated, and extending their influence throughout all the land, had forced conviction upon the minds of all the Jews that he was the true Messiah, the immediate and inevitable result would have been, that they would have raised one universal revolt against the Roman power, and would have hurried the Saviour of sinners into the office of the King of the Jews;

* See chap. X.

The fact that Jesus conformed to the prophets, established the truth of the prophecies; because, by conforming to them, he suffered death; while by his death, in accordance with the prophets, the world gained the evidence that he was the true Messiah. To give life, as a testimony to falsehood, is impossible, either in a good or in an evil being. See chap. iii. On Miracles,