affirm that the life of Jesus was a reflection of the divine beneficence is but satirical praise if the claim be denied that he was vastly more than any other man. To say that he was "a man at his best" is but to mock his honesty. Spinoza, the Jewish pantheist, confesses that "Christ was the very temple of God since in him we have the fullest revelation of God." David Strauss, the German infidel, says, "In Jesus. the union of self-consciousness with the consciousness of God has been real, so that he represents within the religious sphere the highest point, beyond which posterity cannot go." Theodore Parker, while denying the divine claims of Jesus, cries, "How did the spirit of God work in his bosom! What deep divinity of soul! In whom did ever the tide of humanity rise so high as in him?" Unitarians have generally approved the saying, "In Jesus we observe the highest manifestation of God that ever was seen in mortal man."

The fourth step was taken when the blind man said, “I believe in the Son of God."

But even this, if it were merely an intellectual apprehension of his divineness, had no power to save. To be orthodox is not necessarily to be Christian. One may believe in the incarnation and yet not follow Christ. Intellectual assent is not faith. Napoleon conceded everything that Jesus claimed for himself as the very Son of God; yet his life was infinitely far from the life which is hid in Christ with God.

The fifth and final step was taken when the blind man, having said, "Lord, I believe," fell down and "worshiped him."

This means that he then and there took this Son of God to be his Lord and Saviour. This is faith; a hand stretched forth to appropriate. It is the first personal pronoun possessive that brings us into the kingdom of God. "My" and "mine"; these are the touchstones of spiritual life.

Not long ago I was assigned to a room in a hotel, where, as I entered, I observed a coil of rope suspended from the window casing. It was a fire-escape with the slip-noose and a succession of knots; simple enough, but so adapted to its purpose that I said within myself, "I believe in it." But suppose a fire had occurred that night and every avenue of escape

had been cut off? I would have uncoiled that rope, bound the loop about my waist and committed myself to it. That would have made the fire-escape a very different thing for me. I should have made it experimentally mine; my faith would have put an effectual seal of approval upon it because it had saved me.

The Drama, "Out of Darkness into Light," has no recorded sequel. Its central figure is a nameless man; and no more is heard of him. The day came, however, when his eyes were closed to this world and opened in the kingdom of light, and again he saw Jesus, not clad in homespun, but crowned with glory. The King in his beauty! The blind man had come at last out of darkness into the marvelous light.

So may we realize the possibilities of faith in creed and practice so may we worship Christ and follow on-until the day break and the shadows flee away! Then with open eyes beholding, we shall be able to say, "Whereas I was blind, now I see."

VII

HOW PETER SAW HIM

It was toward the close of Peter's career that he wrote a "General Epistle”—that is, a letter addressed to no Church in particular but "to all whom it may concern"-in which he defended his faith in Jesus Christ as the only-begotten Son of God.

Now Peter was not a doctrinaire. He was unfamiliar with the learning of the schools. He was frank to acknowledge his ignorance of many things that university professors knew then and know now; but with respect to the power and coming of Christ he professed an absolute certainty. His creed was short; but it embraced all the essentials of Christian faith, and it was based on the authority of the Word of God.

The truth for which he thus stood had been called in question. The trustworthiness of Scripture was denied, without which there is no ultimate authority for the deity of Christ or any other fundamental truth. There were those who affirmed that many of the events recorded in the Gospels were "cunningly devised fables": such as the virgin birth, the miracles, and the resurrection of Christ. (Strange, is it not, how history repeats itself?) What has Peter to say to the objections of these men? He has one transcendent recollection with which to answer it. An incident had occurred thirty years before which had so impressed itself upon his mind and conscience and heart that he never could forget it. He had seen Jesus with the glory of Godhood shining in his face!

Let him tell his own story: "It was at the close of our Lord's journey through Cæsarea-Philippi. By the way he had

much to say respecting his approaching death. We could not understand it. His death! We expected him to take his place upon the Messianic throne and rule in splendor as the longpredicted Son of David. But he spoke of suffering many things at the hands of the priests and rabbis and of being crucified. At length we came to Mount Hermon. It was toward the close of the day and the Master signified that he would go apart for a season. So he climbed the mountain

path, the two sons of Zebedee and myself following close after, at his desire. Far to the west lay the Mediterranean, glorious in the sunset; and in the distant east the Euphrates ran like a torrent of blood among its mountains and historic ruins. At length we paused, and, wearied with climbing, fell asleep.

"We were presently awakened by the murmur of voices. The Master was changed! His coarse blue garments were like ermine; his face was all aflame as the sun shineth in his strength. And two companions were with him, whom we knew, as by intuition, to be Moses the lawgiver and Elijah the prophet who had ascended a thousand years before in a chariot of fire. We were awestruck, amazed. I spoke at length: 'Master, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses and one for Elijah.' I knew not what I said. There was no answer. Then came the luminous cloud, the Shekinah which long centuries before had disappeared from above the mercy-seat; and as it folded us in we were afraid. And there came a voice out of the most excellent glory, 'This is my beloved Son!' We had fallen upon our faces; the Master touched us; we arose and looked about us. The glory had faded; the celestial visitants were gone and Jesus stood alone.

"The years have passed, but the scene is as fresh in memory as if it had been but yesterday. We are under no delusion. We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father the honor and glory, when there was borne such a voice to him by the Majestic Glory. This voice we ourselves heard borne out of heaven, when we were with him in the holy mount. 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, until the day dawn and the day-star arise in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit. We saw this foregleam of the Parousia, his final coming to be King over all and blessed forever. How can our faith tremble? We believe in his power. We believe in his coming. We shall see him in his glory in that day!"

No more important problem could be presented for our consideration than the one before us, "What think ye of this Jesus which is called the Christ?" He claimed to be very God of very God. He might have escaped the cross by withdrawing that claim, but he refused to do so. He died for making himself equal with God! There is, therefore, no middle ground. It will not do to say that he was "the best of men.' He was either an impostor or else he was what he claimed to be. What think ye? The rabbis were wont to say, "The secret of Messiah is the secret of man." If so, it behooves us to solve this problem and to solve it aright; for out of it flow the issues of eternal life.

There are three ways of approaching the question and only three:

The first is the Zetetic Method. The Zetetics were a school of philosophers who were so called because they professed to be "seekers after the truth." They proposed to arrive at truth by the processes of pure reason, without any aid whatsoever.

We may attempt to solve this problem in the same manner, that is, by reasoning it out; but the result is a foregone conclusion. We shall find ourselves going further and further into the dark. A man might as well undertake to sail a vessel to Liverpool without chart or compass or skipper or pilot or the slightest knowledge of navigation. He would go round and round and get nowhere, or else go down on the open sea. The attempts of philosophers to arrive at spiritual truth in this manner have always led them up a blind-alley with nothing but confusion to show for it. "Canst thou by