OCR Text |
Show w : ZZZl!IIZr . j non-gatfiolic Queries, and Jfnswers Cbereio j (San Franisco Monitor.) If OiiriPt irrformed the miracles recorded in the New Testament, why, then, did the Jews rut Him to i death? ' This difiieulty is thus answered by Father Lam- ' lert : : "The argument of this question is. that because the Jews put Christ to death, they did not believe in His miracles as recorded in the Gospels. But tills conclusion is false. The Jews believed that God had forbidden them to abandon the law of Moses, even if a' prophet performing miracles re- i auired them to do so. From the time of Christ down to the present the .lews have always and uni- fonnly believed in the reality of the miracles of . Christ. If you do not believe this, consult their Talmud.?. 1 "Well, then, you will ask, if they admitted Iho fact of His miracles, why did they not accept Ilim ' as th Messins While they admitted the miracles, they did not believe that they proved Him to be the j Messias. Their prophets had performed miracles ' under the Mosaic law. They had even raised the ' ' dead. The Jews in the lime of Christ could not i understand how miracles could be worked to abro- ! . 1 gate that law. Fixed habits and prejudices, then, ' caused them to reject the evidence of His miracles, while they admitted the fact of them. They at- ' tributed them to Beelzebub. "Again, they believed that the promised Son of j , David was to bo a g-reat temporal prince, that He j wa s to free the Jewish people, and establish a great, Jewish empire, restore the Jewish nobility, and raise the Aaronic priesthood to its ancient preeminence pre-eminence and glory. His preaching and humble life gave no encouragement to these hopes, and they 1 refused to believe in Him as the promised Messias, 1 even while they admitted His miracles. And they put Him to death as they had put to death their " acknowledged prophets" (Lambert, "Xotes on ! . I IngersolL' chap. xvi. pp. 140 141). Is it not incredible that God should become man? 1 j What proofs are there that Jesus Christ was the y i , on of God? ; May not the texts in which Christ speaks of unity vich the Father imply only the moral unity of an edopted sonship? Cannot a man reverence Jesus as the highest and noet perfect type of the race without acknowledjsring , Ilim to be divine? I believe that men should strive more to live Christ's life than to discuss the dogma, of 1 His divinity. "We need to appreciate that the doctrine of The Incarnation is not a hard one to accept. There is no revolt in the natural mind against the 1 bought of God becoming man. It is not a thought which arouses aversion in us. Indeed, we give it i AveJeorue. That man should be raised to a 'par- ! ' Ticipation in a divine nature is a difficult thing to understand if the word is meant to imply a full and char comprehension. But the human race or any part of it has never felt it to be incredible. incredi-ble. The dignity of man suggests the possibility of the Incarnation; the aspirations of man suggest its probability; the degradation of man cries out for it, and implores Ats immediate gift' (Elliott, ''Life of Christ," Epilogue, pp. i.-vii.) The divinity of Christ is the foundation-doctrine of the Christian religion. Deny Him as the Son of God, and at ence the whole fabric of revelation reve-lation falls to pieces; confess Him to be divine, and the logical mind grasps at once the necessity f a divine infallible teacher in the world today, speaking in His name and with His authority. The arguments for the divinity of Christ are: First. Throughout the four gospels Christ clearly asserts His divinity. lie claims perfect equality with the Fat-he? llie Jehovah of the Jews in absolute oneness of i . 'seiice C'l and the Father are one." 7ohn x. 30), in parity of working power ('"My Father worketlx 1 until now, audi work' John t. 17; "What things soever the Father doth, these the Son also doth in like manner v. 19), iu eternal Being ("Before Abraham was made. I am;' John viii. 58). in the. ! equal rights to the homage of mankind ("That all may honor the Son as they honor the Father." John v. 23 ; cf. xiv. 1, 13 ; xv. 10; Matt. x. 37). It is evident thai our Lord, in John x. 30, spoke of His absolute, essential oneness with the Father, I because He "was addressing earnest lnonotheists, I keenly alive to the essential distinction between the i-w. oi xae rccior ana tne me ot tue creature, and 1 religiously jealous of the divine prerogatives. The I .lews did not, understand Christ's claim to be one I itu the Father in any moral, spiritual, or mystical I sense. Christ did not encourage them so to under- 1 stand it. The motive of their indignation "we I stone Thee for blasphemy, because that Thou, be- I ingaman. maketh thyself God.' John x. 33) was l 3ioi. disowned by Him. They believed Ilim to mean f J-hat He was II imself a divine Person; and He never 1 repudiated that construction of His language' 'Liddor. ''The Divinifl- of our Lord." Lecture iv. Pp.lSSli). I Again, the Jews evidently understood our Savior I claim a right to break the Sabbath as the Lord I . or the Sabbath, the equal of Jehovah who had pre- ; -eribed the law, and for that reason "they sought 1 1v kill Ilim, bt-oause He said God was His Father, making Himself equal to God" (John v; IS). A third time they stoned Him as a blasphemer (John , viii. ."&), when He claimed to be the "I am who am" of Israel (Exod. iii. 14), the eternal "Xow." Every one who studies the life of Christ must admit that He was sincere (John vi. L'tJ; siii. 3S, xviii, 37), unselfish (John v. 30: vi. 3S: x. 11; Matt! xvi. 3f0, and humble (Luke viii. .'1; Matt. ix. 30; Mark viii. 11: Matt. xi. 29). But "is He, if He be I not God, really humble? Can Jesus bid us to believe be-lieve in Ilim (John xiv. 1). love Him, obey Him (John xv. 10), live by Him (John vi. i6), live for Him (Matt. xvi. 24); can He thus claim to be the universal Teacher (Matt, xxviii. 20) and the universal univer-sal Judge (Matt. xxv. 31-34, the Way, the Truth, the Life of Humanity (John xiv. C), if He be indeed ';' . '.nlymanif . . . If Jesus Christ be not God, is f ' he really unselfish? Ho bids men make Himself I ihe center of their affections and their thoughts (John xiv. C, 14 ; xi. 25 ; xiv. 1 ; vi. 29 ; v. 23 ; viii. 42 ; xv. 23: xiv. 1.5, etc.) ; and when God does this. lie is but calling man to that which is man's proper duty, to the true direction and law of mans being. But deny Christ's divinity, and what will you say to the disinterestedness of His perpetual self-assertion? ... If Jesus Christ is not God. can we even fsy that He is sincere ! For if He is not God. , where does He make any adequate repudiation of a construction 'of His word? so utterly derogatory to ; the great Creator, so necessarily abhorrent to a ! good mans 'thought? . , . Would not a purely human Cirri A have anticipated the burning Words of the indignant Apostle at the gate cf LystraP (Acts xiv. 34; Liddon, ibid., pp. 195 203). There can be no doubt that the Sanhedrin condemned con-demned our Lord to death because He claimed to be divine. Their words to Tilatc were: "We have a law, and according to the law (Lev. xxiv. 10; Deut. xiii. 5) He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God". (John six. 7). The high-priest I put the question plainly to our Lord: j "'Art Thou the Christ, he Son of the blessed I ; God? And Jesus said to him, I am" (Mark xiv. 1, I ' f2, cf. Matt. xxvi. Ci). This open claim of being I ; the Son of God in a reaL true sense was styled blas- l 1 phemy, and sealed the death-sentence of Jesus I T Christ. I Second. - The Apostles clearly teach that Jesus I ; lsGou. , . I .St. Feler, when, questioned by Christ on this very j -. declares explicitly "Thou art Christ, the Son ! of the Living God" (Matt. xvi. 10), ami our Lord in answer blesses him for -his profession of faith, and declares' it inspired- by His Heavenly Father. "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but. My Father who is in heaven (cf. John vi. 70; I. Pet. i. 2;iv. 2; II. Pet. i. 1). The unbelieving St. Thomas, convinced by the fact of the resurrection, is forced to cry out "My, Lord and my God"' (John xx. 2S). St. John wrote his whole gospel that men "may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God" (John xx. 31), and in his opening chapter he declares Jesus the only begotten be-gotten Sou of God, eiemal and consubstantial with His Father (John i. 1-14: of. I. John iv. 15; y. 2o). St. Pa,ul writes clearly of Christ: "Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal w-ith God" (Phil. ii. !) d in many other passages speaks of Him athe eternal Son of God, the Crea- j tor of all things, etc. (Col. i. 15, 10; Kom. ix. 5; viii. 32; Heb. i. 1 14). This public unanimous preaching of Christ's divinity by His Apostle can be explained on no other hypothesis than the positive revelation of Jesus Christ their Master. Third. The miracles which Jesus wrought in His own name and by His own power prove Him to be God. When Jesus found that His testimony was gain said, He frequency appealed to the miracles He wrought as setting the seal of the divine approval upon His teachings, and His claim to equality with the Father (Matt. xi. 4, 5; John v. 3(3; x. 38; xiv. 12). His life is one series of miracles. He stills the storm, with a word (Mark iv. 39). He walks upon the sea (Matt. xiv. 25). He feeds the multitudes multi-tudes with a few loaves and fishes (John vi. 10), He changes water into wine (John ii. 9), He drives out demons from the possessed (Mark i. 2,5; iii. 11; v. S. etc.), He heals the blind, the deaf, the dumb, the leper, and the paralytic (Mark ix. 25; viii. 1 5; Luke ix. 24), Ho raises the dead to life (Matt. ix. 3). He rises from the dead, converses with the disciples for forty days, and then ascends on high to His Heavenly Father (Matt, xxviii.; Acts i. 9, etc.) The saints and prophets work miracles also, but they always do so in the name of God or Christ Jesus. He alone performs them of Himself: "I will, be thou made clean" (Matt. viii. 3); "Do you believe that I can do this unto you" (Matt. ix. 2S; cf. Luke vii. 14; John xi. 44; Matt. viii. 5 13, etc.) The unbelievers of our day have striven to give us a life of Jesus, while utterly denying the historical histori-cal reality of the miracles recorded of Him. But "to expel miracles from the life of Jesus is to destroy de-stroy the identity of the Christ of the Gospels ; it is to substitute a new Christ for the Christ of Christendom Chris-tendom ... . these (rationalistic) commentators commenta-tors do not affect to take the history as it has come down to us. As the Gospel narratives stand, they present a block of difficulties to Humanitarian j theories ; and these difficulties can only be removed by mutilations of the narrative so wholesale and radical as to destroy their substantial interest, besides be-sides rendering the retention of the fragments which may be retained a purely abitrary procedure. In a word, miracles are so interwoven with the life of Christ, and so prominent a feature of His daily teaching, that the "moral integrity of our Lord's character is dependent, whether we will or not, upon the reality of His miracles'' (Liddon, ibid., pp. 1G1-1G3). Fifth. Pascal considered the prophetical argument argu-ment the strongest proof of Christ's divinity (Pascal's (Pas-cal's "Thoughts," p. 128). Even among the pagan nations there was a general expectation of a new teacher from on high. The Old Testament, in a series of prophecies extending over thousands of years, announces all the details of the life of Christ. God promises a Redeemer to Adam (Gen. iii. 15). He is to be of the stock of Abraham (Gen. xii. 13), Isaac (xxvi. 4), Jacob (Gen. xxviii, 14; Xum. xxvi. 17) of the tribe of Juda (Gen. xi viii. 8-10; of. Heb. vii. 14), and of the family of David (Isa. ix. 7; ii. 1-7; cf. Bom. i. 3; II. Tim. ii. 8). Moses declares that he will be a great prophet (Deut. xviii. 15), Isaias'foretells His birth of a virgin vir-gin mother (vii. 14) and His power of miracles (xxxv. 4-6), Malachias tells of His precurser (iii. I.; cf. Luke i. 76; iii. 2), Mieheas marks the place and Daniel the time of His coming (Mich. v. 2-3; cf. Matt ii. 1.: Lukb ii. 4; Dan. ix. 24-27), Lsaias declares Him the Prince of Peace (ix. 6: cf. T,nke ii. 14; John xiv. 27) foretells the place of His preaching (ix. 1-2; cf. Matt. iv. 15), and says He will make a new covenant for the Gentiles (ii. 4; cf. Luke i. 3; Matt. xvi. 28; xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15) ; the Psalms (xxi. and Ixviii.), lsaias (liii.), and Zacharias (xi. 12) tells the minutest details of His passion and death (Maas, "Christ in Type and Prophecy.") Fifth. Christ's own power of prophecy proves Him God. He foretells His own death and resurrection (Matt. xii. 40; xvii. 21-22; xxvii. 63; xx. 17-19; Luke xiii. 32; John ii. 19), the treachery of Judas (John xiii. 20), the denial of Peter and the manner of His death (Matt. xxvi. 34; John xxi. 18-22), the destruction of Jerusalem (Matt, xxiv.), the dispersion disper-sion of the Jews (Luke xxi. 24), and the spread of His Church (John x. 16; Matt. xiii. 31). Sixth. One of the most striking proofs of Christ's divinity is His absolute sinlessuess. He proposes the highest standard of sanctity possible: "Be you, therefore, perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. v. 4S); and 'instead of insisting in-sisting on His own personal unworthiness, as lie must needs hove done were He only a great prophet .like. lsaias ("I am a man of unclean lips," Isa. vi. '5), Ho, on the contrary, challenges His enemies to find hi Him the slightest sin; "which of you shall convict me of sin?' (John viii. 46), anddeclares that He always does His Father's will, "for I do always the things that please Him" (John viii. 29; Bou- " gard, "The Divinity of Jesus Christ," ch. iv.; Liddon, Lid-don, 1. c, pp. 1C5-1 68). .... - ' Seventh. The sublime. teachings of the Savior, together with the wonderful spread of His Church by the simplest methods -against "the mightiest ene- t mies, the transformation of the world front the lust. I pnae, cruelty and idolatry of paganism to the Christian Chris-tian purity, humility, gentleness, love of God and the brethren for God's sake, prove that thc-Worker of this change was not human but divine. Eighth. "If Christ' be not divine, actually God then the Supreme Buler of men's souls has failed both in His messenger and His message, and failed fatally. Christ was . sent - to eradicate idolatry, which had .proven to be--the deepest seated evil of humanity, and to -establish -impregnably the very opposite, the knowledge and worship of the true ij.,c lihtest belief-in-Uiyinp Providence identifies its rulrngs in this tense with Christ and His mission, and they resulted iniuniversal Chnst-worslnp. Chnst-worslnp. . . . 'If Christ be not God, He is the author of the most pbstinate idolatry ever known o teaching, so. awfully authoritative as Hi, n0 life so irresistibly attractive." no-dea th so solemn and triumphant. Has the only result leen idolatry' idola-try' (Elliott, "Life of Christ," Epilogue, xv. xvii.) Men cannot remain indifferent to this doctrine fo? it is fraught with mighty consequences here and hereafter. This world takes on another aspect to the man who knows that God has deigned to honor it by living here for a -time," and to exalt human nature by making it His very own. You cannot do away with Christ s divinity and pretend to follow out His teaching If He be only man, His power to command , is subject to the caprice of every individual. in-dividual. If He is God, then it follows naturally that His doctrines must be believed under penalty of damnation. (Mark xvi. ,10) and His command-, meats obeyed under penalty of -hell.; Logically, also, there muit be in the world today a teacher of His Gospel, divine as He was divine, infallible as He wiis infallible, voicing His Gopel to nil men unto the end (Ma'tt.xxxviii. 20: Acts i. Slan authority, of which He said: "He that heareth you heareth Me" (Luke x. 16; Fouard, "Life of Christ"; Didon, "Life of Christ" r Lncordaire. "Conferences on Jesus Christ", Nicholas, "The Divinity of Christ"; i Freppei, "Discourses on trie Divinity of Christ." |