Skip to main content

Full text of "Jesus Of Nazareth by Arthur Wallis"

See other formats


Who is He? 



ITE py ‘abe eat a ibd PTT TT aM bi cae 

bus APnAAidG HIsHo OG ampsgidaon 

gpsgopu 7 Adrosone uo GLisofogig CrafsH owns 200 OHamHsapoG 
way ams Aésodatuc., ACpdhu 2uCscmac Oimdu, Apes Obcfoogiu 
YSSoHIGOoT, uso wat Cpybd Aanhsg, Ud Gotemian Aro Aaciigs War Hreaonna 
(E-Books) Boaswie (ws6oy 10:8) Dhar ayhacd Oanoiushs, OpuGs Seqwror 
THON UMEUHpHar °c Coagae6S som sayph wusowylh HHYyD 2Psonrougi. 
Bos Cudp Ba@id Aoisdoandora ysoatiamcn gsyohpdat) (Download) aeiiw 
THAMOLW GOaUGnsos NonHdaoyd/ujsacyd: 

95 soci ysootaH AFP Gaooasepd, aniyfoo dopsoaaap6o. 
boc yssatiacn, paren M2uCschamn GAandoGiusid, Mopsams LP Pufar 
LfawCunh War-fHror, Goactorm GAectuwHASCpnd. QGqCaimor ®HGEHOLW YHHatd 
Giiuo Gooaswrs Wer-prev (E-Book) ance aydoatig aap BoadSiaonname, wiucy 
Aclig| Tham wae sHdoOonoHbaG. shaehoLu WhatsApp adnathCan, Wer 
Agse0Cer (Email) ansenoG Osfutuosoimiacr. Canouns ohiseporw Benranw- 

WhatsApp/SMS: +91 90 190 490 70 / +91 7676 50 5599 

Wishing you in the mighty name of Jesus Christ 

We had collected several thousands of old Tamil Spiritual Books which are 
rich in Sound Doctrines across various places of India for 7 years. Some of them 
are more than 200 years old books. We have spent millions of hours and money 
in scanning them and coverting them to E-Books. The work is still in progress. 
These E-books are published completely free_of cost (Matt 10:8) forever. We give 
all the praise and glory to God for giving this wonderful opportunity to server 
Him. You can download thousands of similar Tamil Christian E-books from our 
website completely free of cost at any time. 

95% of these E-Books are not being printed now and their copyrights are 
already expired. The remaining books are sent as E-Books mostly with the 
permission from the Authors. If you feel that your books should not be published 
as E-Book freely, kindly execuse and forgive us. Please let us know the book 
details by WhatsApp or Email we will remove them from our website. 

WhatsApp/SMS: +91 90 190 490 70 / +91 7676 50 5599 




Who Is He? 


“ Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty 
in deed and word before God and all the people” Luke 24: 19. 


jowed the custom in 

capitals for the personal 
Quotations are from the 
otherwise stated) with Jehe 

Who Is He? 

HE historical existence of “ jesus of Nazareth” 

the commencement of the Christian era is beyond 

dispute; it is witnessed to by those who did not be 
eve in him as well as by those who did. What view are 
we to take of this historical personage and the remarkable 
claims that he made? In the first analysis the possibslines 
are confined to three: either he was a deceiver who made — 
claims for himself knowing them to be untrue; or he was 
wclf-deceived, sincere but deluded, a man suffering from 
,ome kind of hallucination; or he was a man whose words 
and claims were sober truth. Some of the Jews of his 
day said that he was a deceiver. Would you agree that 
this describes the character of the author of the Sermon 
on the Mount? Do you think that the influence be has 


they were reduced to silence and durst not ask him any 
more questions, and to parse pee to pert 
iedge, “Never man so spake ”’? then we © ‘ 
these two possibilities, we are left with the third, and 
find ourselves forced to conclude that he was a true man, 
who spoke the sober es fact which is borne out by 4 
the influence he has ex upon nd. 

The New Testament provides the only original account 
in existence of Christ and his teaching. It is not our 


z SOS OF BILIEETA — weap is we F 

DECSETE DUT YOE (0 Witte tats Ge Cams oh Gee Bitte 
oe te Word A Ch — thee teas tee tally ub Alby 
by many others — bc AIDE EB VES, sos z 
ms 1, COMCATIRO esus A Marae Sic aging 
that bis clans, aad Ge oes ae Scngome mdr 
AG are true, how ate we we emterscnd em? Da q 
reauy Clan to be Gol senites an Ge fete, 2s Gi aoe 
dom n23 generally mainecinet? Or mighe it mee bes 
i kexying with tne lacks ts tae tae warm Gat ee eas 4 
Special ext one 8 Got, et men God RimeaelE2 Wee te 2 
; nore sd pesos of ae cord Gotta 
OF was be the supreme <remed tems met eed mitt 
inienor ts God. thougs occupying as exuded 

* Does it matter very muck?” some may alk. ~ Bowe 
‘¢ Ume to bother wae taecloteal quibbles. or splitting 

hairs over fine poms of Gomme Ow aiswer that 
then we rawst —— et worip due wo Gut ap deny 

God, then to worskep Ems 2s Gongs Se wee ap meaner 
how clevaed or sapetor he may be os 2 ceed 

would be bah blaspeemy and idoiery. EE es Cit 
is Sood ke is 0 ee ee eee 

we rey comccive Ini to ibe, siaee i Meueeen 
the one Jehovah the same eee ool r 

Look at it this way: the moma op Se summit 
of Everest may be thowght to be wery for above che scier 
tit in bis bethyspbere explorieg the deepest ean el 
but in fact the @emee beewess thee Ss Eee we 
one considers bow far both we from: pores sar, mille 
A liget-years @eam fom the eet The meee peek 
and the ocean bed belong to the spkesr of caccin. anil 
G@ferent elevations may be mecswed aad compere: 


star belongs to the sphere of the heavens, and therefore 
no intelligent comparison with earthly things is possible. 
To apply this to the question before us: are we to think 
of Jesus Christ in terms of the star or the mountain peak? 
Chis impassable gulf that divides deity from mere humani- 
ty, the Creator from the creature, the infinite from the 
finite — does it separate him from God, or him from man? 


An inquiry such as this is plainly called for, when we 
find that people who assert their faith in the truth of 
the Bible as God's word to man are fundamentally dis- 
agreed on how it is to be understood in relation to its 
central figure, Jesus of Nazareth. It is clear that Jesus 
claimed to be the Son of God, and that the New Testament 
Scriptures endorse that claim. But what does the expres- 
sion mean? With some it is synonymous with a claim 
to be God the Son, to belong to the Godhead, to be equal 
with the Father, and that it affirms unquestionably his 
deity. Others are emphatic that it is not so; they point 
out that angels are also sons of God,! but they are not 
divine; believers may be called sons of God,? but they have 
no claim to deity. Some will refer us to that extra- 
ordinary assertion of Jesus, “I and the Father are one’’;3 
“ What is this,” they would say, “if not a claim to equali- 
ty with God?” Others will reply that he was only assert- 
ing his harmony with the Father, and will quote in support 
John 17: 21, and remind us also of his words, “ the Father 
is greater than I’’.4 Some say that he claimed to be eternal 
and uncreated when he said, “Before Abraham was, 1 
am.”5 Others assure us that he is but the first of God’s 
created beings, for does he not describe himself as “ the 
beginning of the creation of God’’?¢ 

1 Job 1: 6. 2 Romans 8: 14. 3 John 10: 30. 4 John 14: 28. 
5 John 8: 58. 6 Revelation 3: 14. 


Clearly these two views are mutually exclusive; they 
cannot both be right. There cannot be degrees of deity; 
either Jesus Christ was God or he was not God. Since both 
parties cite the Bible for their support, how are we to 
decide which is correct? The fact that views can exist 
so diametrically opposed, may serve to teach us the falli- 
bility of the unaided human mind in the interpreting of 
the divine revelation, and to remind us of our utter 
dependence upon the divine Author of the book to be its 
Interpreter. As we appeal “to the law and to the testi- 
mony " for an answer to this question — and we can turn 
to no other authority — let us bear in mind three impor- 
tant principles. The first, that a sincere and open mind 
which is willing to be convinced by the truth is essential; 
as Jesus himself said, “If any man willeth to do 
[God's] will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it be 
of God.”! The second, that for right interpretation a pas- 
sage must be considered strictly in the light of its context, 
and in the light of other Scriptures dealing with the same 
theme; ignoring this, we can make the Bible teach what 
we please, Finally, that we approach our inquiry with a 
humble prayer to Jehovah for his illumination: “Guide 
me in thy truth, and teach me; for thou art the God of 
my salvation.””? 


The New is in the Old concealed; 
The Old is in the New revealed. (AUGUSTINE.) 

The reading of the Old Testament is designed to prepare 
us for the New. What we find in full bloom in the New 
is but a seed in the Old. The seed may be small, it may 
be hidden, it may be shrouded in mystery — but it is there. 
This is particularly true concerning Jesus of Nazareth. It 

1 John 7: 17. 2 Psalm 25: 5. 


was during that memorable walk to Emmaus that “ be- 
ginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he [Jesus] 
interpreted to them in all the [0.T.] Scriptures the things 
concerning himself.”! As we set out to discover who he 
really is, We must expect the Old Testament to point us 
down the road that leads to the truth, and prepare our 
minds for the fuller revelation to follow. 

Every Jew knew from the sacred Hebrew Scriptures that 
man was not permitted to look upon God. “Thou canst 
not see my face: for man shall not see me and live.”? 
The New Testament teaching is to the same effect: “ No 
man hath seen God at any time”,} “ dwelling in light un- 
approachable; whom no man hath seen, nor can see”.4 
In view of this it is necessary to inquire who was the one 
who appeared to Abram as “the God of glory”?5 To 
Hagar in the wilderness as “ the angel of Jehovah”, who 
testified, “‘ Thou art a God that seeth. . . . Have I even seen 
him who saw me?’’6 To Jacob at Peniel who said “I have 
seen God face to face, and my life is preserved"?7 To 
Moses at the burning bush as “I am” so that he “hid his 
face; for he was afraid to look upon God" ?® To Joshua 
near Jericho as “ captain of the host of Jehovah” so that 
he “fell on his face to the earth, and did worship"?? To 
Gideon under the oak in Ophrah, who is described now as 
‘the angel of Jehovah” and now as “ Jehovah"? To 
Manoah and his wife, parents of Samson, who “ fell on 
their faces to the ground. . . . And Manoah said unto his 
wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God"? 

These incidents of Old Testament history must evoke 
important questions in the minds of thinking people. — It 
is clear that these godly people were overwhelmed with 
fear because they were convinced that they had seen God. 

- 27. 2 Exodus 33: 20. 3 John r: 18. 41 Tim- 
one ae i - 5 i= 7: = Canale 16: 13 Lit. trans. 
7 Genesis 32: 30. § Exodus3:6. 9 Joshua 5: 14. Judges 
6: 11, 14 ll Judges 13: 20, 22. 


They testified to their conviction, and Seripture endorses 
hut does not explain their testimony. Some believed that 
they would die, and were surprised that they lived. Their 
velicl when they were spared did not remove their con- 
viction that they had seen God, nor did it remove their 
perplexity as to how it was they could see Him and live. 
It they did not truly see God why does Scripture imply 
that they did? If they did see God why did they not die 
according to Exodus 33: 20? Why is the one who ap- 
peared to Gideon described one moment as the angel of | 
Jehovah, and the next as Jehovah himself? Similarly, why 
do we find the aged patriarch Jacob equating God, on the 
one hand, with the angel that redeemed him, on the other, — 
when he blessed the sons of Joseph: “The God before 
whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God 
which hath fed me all my life long unto this day, the angel 
which hath redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads’?! 
Why did this angel command Moses and Joshua to take 
their shoes from off their feet? Why did he receive wor- 
ship.? whereas, when the apostle John fell down before 
an angel to worship him he was told, “ See thou do it not 

. worship God ’’?3 : 

The person of Jesus who is the Christ provides the only 
solution to this enigma of the seeming appearances of God 
in the Old Testament in the person of this mysterious 
angel of the covenant. He it was who, being “ in the be- 
ginning with God,‘ shared his glory before the universe 
existed.5 If this angel of Jehovah (or angel of the cove- 
nant) was God’s Son, then one thing is clear: the mani- 
festation of the Son is presented in the Old Testament 
Scriptures as a manifestation of God, and explains why in 
the New Testament Jesus declared “ He that hath seen me 
hath seen the Father”. That this angel of Jehovah is also 
called Jehovah leads us to inquire whether the title Jehovah 

1 Genesis 48: 15, 16. 2 Jesters’ 14. 2 Revelation 19: 10. 
$ John 1: 2, S John 17: 5. John 14: 9. 


may not be applied to the Son as well as to the Father; this 
would account for the numerous passages in the Old Testa- 
ment which speak of Jehovah, but when quoted in the 
New Testament are related directly to Christ (see appen- 
dix); this would also explain such a verse as Malachi 3: 1, 
‘The Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his 
temple; — who could this be but Jehovah? But the 
prophet continues, “even the angel of the covenant, 
whom ye delight in". We thus conclude that though no 
mortal eye has gazed or can gaze on God the Father, yet 
in the person of his Son, who is the very image of his 
substance, men have truly seen God. 


The giving of the Son to redeem us is shown to be the 
expression of God’s own love to mankind. “ God so loved 
the world, that he gave his only begotten Son.”! “God 
ommendeth his own love toward us, in that, while we 
were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”? Such passages leave 
us with a deep impression of the immensity of God’s love 
is expressed in him who is “ his unspeakable gift”? Here 
is a love which passes knowledge — heights that we can 
never scale and depths that we can never plumb. Is it 
possible that this immeasurable gift was only the giving 
by God of a creature he had made? When God said to 
Abraham, “Take now thy son, thine only son, whom 
thou lovest, even Isaac . . . and offer him there for a 
burnt offering ”,4 he was giving us a foreshadowing of an 
infinitely greater sacrifice that he himself would make in 
a coming day. ' 

God was not asking Abraham merely to yield up some- 
thing he possessed or something he had made — an insig- 
nificant sacrifice by comparison — but his only son whom 

1 John 3: 16. 2 Romans 5: 8. 32 Corinthians 9: 15. 
4 Genesis 22: 2. 


he had begottes. whom he dearly loved. who was 
of himself Goc was asking of him the greatest = 
possible in view of the promise, “In Iszac sizall thy sce 
be called” and by his unquestioning obedience and 
phat faits Abrzham commended his own love t 
In “offerisg up bis only begotten son”? Abrakam 
offered ead ee Bet if 

ane le ‘cache’ heneany, ee 

far more 2 tion for the sactiice efi 
Moriah than thet of God on Golgotha, for Abraham wa 
gn himself but God was only giving 2 creature be ha 
ma How could this be God commendmg ~ kis c 
love"? How could it be true that on the cross Cod 
giving |! . that be “was in Christ recomciiing 
Or if™ If God could create ome p 

son, and then give him for man’s redemption. could 
not in his omnipotence create a thousand others to repiz 
him? How could this be “his great love wherewnh 
loved us”.* of which the responding love of man 
that of Abr2ham. is but a feeble, pale reflection? 


Only the eternal God is outside of time. AH created 
beings belong to time since they have a begining. 
moment God put forth his power to create, time beg 
It is this commencement of time that is expressed by 
phrase “In the beginning was the Word™> The : 
shows that it is God’s Son who is “the Word ~ 
person's mind remains unknown and unknowable save 2S 
he gives utterance to his thoughts, so the eternal, invis 
God is only known through the Son who is his 

1 Hebrews 11: 18 2 Hebrews 11: 17- 32 
s: 1g + Ephesians 2: 4 5 John 1: &. 


or Word. The verse tells us, “In the beginning the Word 
was". It does not say, “In the beginning the Word 
same to be", or “In the beginning the Word was 
eated ". Nothing could be simpler than the use of such 
expressions if they conveyed the truth. Since Genesis 
ypens with the statement, “In the beginning God created 
cne heaven and the earth”, why could not John’s gospel 
pen with the statement, “In the beginning God created 
the Word"? Why does it state instead that “In the be 
ng the Weed was"? Why does it declare that when 
egan the Word was already in existence? There 
an be only one answer, that he existed eternally. 

t is significant that the Son is not called a Word, but 
the Word; Scripture gives no other means of the Father's 
-xpression but the-Son. He, and he alone, is “the efful- 
gence of his glory, and the very image of his substance "2 
The expression of God's mind in the creating of the 
world,? the upholding of the world, the redeeming of the 
world,* has been effected through the activity of “the 
\Vord"". As far as we can tell from Scripture God has 

never expressed himself apart from the Word. Can we 
en conceive of a time when the Word was not, when 
the eternal God was without utterance or expression? 
\re we to believe that he was obliged to create the Word 
to express himself? Such a thought is surely incredible. 
The statement with which Scripture opens, “In the be 
ginning God " finds its counterpart in the opening of John’s 
gospel, “In the beginning the Word” and prepares us to 
accept the tremendous statement that follows — to accept 
it without tampering with it to make it fit a theory — 
“the Word was God”S 


In the cross-examination of a witness it is often the 
l Hebrews 1: 3. 2 = Pa > Heeaes 5) 

1: 17. 4 Colossians 1: 


facts which emerge accidentally that provide the m a 
convincing witess to the truth, Just because they are un 
intentional, rather than calculated and 

is with this theme in Scripture. Not only in the all 

¥- Dut in the most casual allusions and seemingly 
incidental statements scattered throughout Scripture, do 
we Hine pointers to the truth. For there are. 
passages in which the name of the Son is linked with 
that of the Father in such a way, and im such connections 
poe 2n honest inquirer in no doubt as to how the 
person of the Son is to be viewed. Let us look at some 
of them. 
Jesus said, “ If a man love me, he will keep my word: 
and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him 
and make our abode with him.” And again, “But no v 
have they both seen and hated both me and my Father.”? 
Then in the epistles we read, “Grace to you and = 
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."3 “Now 
may our God and Father himself, and our Lord Jesus 
direct our way unto you.”* “Looking for the blessed 
hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and 
Saviour Jesus Christ.’”5 Finally in the book of Revelation, 
“Salvation unto our God which sitteth on the throne, and 
unto the Lamb.Ӣ 
These are but a sample of the many that could be 
quoted. Do they not leave the reader with the strong 
impression that these persons belong to the same plane, 
the same order of being? When we find created beings 
innumerable, out of every nation under heaven, rendering 
to the Lamb the same ascription of worship and homage 
that they ascribe to the peg God, we Acs we ag 
think that this t gulf that separates creatu 
the Creator separates him from God, and not him from. 

: 41 Thes- 
1 2 2. 2 John 15: 24. 3 Romans 1: 7. h 
PEE ‘ 11. $ Titus 2: 13. 6 Revelation 7: 10. 


man? How would it sound to us if Scripture was to read, 
“Grace to you and peace from God our Father and 
Michael his archangel’? Or if Scripture led us to ascribe 
“ Salvation unto our God which sitteth on the throne, and 
unto the angel Gabriel"? Then consider him who is seen 
in the above Scriptures, in company with the Father, in- 
dwelling those who believe and obey him, and who is, with 
the Father, the joint source of grace and peace to believing 
men, the joint director of the steps of his servants, the 
joint object of their ascriptions of worship. Is he merely 
1 supreme spirit-creature? Is he only a kind of super- 
archangel who had a beginning in time, and might have an 
end, if his Creator so desired? 


“Who hath directed the Spirit of Jehovah?’ inquires 
the prophet. Plainly implied in the question is the 
answer, Only Jehovah himself, as the rest of the chapter 
emphasizes, No one but God could have authority to 
direct the Spirit of God. But if this is so, how do we 
account for the words of Jesus when he speaks of the 
Comforter, the Holy Spirit, as the one “ whom I will send 
unto you from the Father”,? and again “If I go, I will 
send him unto you’? It was also Jesus who breathed 
on the apostles in the upper room, and said in anticipation 
of Pentecost, “Take ye the Holy Spirit”;* this act of 
breathing was perhaps symbolic, but it was also mislead- 
ing and deceptive if Jesus had no authority to bestow the 
Spirit of God. 

It is significant that Isaiah 40: 13 may also be rendered, 
“Who hath meted out the Spirit of Jehovah?” (R.v. mar- 
gin). Christ has done so, according to Peter on the day 
of Pentecost, for “being therefore by the right hand of 

\ Isaiah go: 13. 2 John 15: 26. 3 John 16: 7. 4 John 
20: 22 Lit. trans. 


CoS exalted, and having received of the Father 
promise of the Holy Spirit, he (fesus) hath poured fi 
for meted out) this, which ye see and hear”’ To Pe 
this was simply the fulfilment of the promise he had ne: 
himsell from Jesus, “1 will vend him unto you”. 
had John the Baptist, the greatest of the prophets, | os 
witness to Jesus as the Bestower of the Spirit: “ ther 
rte he that is mightier than L, the Jatchet of whos 
+ | am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize 
with the Holy Spirit and with fire”? But 
‘an direct the Spirit of God, and yet Scripture so clearly 
speaks of Christ directing the Spirit of God, how can 
resist the conclusion that Christ is God? - 
Jn further confirmation of this we find that the Spir 
of God which inspired the prophets is doaxthed Et pick Pet 
as “ the Spirit of Christ which was in them”? se 
where the Spirit of God is described as “ the Spi ¢ of 
Son”’A “the Spirit of Jesus Christ”? “the ‘ 
Jesus 6 Since the New Testament reveals so conclusive! 
that the special activity of the Spirit of God is towz 
Christ, that it is his peculiar task to bear witness 
Christ,” to glorify Christ,? to take of the things of Chris 
and declare them unto us,? how can he be less than 
who not only bestows the divine Spirit, but is the 
absorbing object of his activity? 


Scripture has a characteristic expression for the who 
universe, for all created things, animate or inanimate; 

is the “all things”. “ All things were made es him [the 
Son)” “For in him were all things created . and 


LActs 2: 33. 2 Luke 3: 16. 1 
4 Galatians 4: 6. 5 Philippians 1: 19. 16: 7 
7 John 15: 2. John 16: 14 9 John 16: 1 
© john 1: 3 


is before all things." How could Christ exist before the 

“all things”, the whole created universe, and create the 

“all things”, while at the same time being part of them, 

which would be the case if he had been created by God? 

Notice how Scripture uses the timeless present that relates 
to the eternal existence of deity when it says, “he is [not 
was] before all [created] things ”. 

We learn from the same passage in Colossians that the 
“all things” were created “in him ”, “through him”, 
and “unto him”. “Through him” suggests that he was 
the agent of the Father in creation (cp. Hebrews 1: 2), but 
lest we should think that this means that the Son was 
“ an-inferior workman, creating simply for the glory of a 
higher Master, for a God superior to himself”, it states: 
“all things have been created through him and unto 
him”, that is, for his possession, his pleasure, and his 
glory. God is surely the end of all created beings, as the 
apostle affirms, “ Of him, and through him, and unto him, 
are all things ”,? but here in Colossians we see that Christ 
is the end of all created things, that they have been created 
“unto him ”; how then can we escape the conclusion that 
Christ is God? 

The Bible teaches us that creation is a work peculiar to 
God, in which his character and glory are revealed to 
men. “Tam Jehovah, and there is none else; beside me 
there is no God . . . I form the light, and create darkness; 
I make peace and create evil [i.e. adversity]; I am Jehovah 
that doeth all these things.”3 “For the invisible things 
of [God] since the creation of the world are clearly seen, 
being perceived through the things that are made, even 
his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be with- 
out excuse.’4 “Fear God, and give him glory; . . . and 
worship him that made the heaven and the earth and sea 
and fountains of waters.”5 If Jehovah created the world 

1 Colossians 1: 16, 17. 2 Romans II: 36. 3 Isaiah 45: 
5, 7. 4 Romans 1: 20. 5 Revelation 14: 7. 


through an inferior being, who w: himself created, 
can creation be that @ivine work which 

forth Jehovah as the ealy God, the only one to be 
shipped and adored. and which reveals uniquely his ¢ 
lasting power and divinity, as these verses teach? # a 
deed Christ be a creature, by bestowing upon him suck 
wisdom and power necessary to create all things, has net 
God subjected mankind to the grievous temptation of 
worshipping as God him through whom all things we 
created? If Jesus Christ be not God, then this very 
of creation, designed to lead men to the knowledge of 
true God, must of necessity invite them to worship 
serve the creature, Christ, rather than the Creator, 


Throughout the Old Testament we discover that it is 
peculiarly and solely the work of Jehovah to be the Save 
our and Redeemer of his people. How characteristic 
such statements as these: “Beside me there is no 
our ”;? “ Salvation belongeth unto Jehovah ”;s “I Jehovals 
am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the Mighty One 
Jacob.”4 Heathen nations on the other hand are 
proached for their folly in praying to gods that « 
save.5 But in the New Testament the work of salve 
and redemption is attributed to Christ, who came 
ly to save his people from their sins, and who is 
designated as “ the Saviour of the world”.® If then, there 
is no Saviour but God, and Jesus is “the Saviour of the 
world”, it is impossible to resist the conclusion that Jesas 
is God; the Jehovah Saviour of the Old Testament is 
Saviour Christ of the New. This is confirmed by ts 
44: 6 which reads: “Thus saith Jehovah, the King 
Israel, and his Redeemer Jehovah of Hosts: 1 am the & 

1 Romans 1: 25. 7 Isaiah 4g: 11. 3 Psalm 4: & + ale 
4g: 1. SlIsaiah 44: 17; 44: 20, § John 4: 42: 1 JOWR a: a 


and I am the last”, for this description of Jehovah the 
Redeemer, “the first and the last”, is three times attribu- 
ted to Christ in the book of Revelation.t . 

Job's wonderful prophecy concerning the Redeemer is 
conclusive: “I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that 
he shall stand up at the last upon the earth: and after 
my skin hath been thus destroyed, yet from my flesh shall 
| see God: whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes 
shall behold, and not another."2 Two vital facts emerge 
from this wonderful statement: the one whom Job des- 
cribes as “my Redeemer” must refer to Jesus Christ, 
since he is to stand up at the last upon the earth, and Job 
is to see him with his own eyes in the flesh; and secondly, 
this Redeemer is God. 


“Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” Most 
men, however feeble their conception of God, have an 
innate conviction that there is a God of justice superin- 
tending the affairs of men. But when we learn that “ God 
shall bring every work into judgment, with every hidden 
thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil”,4 we are 
staggered at the immensity of the task. “Jehovah is a 
God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.”> 
There is no rough and ready calculation in the court of 
heaven, for the divine judge weighs every act, and metes 
out perfect justice. Every factor, mental, moral, and 
physical, must be taken into consideration; every action 
must be viewed in the light of heredity and environment, 
light and understanding, good and evil influence, motive 
and opportunity, deterrents and consequences. Who but 
an omniscient God, all-wise and all-knowing, is competent 
to judge accurately one life, or even one act of one life? 

1 Revelation 1: 17; 2: 8; 22: 13. 2 Job 19: 25-27. 3 Gene- 
sis 18: 26. 4 Ecclesiastes 12: 14. 5 1 Samuel 2: 3. 


But we learn that the Father has renounced all respon- 
sibility in the matter of judgment, and caused it all to 
devolve upon the Son, “ for neither doth the Father judge 
any man, but he hath given all judgment unto the Son ie 
he, and he alone, shall “judge the alive and the dead”? 
“judge the secrets of men’”,3 and “ give unto each one of 
you according to your works".4 Consider the myriads of 
moral beings, both heavenly and human, that shall be 
brought before him. Remember that in his hands will 
rest the decision concerning their eternal destiny. Reflect 
on the statement that “he hath given all judgment unto 
the Son”. There will be no complex cases that he will 
find himself incompetent to handle, or reserve for a— 
higher authority. Ponder the spectacle of that supreme — 
court of the universe over which he will preside, and re-— 
member that the eternal destiny of those innumerable 
beings, their endless bliss or endless woe, will rest in his 
hands. No appeal will be possible; his decisions will be 
final, irrevocable, and eternal. From the face of the Son— 
of Man seated upon his august throne they “ shall go 
away into eternal punishment: but the righteous into 
eternal life’”’.5 If we believe the Scripture that the man, 
Christ Jesus, is to perform such an office, that man must 

be God. 


That Scripture declares with one voice the absolute 
perfection of Christ’s character cannot be gainsaid. 
Were it otherwise he could never have been the out- 
shining of God’s glory, and the very image of his 
substance. As we contemplate this one who is “holy, — 
guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners”,6 who is 

1 John 5: 22. 22 Timothy 4: 1 Lit. trans. 3 Romans 
2: 16, 4 Revelation 2: 23. S$ Matthew 25: 46. 
6 Hebrews 7: 26. 


“without blemish and without spot”! “who did no 
sin”? “ who knew no sin”,3 and “in [whom] is no sin”4 
let us ask ourselves what moral and spiritual perfections 
are attributed to Jehovah that are not also attributed to 

Behold him who quietly affirmed, “I am the light of 
the world ”;5 it was he, who, with one trenchant question, 
and one penetrating glance, caused his adversaries to slink 
away convicted by their own consciences,$ or rendered 
them speechless with the unanswerable challenge, “ which 
of you convicteth me of sin?”? Jt was he who wrung 
from the lips of a reluctant Pilate the admission, “I find 
no fault in this man”,8 and moved a heathen centurion 
to exclaim in astonishment, “ Certainly this was a 
righteous man”;? it was he, who, in the depth of his 
agony, could so convince the criminal dying by his side 
that he declared, “this man hath done nothing out of 
place".10 Does the Old Testament introduce us to 
Jehovah as the Holy One?" Then with equal emphasis 
is Jesus so called in the New.!2 How then can Jesus be 
one with Jehovah in moral and spiritual perfection, as 
Scripture presents him, if at the same time he is separated 
from him by that infinite gulf that parts deity from every 
other being? Furthermore, if Jehovah could create a 
sinless Christ, how was it that he ever saw fit to create ; 
Adam who could and did so quickly fall? Why did he 
not start the race with the sinless “last Adam”, instead 
of the sinful first Adam? é 

The conversation of Jesus with the rich young ruler is 
significant. “Good teacher, what shall I do to inherit 
eternal life?” was the young man’s question. “ And 
Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is 

11 Peter r: 19. 21 Peter 2: 22. 32 Corinthians 5: 21. 
‘1 John 3: 5. 5 John 8:12. 6 John 8:79. 7 John 8: 46. 
§ Luke 23: 4. 9 Luke 23: 47. 10 Luke 23: 41 Lit. trans. 
U Isaiah go: 25. 12 Acts 3: 14. 

i4 JEG OV WALDO —~ WO We tbe 2 
yn, wave ome, even COALS (ee it We etek Gea jos 
Aid nin deny that he Was good, tox tod ts Fp 
tioner calling him good; he merely aces pn Dn 
addressed him, In the wording A te ers 
question there Was a latent ComttaicGon, jon 
was pointing out, The lorce A the Lends question 

he expressed thus: "You address me by the memeas 
‘twacher’ lop, Luke %: 12) and yet you cab me good 
only God is good, and if | arm acknomietges as uty ( 
then | must be acknowledged as truly Gol” 

not only sets forth the absolute goodness of Jeous Carat 
but shows that abwlute goodness and dbwdlase Getty are 
inseparable, It must be plainly understood teat toe dextal 
of Christ’s deity involves, on the axthority of kis ows 
words quoted here, the denial of his essenticl govtness,; 
the two stand or fall together 


In the fourth gospel there are recorded taree Gsinct 
instances of Jesus claiming to be the Son of and 
what is of the deepest significance, how that claim 
understood, “For this cause therefore the jews 
the more to kill him, because he not only brake the sab- 
bath but also called God his own Father, making himself 
equal with God.”? “ The Jews answered him. For 
work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and becamse 
that thou, being a man, makest thyself Cod“? ~The 
Jews answered [Pilate], We have a law, and by that 
he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of 
God.’* <q 

These quotations establish two points beyond doubt 
The first, that the Jews took for granted that the special 
claim of Jesus to be the Son of God, and his calimg ~ God 

1 Luke 18: 18, 19. 2 John 5: & 3 John 10: 
4 John 19: 7. 


his own Father” was nothing less than claiming divine 
equality with God, or making himself God. Notice that 
Jesus never made any attempt to deny their assertion, 
or to show them that they had put the wrong construction 
on his claim. The second, that this claim of divine son- 
ship, which the Jews plainly understood as a claim to 
deity, was the real issue in the trial before the Sanhedrin 
which issued in his crucifixion. A celebrated Jew, M. 
Salvador, has made it clear in his book Jésus Christ, that 
in view of the claims of Jesus, a Jew had no logical al- 
ternative to belief in his godhead, except the imperative 
duty of putting him to death. It is inconceivable that the 
Jews condemned him simply because they misunderstood 
the true nature of his claims. It is plain from the records 
that they put him to death because they saw clearly, yet 
refused to accept, the claims he was making. Of this 
Peter reminded them soon after, “ Ye denied the Holy and 
Righteous One’’.! 

Closely connected with his claim to be God’s Son was 
his claim to be the Christ or the Messiah. What kind of 
Messiah had the Jewish prophets led their people to 
expect? Isaiah had described the coming one as “ Emman- 
uel” — God with us,? as “the mighty God, the Father 
of eternity ’;? Jeremiah called him “ Jehovah our right- 
cousness";# Micah spoke of his eternal pre-existence;s 
Daniel predicted his everlasting dominion through 
Zechariah God refers to him as “the man that is my fel- 
low";? while in Malachi his advent is described as the 
Lord coming suddenly to his temple.8 That the Jews 
looked upon his claim to be the Son of God as a claim 
to deity we have already seen. Clearly they linked with 
this his claim to be the Messiah, as we see from the 
solemn adjuration of the High Priest, “I adjure thee by 

1 Acts 3: 14. 2 Isaiah 7: 14. 3 Isaiah 9: 6. _4 Jeremiah 
23: Se 5 Micah 5: 2. 6 Daniel 7: 14. 7 2chmiah 
13: 7. 8 Malachi 3: 1. 


the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the 
Christ lor Messiah], the Son of God.” From the Jewish 
standpoint the fate of Jesus was determined by his un- 
hesitating reply, “Thou hast said [the truth].”"! 


We have been seeking to discover from Scripture 
whether this impassable gulf that divides the Infinite from 
the finite, the Uncreated from the created, is a gulf that 
separates Christ together with all created beings, from 
God; or whether it separates Christ and God from them. 
The Scriptures considered thus far have shown beyond 
question that no such gulf ever existed between him and 
his Father, but that he possessed an identity of nature as 
“the only begotten Son”. Therefore this impassable gulf 
must lie between him and all created beings. Does Scrip- 
ture bear this out? Does it show man standing in the 
same relation to Christ as to God? Does it require that 
man shall render the same homage (that due from the 
creature to the Creator) to the Son as to the Father? One 
sentence will suffice to answer, perhaps the most conclu- 
sive on the subject to be found in Scripture, because it is 
virtually impossible to make it mean anything other than 
what it says. From the lips of Jesus himself we learn that 
it is the express desire of the Father “ that all may honour 
the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honour- 
eth not the Son honoureth not the Father which sent 
him ’’? 

A zealous religious worker who denied the deity of — 
Christ said to a Christian friend of the writer, “ The dif- 
ference between us is this: you make much of Christ, 
but we make much of Jehovah.” Had the speaker under- 
stood the import of this verse he would have seen that 
the honour he refused to give to the Son he was thereby 

1 Matthew 26: 63, 64. 2 John 5: 23. 


denying to the Father. The apostle Peter would say to 
such a_ one what he said to the deeply religious people 
of his day, “‘ Ye denied the Holy and Righteous One” — 
though no doubt he would be ready to add, “1 know 
that in ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.”! That 
the honour due to the Father is due to the Son does not 
however hinge upon one proof text, but is the very warp 
and woof of the New Testament revelation concerning 
Christ. This may be established along four lines: knowing 
Christ; trusting Christ; praying to Christ; worshipping 


Spiritual life, eternal life depends upon spiritual know- 
ledge; not knowledge of Scriptural facts, not knowledge 
of a system of doctrine, but heart knowledge of the only 
true God.? The vengeance of God will yet fall upon those 
who know him not.5 But Scripture places the knowledge 
of the Son on the same level as the knowledge of the 
Father, and equally essential to the possession of eternal 
life: “ And this is life eternal, that they should know 
thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, 
even Jesus Christ.’”4 “If ye had known me, ye would 
have known my Father also.”5 Furthermore, knowing the 
Father depends upon the will of the Son to reveal him, 
for “neither doth any know the Father, save the Son, and 
he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal him’; hence 
the bestowing of eternal life upon men is in the hands 
of the Son.” 

Paul shows us that his most intense desires and longings 
are for a fuller knowledge of Christ: “ What things were 
gain to. me, these have I counted loss for Christ. Yea 

1 : 2 i 1: 34. 3 2 Thessalonians 1: 
8 ae ise 5 yon ment peter 1: 2. 6 Matthew 
11s 2a 7 John ro: 28; 17: 2. 


verily, and I count all things to be Joss for the excellency 
of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom ] 
suffered the Joss of all things, and do count them but 
dung, that I may gain Christ... that I may know him, 
and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship 
his sufferings.”t It is characteristic of all the apostle 
teaching to emphasize that not only salvation, but full 
spiritual maturity is bound up with the knowledge of 
Christ: “till we all attain unto the unity of the faith, 
and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a full gro 
man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness 
Christ."? Since the knowledge of the Son is the key 
the knowledge of the Father, and since there is at le 
as much emphasis placed upon the. knowledge of the 
as the other, how can we escape the conclusion that Ch: 
is God? 


The New Testament does not present salvation as b 
available in the name of Jehovah, but in the name « 
Jesus Christ of Nazareth, “for neither is there any o 
name under heaven, that is given among men, whel 
we must be saved”’3 It is faith in Christ alone that j 
fies a man before God,‘ and saves him from his sin 
this faith that saves is no intellectual assent to the tu 
of Christ’s existence, or even the nature of his w 
“Thou believest that God is One; thou doest well: 
demons also believe, and shudder.”6 Such a faith doe 
not deliver demons from their misery, nor does it sa 
men from their sin. It must be “with the heart ma 
believeth unto righteousness ”,? and the heart includes 
only the mind, but also the affections and the will. 

1 Philippians 3: 7-10. 2 Ephesians 4: 12, 13. 3 Acts 4: 
10-12. 4 Romans 3: 22, 26. 5 Acts 16: 31. 6 James 25 
7 Romans 10: 10. 


mind perceives him who is the object of faith; the affec- 
tions embrace him; the will yields to him, The heart is 
thus captivated — mind, affections and will — by the 
object of its faith. In a sense the believer merges his per- 
sonal existence with the one in whom he believes; he is 
“joined” to Christ,! he is “ in ‘Christ ” (this and equivalent 
expressions are found about roo times in Paul’s writings), 
and can affirm “ Christ liveth in me”.? 

If then Christ is truly the object of saving faith, as 
Scripture declares, and if this saving faith is of such a 
quality as to involve the voluntary submission of one’s 
whole inner being — mind, affections, and will — to him, 
so that one is transplanted into a new spiritual sphere, 
“in Christ”, and so transformed as to become “a new 
creature ’”’,3 can we really believe that this one who is to 
be thus trusted, depended upon, submitted to, who thus 
becomes the very sphere of our spiritual existence, is less 
than God? What measure of trust is the believer to give 
to the Almighty over and above what Scripture requires 
him to give to the Son of God? 


All prayer, as we properly understand the word, is only 
rightly addressed to God. In this, unitarians who deny 
Christ’s deity, and trinitarians who affirm it, are agreed. 
But according to the former, prayer should not be made 
to Christ, for he is not God; according to the latter, prayer 
may be made to Christ, for he is God. What saith the 
Scripture? Do we find any examples of praying to Christ? 
Are believers forbidden or encouraged to pray to him? 

There are many in the gospel narratives who came and 
‘besought ” Jesus,‘ but can we be sure that this was pray- 
ing to him as God? He said to the woman at the well, 

1 Romans 7: 4; 1 Corinthians 6: 17. 2 Galatians 2: 20. 
32 Corinthians 5: 17. 4 Matthew 14: 36. 


“I thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith 
to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of 
him, and he would have given thee living water.”! If we 
believe that that gift is available today, on the same con- 
ditions, how does praying to Christ to give us “ living 
water” differ essentially from praying to God for his 
blessing? How does the prayer of David, “ Have mercy 
upon me, O God”? differ essentially from the cry of 
Bartimaeus, “Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy on 
me’?3 Similar words addressed to Christ have surely 
formed the saving prayer of multitudes who have passed 
from death to life, Certainly Paul’s prayer to Christ, 
“Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?’ was the turning 
point in his experience of conversion. Are we then per- 
mitted to call on Christ at the first for salvation, but 
thereafter never to call on him again? Let Stephen, the 
first Christian martyr, answer it, when “ full of the Holy 
Spirit ”, he finished his Christian course as Paul had com- 
menced it, with a prayer to Christ, “Lord Jesus, receive 
my spirit.”> Almost the same words that Jesus uttered 
to the Father at the cross, Stephen prayed to Christ at 
his martyrdom. 

There is in fact abundant Scriptural evidence that pray- 
ing to Christ was the rule, not the exception, amongst 
the early Christians, for they are characteristically des- 
cribed as those “ calling on the name of Christ’”.6 Then 
there are those breathings of the sacred writers, which 
are themselves prayers: “I hope in the Lord Jesus”;? “I 
thank . . . Christ Jesus our Lord.”8 In fact the last 
prayer of the Bible, expressing what has been the longing 
of the church down the years, is a prayer addressed to 
Christ, ‘Come, Lord Jesus.” Isaiah rightly reminds us: 
“They have no knowledge that . . . pray unto a god that 

1 John 4: 10. 2 Psalm 51: I. 3 Mark 10: 47. 4 Acts 

AN. 5 Acts 7: 55, 59: 6 Acts 9: 14, 20, 21; 22: 16 

* 16, 55, 59. 
: Corinthians 1: 2. 7 Philippians 2: 19. 8 1 Timothy 1: 12- 


cannot save”’,! but those who call upon Christ are i 
unto one who is “able to saye of the wishin tee 
that draw near unto God through him”? Those who have 
cried to him and received his gracious answer, cannot 
doubt that they have truly communed with God. 


The worship of created beings is due to Jehovah, and 
to him alone, for the Scripture says, “Thou shalt worship 
Jehovah thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.”3 To 
worship any other god, whether spirit-being, angel, or 
man-made image is idolatry. If it can be shown from 
Scripture that men are enjoined not to worship Christ, 
and that he himself refused that worship which was due 
to God, then there is strong evidence that he was not 
truly divine. If on the other hand Scripture gives over- 
whelming evidence that men did worship him as God, 
and that he readily received it, and if we find that God 
encourages men to worship him, then the proof of his 
deity is conclusively established. 

The word in the Greek Testament meaning to worship! 
occurs about sixty times, and is used generally to refer 
to that adoration which is due to God, but which men 
in their ignorance sometimes give to other men, or in 
their folly to gods, the work of their own hands. We find 
godly men refusing such worship from their fellows, as 
when Peter refused the worship of Cornelius,’ or as when 
Paul and Barnabas in great consternation forbade the in- 
habitants of Lystra from doing sacrifice to them So it 
was with the angels: twice John, in the visions of Patmos, 
would have worshipped the angel that showed him such 
great revelations, and twice he was met with the same 
firm refusal, “See thou do it not . . . worship 

l Isaiah 45: 20. 2 Hebrews 7: 25. 3 Matthew 4: 9, 10. 
proskuned. 5 Acts 10: 25, 26. 6 Acts 14: 14, 15. 


men, “a multitede of the heavenly bast ~ 
the infant Jesus at his bith, amd thes ac Godt cope 
What Jesus resolutely refused t0 do to Sees the wie 
men did to the infant Som of God ~they fell down and 
worshipped him" + The worship of jesus Cart by mes 
— the gospel narratives: By the 
leper.« the ruler of the Jews. the blind man’ the disciples 
in the boat the Canaanitish woman! the mother of James 
and John? the Gadareme dGemoniac®® ip bis resarrectiom 
the two Marys:" at his ascension, the cleves Gecpien™ 


Are we to believe thet this worsiip of i 
merely the payment of reverence dee w a pee 
or of honour to 2 great benefactor, who under Gad Rad 
blessed them greatly im bealiimg their bodies of saving ther 
souls? Such a view is faced with Imseperable Gini 
The man born blind gave mo Z 
one who had healed bir. Gil Jeses told bie who he wae 



shipped him Clearly, then. 
for what he had done. but 

then take the view that this worship besowed on 
the Messiah, was something less than the 




and the Omega. the King of kimgs and Lord of 
Lamb which is in the midst of the throne 
opening vision of this glorioes person that Jobe recom 
“when I saw him, I fell at bis feet as ome 


and ever". He shows us myriads of angels round the 

- to receive the power, and riches, and Wisdom, and 
might, and honour, and glory, and blessing”? Is this the 
sort of praise we would expect created spirits to render 
to a fellow created spirit, however exalted? Is this wor. 
ship of an inferior quality to that which is rendered to 
the Ahnighty? : 

Notice how the vision continues: “And every created 
thing which is in the heaven, and on the earth, and under 

earth, and on the sea, and all things that are in them, 
neard I saying, Unto him that sitteth on the throne, and 
unto the Lamb, be the blessing, and the honour, and the 
glory, and the dominion, for ever and ever.”3 Let it be 
n that all created things in the universe are here 
bing homage to their Creator. Is the Lamb found 
among them ascribing homage to his Creator also? Or is 
he found receiving from all created beings precisely the 
same homage, the same ascription of worship that is 
xddressed to the Almighty?‘ Earlier statements of Scrip- 
ture should have prepared us for such scenes, Jesus had 
revealed that it was the Father's express desire “ that all 
men should honour the Son, even as they honour the 
Father ’$ Paul reminds us that God has decreed “ that 
in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [created] 
things in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and 
fat every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, 
to the glory of God the Father”. How clearly these 
verses teach that the glory of the Father is bound up for- 
ever in the glory of the Son. 

Has not God said, “I am Jehovah: that is my name; 
and my glory will I not give to another”?? How then 
do we find him sharing his glory with the Lamb in the 

1 Revelation r: 5, 6. 2 Revelation 5: 11, 12. ‘3 Revelation 
52x 4 cp. Revelation 7: 10. 5 John 5: 23. 6 Philip- 
Pians 2: 10, II. 7 Isaiah 42: 8. 


midst of the Throne? It can only be that he does not 
view his Son as “another” of an inferior order, but as 
“the man that is my fellow” or equal, and so entitled 
to the honour and glory due to the Godhead. This is 
clearly how Paul interprets it, for at one place he exhorts, 
“He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord”) and at 
another he shows. that it is one of the characteristics of 
saints that they “glory in Christ Jesus a 

Sir John Kennaway, Bart., of Escot, grandfather of the 
present Sir John, and a fine Christian gentleman, was once 
incorrectly addressed by a friend of the writer as “ My 
Lord”. immediately he replied, “1 am not entitled to 
that.” This was the reaction of an upright and honest 
man, to refuse at once an honour to which he knew he 
was not entitled. But when Jesus was worshipped by 
Thomas with those remarkable words, “My Lord and my 
God”,3 he not only received them, but gently rebuked 
Thomas for taking so long to believe the truth. And have 
you, my reader, ever worshipped him thus? Or are you 
among the multitudes, some religious and some otherwise, 
who honour not the Son, and therefore honour not the 
Father who hath sent him?‘ 


Whether or not Christ is worshipped is not the only mat- 
ter affected by one’s verdict concerning his deity. It 
vitally affects something even more basic, for the whole 
question of man’s reconciliation to God hinges upon who 
Jesus is. The reader's personal salvation is at stake, for 
the Lord Jesus says today, as he said to religious people 
long ago, “ Except ye believe that I am he, ye shall die in 
your sins”.5 Did not Jesus reveal that Peter's confession, 
“Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" is the 
yery rock upon which the church is built? 

1 Corinthians 1: st 2 Philippians’ 5:14 96:00 Mea 
28. : Tok fies 5 John BP. 24. 6 Matthew 16: 16-18. . 


Centuries before Jesus came, Job expressed his longing 
for a mediator, one who would arbitrate on his behalf 
with God. The Almighty seemed too exalted, too remote 
to contemplate dealing directly with him, “For he is not 
a man, as I am, that I should answer him, that we should 
come together in judgment. There is no daysman 
umpire] betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us 
pboth.”! Job's longing for a daysman found fulfilment in 
the “one mediator between God and men, the man Christ 
Jesus”.? He it is, and only he, who may lay his hand 
upon them both, for being “in the form of God” he was 
“made in the likeness of men”, and so “the Word 
[which] was God . . . became flesh and dwelt among us”. 
To lay his hand upon God and man, as Job expressed it, 
required that he should be able to make personal contact 
with God in the divine realm, and with man in the human 
realm. So it was that in the fulness of time Jesus came 
from ‘the bosom of the Father”S to be “born of 
a woman”.6 As to his knowledge of God, he confessed, 
“neither doth any know the Father, save the Son eas 
to his knowledge of man, “he needed not that any one 
should bear witness concerning man; for he himself knew 
what was in man”. Only as the God-man could the Son 
be an effective mediator, representing God to man no less 
truly than man to God. 

Some have asserted that only a man who was perfect, 
not divine, was required to ransom man from the power 
of sin, for the apostle states, “For as through the one 
man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so 
through the obedience of the one [Jesus] shall the many 
be made righteous”. The view has been expressed thus 
in Let God be True (Watchtower Bible and Tract Society) : 
“That which was lost [by Adam’s transgression] was 

1 Job 9: 32. 21 Timothy 2: 5, A.V. 3 Philippians 2: 6, 7. 
4 John ES : 14. 5 John r: 18. © Galatians 4: 4. 7 Mat 
thew 11: 27. 8 John 2: 25. 9 Romans 5: 19. 

ecrifice] is whet was lost, mamely, perfect umn Gifle 
with its rights and earthly prospects. Gods jut ew, 
Denteroncmy 19: 21, was that Eke should o> for ke 
hence 2 perfect eemen life saciGced for 2 periect oa 
fe lost” (page 114). ~OF al God's foxhial ceo 
heaven, it pleased him to use this One most dear ow kim 
him to earth to become 2 perfect mam, ang 
mong Sher things the remsoming work” Gage 
: s 2 peries man, jeses stood im 2 posi Eee 

. “2 perfect buman life~ was mecesmy for 
to find perfection outside of deity? This has aiready berm 

made dear by our study of the character of 
own words, “none is good, save one, that is God” 
perfect human life is 2 spiritual and moral impomtbaiay 
unless deity puts on kumanity, and fies. 
than 2n innocent of evem silicss 
state, as that of Adem before the fall beta 
after being tested im its snlessmess has 
was with Christ, ~He suffered; and having beez 
riect [through tial, he became unto that 
him the author of eternal salvation “4 To speak 
perfect man Adam in the garden” is to confuse 
with perfection, and misunderstand 



“like for like”, or “a perfect human life sacrificed for a 
perfect human life lost”. See how it reads: 

“ But not as the trespass, so also is the free gift. For if 
by the trespass of the one the many died, much more did 
the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of the one 
man, Jesus Christ, abound unto the many. And not as 
through one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment 
came of one unto condemnation, but the free gift came 
of many trespasses unto justification. For if, by the tres- 
pass of the one, death reigned through the one; much more 
shall they that receive the abundance of grace and of the 
gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, even 
jesus Christ.”1 Had Romans 5: 19 been interpreted in 
the light of its context, the view under consideration 
would never have been expressed, for it is the negation 
of what the apostle is saying; he is not comparing but 
contrasting what was lost through Adam's transgression 
with what is bestowed through Christ’s obedience. Notice 
how he describes what we may have in Christ: “much 
more”, “the abundance of grace”, “reigning in life”. 
What did Adam know of these before he fell? Let the 
apostle sum up the argument in his own words (verse 20): 
“Where sin abounded, grace did abound more exceeding- 
ly.” Here is warrant enough for the sentiments of the 

In Christ the sons of Adam boast 
More blessings than their father lost. 

If, as some affirm, the sacrifice of Christ only avails to 
put the ransomed back where Adam was before he fell, 
then there is all the dire possibility that they shall again 
stumble as he did, and perish eternally. Is this then the 
“so great salvation” that Christ procured at such a price, 
which the apostle describes as “ much more”, “ the abun- 
dance of grace”, “ reigning in life”? Surely no one who 
has tasted it would ever be tempted to think so. 

1 Romans §: 15-17. 

JZ SIS OF WALARETH — wrap os we? 

Furthermore, if it were true tac Nike auus go for Tike 
and (hal the sacrifice of the Redeemer somst be at ies 
equivalent in value to the being or betas he is t0 
theri it is obvious that the sacrifice of ome perfect sn 
finite bike (if such could exist) conld enby sufhce $0 ame 
for the sin of one other finite fe Om tus hase : 
may be considered to have atoned for = of 
ut not of his posterity. Bat Scrigeme seaches thar 
s “the Saviour of the world 72 was sent “ thar 
wore ould be saved through hime "2 “he as the 
tion for our sins; and not for exes exiy, but also for 
wre world”? Further, it is deze tat angelic 

demption, that 2 secrifice was meeded which would 
embrace in its scope the millions upon mallons of created 
beings, past, present, and future, aud witch would 

the heavens and reconcile them 

that the shed blood of 2 sinless Adazs cosiid have accom 
plished it? Could 2 Michael or 2 Gabriel, thongh he 
without blemish or without spot. take buman form. be 
come obedient unto death, and thus effect sp preat 
tion? Here was a work not merely of saving souls 
death, but of “ bringing many soms mato glory ~* redeqe 
ing his people from all imiguity. and presenting “the 
church to himself a glorious church. mot haying spot or 
wrinkle or any such thing”? Let the wonder of it dawn 


redemption requires an infinite Redeemer: “I Jehovah, am 

thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer."* Ps 
: 42; 1 John 4: 2 Jobm 5: 17. 35 John 2: 2 ee 

shoot Tae ae page le 7 Tiems 2: 1: 2 Gaeaheae 

4 Job 4: 18; 15: 35; 25: 5 J z : 
PP re el 7 Ephesians 5: 27. §% Isaiah 49: 26 


Examination must now be made of some of the argu- 
ments used by those who deny that Christ is God. 


Revelation 3: 14 is sometimes cited as proof that Jesus 
Christ was created, and so is inferior to God. It reads: 
“To the angel of the Church in Laodicea write; These 
things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the 
beginning of the creation of God”. This last descriptive 
title is interpreted to mean that Jesus was the first being 
that God created. Let us put this to the test. This word 
“ beginning’! is only found twice elsewhere in Revelation. 
In 21: 6 God says ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the 
beginning and the end”. No one who believes in God at 
all would suggest that this means that God had a begin- 
ning, or that he will one day have an end, but rather that 
he is the beginning and the end of everything, the origina- 
tor and terminator of all that exists. 

The other mention of this word is in 22: 13 and is 
almost identical, ‘‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the 
first and the last, the beginning and the end”; but this 
time the speaker is the one who says in the preceding 
verse, “‘ Behold I come quickly”, and to whom his people 
respond in verse 20, ‘“‘ Amen: come, Lord Jesus”. So the 
Son is also with the Father the originator and the termina- ° 
tor, the first cause, who will bring to its consummation 
all that he has commenced. How then can he himself 
be created? No, indeed; the word “beginning” in 
Revelation 3: 14 carries its primary meaning of origin, as 
in these other two instances of the word in the book of 
Revelation; Christ Jesus is “the origin of the creation of 
God”, the one who gave beginning to that creation, and 
to this fact Scripture testifies with one voice.? He is also 
“the firstborn of all creation”, which emphasizes his 

1 Greek arché. 2 John 1: 3; Colossians 1: 16. 


heirship, the one destined to inherit all that he created, so 
the passage continues, ‘‘all things have been created 
through him, and unto him”.* 


To some the statement, “ Wherefore also God highly 
exalted him [Jesus]? creates a difficulty. If Christ were 
God then he already held the place of absolute supremacy 
in the universe; how then could he be exalted? We have 
only to examine the passage in its context and the diffi- 
culty is resolved. The question may be answered by ask- 
ing another, suggested by the two preceding verses: How 
could one who Scripture declares was “in the form of 
God”, was ‘“‘ with God”, and “ was God”, empty himself 
and humble himself?3. The answer: By “taking the form 
of a bondservant, being made in the likeness of men .. . 
becoming obedient unto death”. This involved the 
greatest act of self-humbling the universe has ever seen, 
or ever shall see; and it is this supreme example of divine 
humility that the apostle is holding up to the Philippian 
Christians. That “God highly exalted him” is but the 
complementary truth, and only what we should have 
expected. What should stagger us is not that he has been 
highly exalted, but that he who was “in the form of 

God” should ever have humbled himself for the salvation — 

of sinful men. Is it not right and proper that we should 
now “behold the Son of Man ascending where he was 
before’’?4 It was for this that he had requested his Father 
when he said, “ O Father, glorify thou me with thine own 

self with the glory which I had with thee before the world 

was ”’.> 
A number of years ago, after a meeting in the Chicago 
Tabernacle, a servant of God had conversation with a 

1 Colossians 1: 15, 16; Hebrews 1: 2. 2 Philippians 2: 9. 
3 Philippians 2: 7, 8. 4 John 6: 62. S John 17: 5. 


cultured young German, son of a rationalistic theologian. 
He found him to be a sincere seeker after the truth, but 
one who met grave difficulties in the New Testament, 
one of which was the seeming contradictions in Christ’s 

own testimony concerning himself. “He says in one 
place, ‘I and the Father are one”; and again, ‘He that 
hath seen me hath seen the Father’. . . . But he says 

on another occasion that his Father was greater than he. 
Now he cannot be one with God and at the same time 
inferior to God. And he says, ‘All authority hath been 
given unto me’. Now that is an admission that he had 
not power himself, but it was given to him; and surely 
he that receives power is inferior to him that gives it. 
Now are not these contradictions in his own testimony?” 
Having read aloud the passages mentioned, the Christian 
replied: “‘ Suppose you had been on earth when Jesus was 
here and had heard him make these apparently contra- 
dictory statements, and had asked him. . . . And suppose 
he had said in reply, ‘My child, what if, for the purpose 
of your redemption from sin and the curse of the law, I 
voluntarily laid aside my eternal glory, and suffered my- 
self to be born of a woman, and made under the law, thus 
limiting my being to the condition of your nature, that I 
might, in that nature, offer up to God a sacrifice for sin 
as would enable him to proclaim forgiveness of sins to the 
whole world? In such a case can you not conceive that 
there is no contradiction in these sayings of mine? For 
indeed I am one with the Father, and he that hath seen 
me hath seen the Father; but for the purposes of the 
atonement I have voluntarily assumed an inferior position, 
that I might take your place and die, which I could not 
have done unless I had taken a subordinate place, yea, and 
your very nature. Thus I sometimes speak of my eternal 
relation to God, and sometimes of my relation to him as 
the messenger of the covenant sent forth to redeem,’” 
He listened attentively to this, and then said as if speak- 


ing to himself: “ Yes, that might be; I can see how that 
might be. But did Christ ever make such an explanation? 
Is that the theory of Christ's subordination to the Father?” 

Turning to Philippians chapter two the Christian re- 
plied: “Certainly this is the explanation of it; for see, 
Paul was trying to inculcate lessons of humility by ex- 
horting the Philippians to take voluntarily a subordinate 
place in relation to each other, though they might as a 
matter of fact and right stand on an equality. He en- 
forced his exhortation by this reference, ‘ Have this mind 
in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the 
form of God, counted it not a prize [a treasure to be tightly 
grasped] to be on an equality with God, but emptied him- 
self, taking the form of a servant, being made in the 
likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, 
he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, 
yea, the death of the Cross.’ ” 

The young man took the Bible in his hand, and read the 
passage over and over to himself, and said: ‘‘ Wonderful! 
wonderful!” And still holding the Book in his hand, with 
quivering chin and moistened eyes he said: “ Yes, the Son 
of God made himself of no reputation for me, and took 
my nature and died on the cross for me!” And then 
looking up into the Christian’s face, he said: “ What have 
I got to do about it?e 

“ Accept him; believe on him; and confess him as your 

“May 12” 

God’s servant replied by opening his Bible to Romans 
10: 9: “If thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as 
Lord, and shalt believe in thine heart that God raised him 
from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” 

“Let me see that!” 

The book was handed to him, and he read it aloud, 
and then said: “I do believe in my heart that God raised 

1 Weymouth. 


him from the dead; and I do acknowledge him as my 

Together they dropped upon their knees while the ser- 
vant of God gave thanks for his conversion, and committed 
him to God’s keeping. (From Taking Men Alive by C. G. 


The intercessory work of Christ on behalf of his people 
has been thought to imply an inferiority to God. How 
can he make supplication to God, and yet be equal 
with God? Since this work of intercession is a direct 
result of his becoming man, the foregoing has already 
answered the difficulty. We have not found anything 
in Scripture to suggest that he thus interceded before 
he was made flesh; but having been found in fashion as a 
man, having suffered for sin, and risen again, he has en- 
ered “into heaven itself, now to appear before the face 
of God for us”.! Scripture is emphatic that we are repre- 
sented in heaven, not by “a glorious spirit-creature”, but 
by a glorified man, the man Christ Jesus. Scripture states 
explicitly that it was “the Son of Man”? whom Stephen 
saw standing at God’s right hand, and that it is “ the Son 
of Man "3 whom men shall yet see “ coming on the clouds 
of heaven”. Our present mediator is (not was) “ the man 
Christ Jesus ’’.4 His intercession is part of his mediatorial 
work, and in direct consequence of his suffering as man. 
He could never intercede as our great high priest apart 
from his humanity. “ For every high priest, being taken 
from among men, is appointed for men in things pertain- 
ing to God. . . . So Christ also... .”5 Only as man is 
he touched “with the feeling of our infirmities "6 
But it must be emphasized that it is by his very presence 
that Christ intercedes for his own. “He does not bend as 

1 Hebrews 9: 24. 2 Acts 7: 56. 3 Matthew 26: X 
4 y Timothy 2: 5. A.V. 5 Hebrews 5: 1, 5. © Hebrews 4: 15. 


a suppliant before the sanctity of God; he is a priest upon 
his throne.’ Christ's perpetual presentation of himself 
before the Father is that which constitutes his interces- 
sion” (Liddon), “He ever liveth to make intercession ” 
means that his very existence in the presence of God in 
all the worthiness of his person, and in all the sufficiency 
of his finished work, constitutes a perpetual plea on behalf 
of his people. His very appearing before the face of God 
is “for us’.2 We have seen the nature of his intercession, 
and have observed that it hinges upon his humanity, which 
in turn depends upon that gigantic step which exchanged 
“the form of God” for “the form of a bondservant ”; 
instead of viewing all this as a reason for belittling his 
person and position, it should only serve to magnify the 
greatness of his grace. ‘For ye know the grace of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your 
sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might 
be rich.’ 


There are other Scriptures which some have thought 
implied that the Son is inferior to the Father. Christ said 
himself, ‘ the Father is greater than 1”.4 It is also said of | 
Christ, ‘he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even 
the Father .. . then shall the Son also himself be subjected 
to him that did subject all things unto him, that God may 
be all in all.”> Can we give full weight to these important 
passages without contradicting what has been asserted 
concerning the deity of Christ? The answer is, un- 
doubtedly, yes. 

Scripture helps us to understand the mystery of the 
divine order by pointing us to the human order: “the 
head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ 

1 Zechariah 6: 13. 2 Hebrews 9: 24. 3 2 Corinthians 8: 9. 
4 John 14: 28. 5 1 Corinthians 15: 24, 28. 


is God”! In other words, God is the head of Christ in 
the same way as the man is the head of the woman. AL 
though in the human realm headship is invested in the man 
and not the woman, surely no one would think that 
the woman was thereby an inferior being to the man. 
rhe man is no more a human being than the woman be- 
cause he is the head; the woman js no less a human being 
than the man because she is subordinate. The question of 
subordination does not touch the question of essential be- 
ing. Just so in the realm of the Godhead. Here too there 
is equality of being, but a difference of order. Because the 
Son is and ever shall be subordinate to the Father, he is 
not one whit less God than the Father is. In his essential 
being the Son is equal to the Father, but in respect to 
order within the Godhead he would say, “the Father is 
greater than I.” 

Scripture presents Christ as coming forth from God.2 
We might express it thus: the Father is the source of 
deity, the Son deity in its outflow; but as in the stream 
is all the fulness of the spring, so in Christ “ dwelleth all 
the fulness of the Godhead bodily ’.3 “God is a sun’4 
but Christ is “‘ the effulgence [or outshining] of his glory "> 
The full glory of the sun is concentrated in its rays. What 
should we know of the light and heat of the sun apart 
from its rays? Similarly, what would mankind have ever 
known of the glory of God apart from him who is the 
shining forth of that glory? Just as the sun’s rays are 
part of the sun, so is Christ of the essence of the Godhead. 
\s there could never have been a time when the sun ex- 
isted without its rays, so could there never have been a 
time when God existed without Christ. They are co- 
eternal. We could never say that the sun proceeds from 
its rays, but rather that the rays proceed from the sun. 
yet they are in essence one; even so it would be erroneous 

1 y Corinthians 11: 3. 2 John 8: 42; 13: 3. 3 Colossians 
275g 4 Psalm 84: 11. 5 Hebrews 1: 3. 


to put Christ in the place of God the Father, for he comes 
forth from the Father, yet can he truly say, “I and the 
Father are one."! 


To some there may still be a grave difficulty in accept- 
ing the deity of Christ. How can the acknowledging of 
another beside the Father within the Godhead be recon- 
ciled with the essential unity of God as taught in Scripture : 
“ Jehovah our God is one Jehovah "?? This verse Jesus him- 
self quoted, notwithstanding his own clear and unequivocal 
claim to deity. Evidently he saw nothing inconsistent or 
incompatible in the two truths; neither shall we when we 
rightly understand the nature of the unity of the God- 

Those who believe in the deity of Jesus Christ are not 
polytheistic; they believe in one God, one Jehovah, and 
that the unity of the Godhead is absolute, but they have 
not found anything in Scripture to suggest that Jehovah 
our God is one person. Such an assertion would be con- 
trary to the whole Biblical revelation concerning the 
nature of the Godhead. Jesus said, “I and my Father are 
one”, but not one person. When Scripture says “ one 
Jehovah”, it is not the “one” of simple unity, but of 
compound unity, in the same way as it says of the mar- 
riage union, “ the twain shall become one flesh ’;3 no one 
would take this to mean that the man and the woman 
are not two distinct persons. 

The Bible commences with the statement, “In the be- 
ginning Elohim . . .” which is a plural word for God, 
and prepares us for that mysterious verse in which we 
find God soliloquizing in the plural, “Let us make man 
in our image”. Why the “us” and the “our”? How 

1 John 10: 30. 2 Deuteronomy 6: 4; cp. James 2: 19. 
3 Matthew 19: 5. 4 Genesis 1: 26. 


do we reconcile “ our image" with the statement of the 
next verse, “ God created man in his own image"? The 
serpent said of the forbidden tree, “In the day ye eat 
thereof . . . ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil”; 
and when they had eaten “ Jehovah said, Behold, the man 
is become as one of us, to know good and evil”! Such 
passages are inexplicable according to the unitarian con- 
cept that insists-on God being a single Person. ‘God is 
love” is one of the profoundest statements of the Bible 
relative to the nature of God, and was true of him before 
the beginning of time, or the first creature was created. 
But how can love exist in isolation? Let the reader pon- 
der Augustine’s thought-provoking dictum: “If God is 
love, then there must be in him a Lover, a Beloved, and a 
Spirit of love.” 

A Moslem law student who had been given a gospel of 
John brought it back with the request that the opening 
statement might be explained. Said he, “This book 
speaks of one called the Word of God, and says he was 
both with God and was God. How can a person be with 
himself?”" The Christian replied, “ If there was a problem 
in mathematics that you could not solve, and you took it 
to your tutor and he could not solve it, it would at least be 
clear that neither you nor the tutor had inyented the prob- 
lem, Now here is a problem, not in mathematics but in 
theology, that is, the being and nature of God as a trinity. 
Thousands of the ablest minds of the centuries have pon- 
dered this problem, and no one has been able to explain 
it; who then invented it? What man can invent man 
can explain; what man cannot explain man cannot have 
invented. It must be a revelation.” Needless to say he 
found no answer to this. 

Some pour scorn on the doctrine of the Trinity simply 
because it is a mystery. This would imply that to them 
there are no mysteries in the Godhead: all is simplicity. 

1 Genesis 3: 5, 22; cp. 11: 7; Isaiah 6: 8. 


it would appear that they worship a God that they can 
comprehend within the marrow confines of them imme 
understanding. “~ Canst thou find out the Alasighty ump 
perfection? it is high as heaven; what camst thow do? 
Deeper than Sheol; what canst thou know?7! Preset ap 
us “a god” whom we can comprebend and expiam who 
has ceased to be in his infinite being shrouded im myscezy, 
and we will refuse to worship this creation of your imme 
mind, and from his holy habitation the God of keavem 
will thunder: “Thou thoughtest that I was altogether 
such an one as thyself: but 1 will reprove thee 


when in the fulness of time “God sent forth lms Sam. 
born of a woman”, then the invisible became visible, and 
the intangible became fiesh that men could handle? of 
mishandle if they chose: God, who is spirit, had become 
incarnate in the person of his Son, who was ~ the very 
image of his substance, the exact representation of God's 
very being. Now there stood one in the midst of them, 
whom they knew not, but who was ready to declare, ~ He 
that hath seen me hath seen the Father”* No longer 

lieving in him. God had forced man’s hand, and thence- 
forth his attitude to God was to be revealed unmistakably 

of John the apostle. If you know Christ, you know the 

1 Job 11: 7, & 2 Psalm so: 21. 31 John tr: © 4 John 
14: 9. 


rather also;! if you believe on Christ; you are in fact be- 
lieving on the one who sent him;? if you confess the Son, 
you have the Father also. On the other hand, if you 
honour not the Son, you honour not the Father;* if you 
deny the Son, you have not the Father; if you hate the Son, 
you hate the Father also.S It is therefore a moral and 
spiritual impossibility to have one attitude to God, and 
quite a different attitude to Christ. You cannot acknow- 
ledge the deity of the Father and deny the deity of the 
Son, for a denial of the Son constitutes a denial of the 
Father. Whether or not you understand it, whether or 
not you believe it, your attitude to Christ is your attitude 
to God. ‘‘ What think ye of Christ?” is now the acid 
test of your relationship to God, and your answer will 
determine the destiny of your soul. Listen to his own 
solemn words, “Except ye believe that I am, ye shall die 
in your sins "6 

What think ye of Christ? is the test 
To try both your state and your scheme; 
You cannot be right in the rest 

Unless you think rightly of him. 

As Jesus appears to your view, 

And he is beloved or not, 

So God is disposed to you — 

And mercy or wrath is your lot. 

Some take him a creature to be — 

A man, or an angel at most, 

But they have not feelings like me, 

Nor know themselves wretched and lost; 

So guilty, so helpless am I, 

I durst not confide in his blood, 

Nor on his protection rely — 

Unless I were sure he is God. (JoHN NEWTON.) 

1 John 8: 19; 14: 7. 2 John 12: 44. 3x John 2: 23. 

4 John 5: 23. 5 John 15: 23. 6 John 8: 24 marg. 


40 JELUS OF NAZARETH — wHo ws me? — ¢ 

Any doctrinal scheme which denies the fell desy ov 
true humanity of the Son of God, is 2 tah without 
foundations, and aj) its accompanying tenets are suspect. 

* * * * ‘ - 

Johann Dannecker (1756-1841), the great scaiptor, 
yearned to give the world a masterpiece that would be 
treasured for ever. “He gave himself to prayer and com 
templation. One evening as he read his New Tesament 
he came across these words, “ without comtroversy great 
is the mystery of godliness” Overawed by these lmmes, 
he read them again and again. “If only I could catch 
their spirit and express it in marble,” he said to bimseift 
He prayed for grace and guidance. His whole personalty 
and genius were consecrated to the task 7 

He completed at length the first cast of his statue of 
the divine Christ. He invited a group of children to visit 
his studio to inspect his work. They gazed aduaiximgly at 
the stately figure, and then one boy exclaimed, ~ He must 
be a very great man!” Dannecker was bitterly disap 
pointed. The impression of greatness was mot the one he 
had wished to convey. He thanked the children and 
dismissed them. Having set to work and completed his 
second cast, he sent for a fresh group of children to visit 
him. Smiling appreciatively, they were 7 
drawn to the lovely figure on the pedestal It was a girl 
who broke the silence: “ He must have been a very good 
man!” she exclaimed. Dannecker, encouraged, 
was by no means satisfied. He decided to make a2 third 

1 y Timothy 3: 16. 


her knees. Dannecker felt that at last he had expressed 
the adoration that was in his heart. 

In these pages there has been presented to you, not 
with the art of a sculptor or the brush of an artist, but 
with the pen of a disciple, a portrait of Christ. Let the 
reader bear witness that the lines and features of this 
portrait do not consist of a few proof texts, or a few 
isolated passages wrested from their context, but are 
drawn from the whole manifestation of Jesus Christ as 
the Bible presents him. “ What think ye of Christ?” 
Pause and view him yet again. He is called the Alpha 
ind the Omega, the First and the Last, the King of kings 
ind Lord of lords, the mighty God, the Father of Eternity, 
the Lord of Glory, the Prince or Author of life, and Lord 
of all. See him existing beside the Father before time 
began, the outshining of his glory, and the very image of 
his substance, in whom dwells all the fulness of the God- 
head bodily. Behold him who is the Creator of the 
universe, without whom nothing was made that was 
made; the upholder of all things; the searcher of hearts; 
the pardoner of sins; the Saviour and Redeemer of men; 
the bestower of eternal life; the pourer out of the divine 
Spirit; the quickener of the dead, having the keys of Death 
ind of Hades; and the judge of the universe. Remember 
that he claims to have exclusive knowledge of the Father, 
ind exclusive power to reveal him to men; to share equally 
the honour due to the Father, and with the Father to be 
trusted, implored, and worshipped by creature man. Will 
you dare to say that he is only a creature, separated from 
his own Creator by a measureless gulf? Will you 
merely acknowledge him as a great man? Will you only 
applaud him as a good man? Or will you adore him as 
the God-man? 

It may be you have recognized who he is for the first 
time. ‘Or perhaps it has never occurred to you to doubt 
that he is the divine Christ. Whichever it be, will you 


now examine yourself whether you be in the faith? It 
is possible that your faith in who he is, may be no more 
than a mental assent to a doctrinal fact, rather than a 
believing in the heart, a faith that saves and transforms, 
that unites you to the one in whom you believe, and ‘so 
brings you to God. The new sphere of the one who be- 
lieves is “in Christ’; are you in Christ? “If any man 
is in Christ, he is a new creature’’;! are you a new crea- 
ture? “The old things have passed away; behold, they 
are become new ";! has that happened in your experience? 
You cannot afferd to be other than crystal clear on this 
vital issue. Your heart attitude to Christ determines the 
destiny of your soul. 

There stands before you, as there stood long ago in the 
upper room, the crucified, yet risen Christ. He is no 
phantom, no illusion, no spirit. He says, “See my hands 
and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for 
a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye behold me haying.” 
Yes, he is real, and he comes to us bearing in his resur- 
rection body the proof of his passion. This divine Re- 
deemer was wounded for your transgressions, bruised for 
your iniquities, the punishment—the price of your peace— 
was laid upon him, and with his stripes you may be healed.’ 
The love that for your sake’ brought him from the throne 
of glory to the cross of shame has not diminished with 
the passing of the centuries. He says, “ Come unto me”. 
Will you fall at his pierced feet in true repentance, in 
living faith, in glad submission, and say with Thomas, 
“ My Lord and my God "’?# 

12 Corinthians 5: 17. 2 Luke 24: 39. 3 Isaiah 53: 5. 
4 John 20: 28. 

pas LILA PILE — WA te ET 
Tie Spliowmng 2 les of some O16 Tamme 

vig syvtes of 

aus wey 

peommian 13: to ~O Jefowsie of Hiomts - - tae oer 
“oe reins and tee meet flies 
eremidn 17- 50 “| Jenowah earch the neat, I ey Ge 
re a 
teveiion 2- 1% 25 ~ These songs sate the Som of 
ees [om be whack searches ce =ims and Hemet 

mane Go- 3¢ ~ psoreh shail se um thee an come 
ng light. and tey God tay gory” e : 

inte 22 yom Geneon sesking te mio oe 
” Wane eyes hove seem thy scloction, wii too hoe 

5 Peter 2- 7.8 ~ Zot for sucks os distetinere - _ - 
2 Ome of numblng and « rock of ofiemce” 


Isaiah 45: 22, 23. “I am God, and there is none else. By 
myself have I sworn, the word is gone forth from my 
mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that unto 
me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.” 
Philippians 2: 10, 11. “ That in the name of Jesus every 
knee should bow . . . and that every tongue should confess 
that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” 

Zechariah 12: 10. “I [Jehovah] will pour upon the house 
of David . . . the spirit of grace and of supplication; and 
they shall look unto me whom they have pierced.” 
john 19: 34-37. ‘‘ One of the soldiers with a spear pierced 
his side .. . for these things came to pass that the Scripture 
might be fulfilled. . . . They shall look on him whom they 

Malachi 3: 1. “Behold, I send my messenger, and he 
shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom 
ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple.” 

Matthew 11: 10. “ This is he [John the Baptist], of whom 
it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, 
who shall prepare thy way before thee.” 

Genesis 14: 19. “God Most High, possessor of heaven 
and earth.” 

Deuteronomy 10: 14. “ Unto Jehovah thy God belongeth 
the heaven, and the heaven of heavens, the earth, with 
all that therein is.” : 
John 3: 35. “ The Father loveth the Son, and hath given 
all things into his hand.” 

Acts 10: 36. “ Jesus Christ (he is Lord of all).”