Cameron County press. [volume] (Emporium, Cameron County, Pa.) 1866-1922, 1907-08-08
EMPORIUM, PA. THURSDAY. AUGUST s, 1907.

to His own claim. The question was
quite general in character, referring
only to the Messiah in general, who
ever he might be. But Jesus might
have challenged attention directly to
Himself, as He indeed did on many oc-
casions. Our text in the King James
version is often used to challenge
thought directly to our Lord Himself.
"What think ye of Christi" Very ap-
propriately may these words be so used,
for such a challenge does confront
every man who comes into the
world. There stands Jesus Christ, the
central figure, the dominating person
ality in the worlds history, making
claims upon the allegiance of men such
as none other can make. Whether one
will or no he is confronted with the
challenge, What think ye of Christ?
What is his value for you? What does
His nature mean for you? In other
words, whose son do you say He is?
We all believe and gladly confess
that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
But let us not fall into the error of
the Pharisees of old, who saw in the
question as to whose son Jesus was,
nothing more than a question of gen.
ealogy and physical heredity and
origin. The question, primarily, is not,
how do we think Christ was born?
but, what nature do we behold in Him?
We must put an ethical emphasis upon
the question, Whose Son is He? not q
genealogical emphasis. Two of the
evangelists do indeed tell us something
about the mystery of our Lords birth,
and these accounts in their essential
features are not likely to be set aside
as the result of the most searching
historical scrutiny or of the most rigid
scientific criticism. But after all is
said it will remain true that our
belief in the divinity of Jesus, our
faith i'll the Incarnation, does not rest
upon the story of His extraordinary
birth, any more than does aur belief
that He was the Christ of God rest
upon the proof of His descent from
David.
Upon what ground then, do we rest
our judgment that Jesus was divine,
that He was the Son of God? 1t rests
upon our direct perception and appre-
citation of His wonderful, His unique
personality, of his matchless character
of love and goodness, and of his su-
prenie power and influence over the
lives of men. 1t was upon this ground
and this alone, that our Lord Himself
based his claim upon the spiritual al
legiance of men. He had nothing to
say about His genealogy or of the cir
cumstances of His birth; but He did
say, "He that hath seen Me hath seen
the Father"
We smile at the simplicity of ST.
Philip, who said, Show us the Father
yet have we not been just as slow as
he to see that in knowing the. concrete
historic Christ we are in reality know
ing the Eternal Father? Somehow we
think of divinity as something wholly
different and separate from humanity
1t is a puzzle to us to understand
how Jesus Christ could be both Goo
and man-very God and very man
We have invented theories to solve
the problem. Sometimes we have EN-
phasized His divinity almost to the ex
clusion OF His humanity; and some
times we have emphasized His hu
manity to the exclusion of His divinity
Perhaps the most common way o
trying to harmonize the two elements
has been to alternate between the two
to see in Christ alternately one who il
human and divine. IN the Christ wht
sat weary beside the we'll of Samari;
we see the human Christ; in the Chris
who walked upon the water and wht
fed the multitude in the wilderness W.
see the Christ who was divine In tn,
Christ who quivered with agony in th
Garden of Gethsemane and who endur
ed the pain of crucifixion we see tn
human Christ, while in the Christ O
the rending tomb and the envelopin,
cloud we see Christ the divine.
But is Christ to be thus divided? Ar
we still to cling to that habit @
thought which separates SO sharpl
between the divine and the human
J that it cannot see the human in th
+ divine, nor recognize the divine in tn
: human? Our Lord Himself was cor
, scious of no severance in his person
A atty. Had He been conscious of sue
a division in Himself between the d
vine and the human, He would surel
l have qualified His answer to st. Phil
. by saying, "He that hath seen the d