(fi) Clirisfs 'mcf/iod in tcac/n„>, ^^a> < li.nartcr istic. He taught neither as tin nil,,- i\|t 7 i. nor as a prophet (Mt 11"). Ami iln- l.r.ni-r ,,t His own nature and the natuiv ,.| His nir-^ayc. Ill' rami' not as a teaclier ; compelling assent by
ill i|il.te answer to every difficulty, silencing
.li-|iiiti' with argument.s. He was more personal and ^piritual. His teaching did not profess to oiler an absolute intellectual proof of itself which must convince all sufficiently intelligent persons. It claimed the belief of all men, but not on the ground of its incontrovertible evidence ; on tlie ground rather that all men were created to be good, and to know the truth, and would know it if their iicrceptions were not dulleil and distorted by sin. It cDnvinccd only by a process which at the saini- tiiiii- ]iiirilied. He made His message not an ar^iiiiniil Imt a force.
IK-nii- Hi- 111. til. m1 was both declarative and suggcsliv..: I... Ill tli,.tii;lit an. I in.-..iiliM. to fmtlier thoui^lit. At tini.-s II, ■ is ,|,.:i, aii.l aiillii. illative; His«or,i-;ircsn.-li that nn-n iiia> i.lii-,- lli,-i,ibut cannot inistaki- tliciii. At olli, r tiiii.- II.' -Iiiuuds His doctrine in parables, and, ]iointinj: to ],riin i]ilcs, leaves them to work and unfold tlii-ir inir|,urt as men are found ready to receive them. This was so. because the teaching Avas not simply of I nit lis but Truth, infinite, inalienable, iiniierish.'iblc ; the
fulfilment of all partial truths. His ' Verily I say' asserts His belief that it was so. The ' mind of Christ' which the teaching ofiers is not mere neutrality but sovd, personalitj' — back to which the teaching goes for justification. He appeals to no higher sanction than Himself. For Himself also He assumes a right to revise the law of Moses (Mt 5-'), and claims authority over every indi- vidual soul (Mt 19^). For this reason it is futile to found an argument against the final and the revealed character of His message on its frag- mentariness or its want of originality, futile also to limit His teaching to any detached portion of its recorded whole, e.if. the Sermon on the Jlount. The fragments are numerous enough to enable us with ease to trace His mind. They form a unity which is not a new edition simply of any- thing preceding. That some of His thoughts and precepts were anticipated by Jewish and ethnic men of wisdom does not detract from His origin- ality (see art. ORIGINALITY), because that consists, not in isolated truths, but in the remarkable sum of truth in which they take tlieir appropriate and articulate place. That doctrine again explains the precepts of the Sermon on the Mount more fully than the Sermon sums up the doctrine. The method of Christ challenges reflexion and suggests as origin of His teaching His own statement ' from God'lMt 11-7, Jn?'").
(7) What is meant bj' the moral perfection of Christ is at times misconceived, yet embodies a difference in His nature as compared Mith ordinary men that is perfectly realizable. Ullmann in a treatise of great power has made it familiar under the term ' sinlessness ' {Sinless7icss of Jesus, T. & T. Clark). The term has been objected to as a nega- tive conception, the negative absence of evil, a negative difficult to prove from the limited induc- tion available in a life of a few years. To give tlie conception a concrete expression may be im- possilile ; but the term is of value as pointing to the stainless purity of Christ. His moral self- wit 11, '-> is in the highest degree positive.* It iiiil.lii's not simply the consciousness of flawless , .111. Ill, t, but the consciousness of perfect character as will as the assurance of power to create in others jierfect character. Man may fail to meet his moral obligation in three ways : by falling short of his ideal of duty, by forming lower ideals than he ought, by direct transgression. And the witinss (it the ordinary conscience is that man has faih'il in all three, and has reason to fear ( hill, i'lie jieculiarity of Christ's moral life is that all susjiii'ion of this is wholly absent. He never confesses sin. He never fears any consequences of His acts either from God or from men. He seeks forgiveness, but onlj- for others. He dreads sin, but not for Himself. He claims to be apart from it. He gives the impression of breath- ing an atmosphere in which sin cannot be. He is possessed with, a holy energy, constant and powerful. Yet His moral life finds exercise npt in abstracts but within conditions of earthly ex- istence. He fought His way through those ex- periences which make goodness diffieiilt. For this reason His goodness is both provable and imitable. The crux of the proof must rest less in special pleading for particulars of conduct than in a central view of His moral personality. Particulars have been contested. He has been charged with harshness to His mother (Jn 2*) ; with petulance
• Til,'
MMiv rMe'it tho
frnort? The:
word of F.ncyc. ( Origin
DIVINITY OF CHEIST
DIVINITY OF CHRIST
(Lk 2-'"); with liru-,,,,,. ,■,.„ discourtesy and i"i,,iin,il lii with violation of |.ii.|iniy li with underrating l.nnilx .In 10", Lk 14=15- ^i^) ; with .lelecti theories as to civic virtue,