of Spirits, and the future Judge of the world, the delineator would not have derived a single hint as to how these characteristics were to be exhibited in action. Still more devoid of assistance would this book have left him, in depicting the human aspects of the Christ of the Gospels. The solitary hint that it would have given him would have been its assertion that He was to be the Son of man.

But as I have said, the aspect of the Messiah as a sufferer is utterly wanting. That He was to suffer, above all to die, the book does not give the smallest intimation. Its Messiah is altogether triumphant and divine. On the other hand His character as a sufferer is one of the most striking aspects of the Christ of the New Testament. A Christ in whom this portion of the Evangelical portraiture is wanting, is an utterly different one from the Christ of the New Testament; and if this was the only distinction between them, it would constitute a proof little short of demonstration, that the Messiah of Enoch could not have served as a model for the Christ of the Gospels. I need hardly say that if the suffering Jesus is an ideal creation, it must have been one of the most difficult portions of the whole character to conceive and dramatize. It follows therefore, that apart from its seven or eight dogmatical assertions respecting certain attributes which the Messiah was to possess, the Messianic elements of the book of Enoch would not have afforded the smallest assistance to any body of idealists who may be supposed to have imagined the Christ of the New Testament.

2. But may not another apocryphal book, that of Esdras, have supplied the deficiency, and formed the model of the suffering Jesus? Here again, great uncertainty exists respecting the date of the work. Whatever may be said of the greater part of it, there cannot be the smallest doubt that a few passages in it are interpolations in favour of Christianity. While the book of Enoch displays a generally triumphant tone, this apocalypse is distinguished by the tone of profound melancholy which pervades it. Under this influence, it recognizes the fact that

the Messiah was to die; but as with the other book, the idea of His death as a sacrifice is foreign to its contents. Its Messiah is one pre-eminently Jewish,-an aspect of thought which distinguishes the entire work. With the exception that the Messiah was to die, and the world to return to chaos before the Resurrection, it furnishes us with no fresh element of Messianic thought. If we adopt the highly improbable supposition, that this book was in the hands of some idealists, who have invented the portraiture of the Christ of the Gospels, the only possible aid it could have afforded them was the idea that the Messiah was to die; but as to how the conception of a dying Messiah was to be combined with the triumphant one of the other apocalypse, or how the Messiah of Esdras was to be metamorphosed into the Christ of the Gospels, it would have imparted to the idealist neither aid nor suggestion. Any one who carefully peruses this book must arise from it with a firm conviction that it has not formed the model of the supposed delineators of an ideal Christ, who, according to any theory which does not ignore the plain facts of history, and the possibilities of things, must have been as numerous as the inventors of the legends of which the Gospels are said to be composed.

3. It being clear, therefore, that these two apocalypses have not supplied the materials out of which a number of ideologists have succeeded in delineating their Christ, it will be needless to inquire whether the remaining works of this description can have been used for the same purpose. A cursory perusal of them will be sufficient to convince the reader that they are incapable of supplying the deficiency; and it is also certain that portions of them must have been composed at a period subsequent to the Advent. This being so, it only remains to inquire what amount of aid could have been furnished by the Messianic elements in the Old Testament.

4. The book of Daniel would have furnished the conception of a Messiah who, while He was to be invested with superhuman attributes, was also to be the Son of Man.

From it they would also learn that the kingdom of God, the advent of which it announces, would differ from all other earthly kingdoms. Another prophecy of the same book would have informed them that one of the purposes of His coming would be to make an end of sin and reconciliation for iniquity, and that to effect this object the Messiah would die by a violent death. From this, when viewed in connection with the other prophecies which assign to Him a kingdom without limits and without end, it is highly probable that they would infer that it was part of the Messianic character that He should be raised again from the dead; but this could only have been an inference, for the book nowhere affirms that such would be the case. This book and that of Enoch are affirmed by those whose theories I am controverting, to have contributed largely to the formation of the Messianic conception of the Jesus of the Evangelists. It is clear however that the points above referred to form the utmost aid which it could have afforded to the supposed ideologists, but that it would have given them no hint as to the proportions in which the divine and human were to be combined in the person of the Christ, and have left them entirely in the dark as to the mode in which the character was to be delineated. In one word, as far as this book is concerned, with the exception of these imperfect hints, the entire portraiture, as it appears in the Gospels, must have been their own pure invention.

5. The Old Testament contains one distinct classes of prophecies, one of which depicts the Messiah in the divine, and the other in the human aspects of His character. These are very rarely combined in the same prediction: I mean those which speak of Him as a glorious King, and those which speak of Him as a sufferer. Ideologists therefore could only have arrived at the conclusion inferentially, that these two classes of predictions were intended to refer to the same person. If they inferred that this was to be the case, the problem how the union was to be effected, and the character dramatised over a course of action, would have

proved to be one of which each ideologist would have propounded a different solution, and thus rendered all unity of delineation impossible.

6. Let us now turn to the greatest prophecy in the Old Testament, that of the Servant of Jehovah, in the latter section of Isaiah. It is evident that if this prophecy is not sufficiently definite to have furnished the materials for constructing the Christ of the Gospels, no other, nor the whole in combination, can have been adequate for the purWhat then are the materials with which it could have furnished them?

pose.

Taken as a whole, it presents us with five characters, viz., that of Jehovah himself, of the Servant of Jehovah, of an ideal Israel who is often identified with the Servant of Jehovah, of the actual Israel, and of the prophet. The ideal Israel is the prophet's conception of what the historical Israel ought to have been in its covenant relation to Jehovah, as distinct from what it actually was.

Throughout the entire section which contains this delineation, Jehovah Himself is frequently introduced as a speaker, proclaiming His own omnipotence, and revealing Himself in His capacity as a Saviour. His personality and that of the Servant of Jehovah are preserved distinct throughout the entire prophecy, and there is no confusion or intermingling of the characters. It should be observed that the Servant of Jehovah forms the Messianic delineation.

The conception of the Servant of Jehovah makes its first appearance in the forty-first chapter. It is clear that He is here identified with the ideal Israel. Precisely the same conception is continued throughout the following chapter, where the Servant of Jehovah, still the ideal Israel, is invested with Messianic attributes of a very high order, which the Gospels affirm to have received their perfect realization in Jesus Christ alone. It should be observed that not only are the personality of Jehovah and that of His Servant kept perfectly distinct, but the latter is invested with no attribute which is properly divine.

The forty-third chapter opens with another ideal delineation of Israel as the Servant of Jehovah, who is described as His witness. In this chapter we are first introduced to the historical, as distinct from the ideal Israel whom Jehovah addresses in terms of expostulation.

The forty-fourth chapter again presents us with the ideal Israel as Jehovah's Servant, who receives a succession of promises, and to whom Jehovah proclaims His omnipotence. On this follows a description of the character of the historical Israel. Then the ideal Israel is again introduced with assurances of pardon, for whose sake a deliverer is raised up in the person of Cyrus, who is expressly called to his work for the sake of Israel, Jehovah's Servant, and Israel His elect.

The same imagery is continued until we arrive at the forty-ninth chapter, where a speaker is introduced who designates himself by the name of Israel, and declares himself to have been formed from the womb to be the Servant of Jehovah. He describes himself as having been discouraged at the greatness of his work, but as supported by the strength of his God. His special office is to bring the actual Israel near unto him, and he declares that though he should fail in the attempt, he would still be glorious in the eyes of Jehovah. In the fiftieth chapter he first makes his appearance as a sufferer, yet as firmly bent on the performance of his work, trusting in the aid of the Almighty.

In the fifty-second and fifty-third chapters we are introduced to the last appearance of the Servant of Jehovah, unless in the subsequent Messianic prophecies the same person is addressed, but not named. It is by far the most remarkable of them all, the well known description of the Man of Sorrows. The Servant of Jehovah, though acting prudently, is described as having his visage more marred than any man, yet he is to sprinkle many nations, while kings shut their mouths at him. He has neither form nor comeliness; he is despised and rejected of men. He bears our griefs and carries our sorrows. He is wounded for our