The fear of soul. There is a conflict going on in the world. It is an elemental war- It is not a mere game. The additional fear which this mysterious teaching of Jesus lends to the sense of sin made itself felt in human experience for many centuries. Doubtless it was over-emphasized and exaggerated, by a false interpretation of His words, into an immense and shapeless terror. A grotesque and impossible devil tyrannized over ages of superstition. Men believed in a Satan who was practically the rival of God, equal in power if not in glory, and as immortal in evil as God is in good. There is no trace of such a doctrine in the words of Jesus.1 It was natural, it was inevitable, that men should react from the exaggeration, and cast off almost entirely, as they have done to-day, the thought of an actual power of evil, outside of the human soul and inexorably hostile to it. But when we return to the teachings of Jesus, and study them with candour and calmness, we see that thought in His mind clearly 1 The Gospel for an Age of Doubt, p. 272. and unmistakably. He teaches us that our conflict is not merely with ourselves. There is an enemy against us who is mightier than We need a defender, a deliverer, a man. divine friend to fight with us and for us. Where, then, shall we look for such a power- Who will ful friend? If Jesus was not the Christ who fight for us? came to save us from our sins, then there is no captain of salvation, no conqueror of Satan, no liberator of captive souls. We must fight the battle alone against unknown and heavy odds. The triumph of Jesus over evil was for Himself only. It gives no assurance that we also shall overcome the world. On the contrary, it makes our victory seem the more doubtful, when we remember His perfect courage and inflexible strength, in contrast with our waverings and the many defeats that we have already suffered. We have begun to lose the battle already. Who shall turn the tide for our discouraged forces? The sinlessness of Jesus comforts us little unless it has some remedial bearing upon our sins. If it is but an example of what every man ought to be, its very perfection daunts and disheartens us. Something less absolute and flawless would be better suited to our need. In fact, men have never dared or cared to Jesus our example, only if He is our Saviour. Has He no power to forgive? make the stainless Jesus the real pattern of their lives, until they have learned to believe in Him as the redeeming sacrifice for their sins. They have chosen other ideals, other heroes, other examples, — less exacting, less disheartening, less depressing by contrast with themselves. It is the ransoming faith that "Christ suffered for us," that gives His disciples courage to say that He also left us "an example that we should follow in his steps."1 The idea of "The Imitation of Christ" is hopeful and inspiring only to the heart that has first felt the liberating touch of His pierced hand. Sinners do not venture to go after the sinless Jesus unless they hear Him say "The Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins.” 2 But in a Christless gospel this word has no place, no meaning. There was no such unique power committed to the hands of Jesus. All the consoling, reassuring, inspiriting utterances of Jesus, which are connected with His sublime confidence in His divine mission and authority to seek and save the lost, utterances which strangely enough are closely and inseparably connected with the prevision of His death, His laying down His life for the sheep,3 His lifting 11 Peter ii. 21. up upon the cross,1- all these words of saving hope must be "blacked out." They lose their significance, if the Redeemer is lost. There was no ransom wrought upon the cross. There was only the payment of The good Shepherd the debt of nature. laid down His life. But it was not for the sheep. It was only to show the cruelty of the robbers. There was no victory on Calvary. It was a defeat, in which the one sinless being on earth was crushed and killed by the sin of the world, but not for it. without Christ. Let us turn from the Gospels to the Epistles, The Epistles and consider what they have to say to us about sin, when we have taken out of them the idea of a work wrought by Jesus Christ for the salvation of the world. It is evident that the Apostles have received the teaching of their Master in regard to the source, the workings, the guilt, and the danger of sin, and that it has made a profound impression upon them. St. Paul and St. John, their teach No doubt there was some difference between St. John and St. Paul in regard to the philosophic forms in which they expressed their ing about thought upon this subject. St. Paul was trained sin. in the rabbinical theology of Jerusalem. St. 1 John iii. 14, John was influenced by the Platonic philosophy of Alexandria. St. Paul lays emphasis upon the connection of sin with "the flesh," with man's lower, physical nature.1 St. John brings out "the darkness" of sin as contrasted with the light of God. St. Paul traces the entrance of sin into the world, to Adam's disobedience.3 St. John speaks of "the world" as an order of existence estranged from God, which must not be loved because it is opposed to the love of God, and declares that "the whole world lieth in the Evil One."5 But both agree in teaching that sin is transgression of the divine law; 6 and that its fruit is death. It is their sense of the reality and guilt of the transgression, their overwhelming sense of the greatness of the disaster which threatens all men on account of it, that separates them as writers from the easy-going, reckless pagan world. "If we say we have not sinned," says St. John, "we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." "When I would do good," cries St. Paul, “evil is 1 Rom. vii. 5; viii. 4, 6 2 Cor. x. 2; Gal. v. 17; Eph. ii. 3. 21 John i. 6; ii. 9, 11; Rev. xvi. 10. 8 Rom. v. 12-21. 1 John ii. 15. 5 1 John v. 19. 6 1 John iii. 4; Rom. vii. 13. 7 Rom. vi. 23; viii. 6; 1 John iii. 14; v. 16; 2 Cor. |