recompense of reward, by a most merciful, long-suffering, and righteous God, to those who wilfully reject all the overtures of His infinite mercy.

It seems clear to us, then, that the stories of the Old Testament are as credible as those of the New Testament, that the God of the one is the God of the other, and that the attributes, of mercy and of justice, belong to both alike, as necessary to a true divine Being. The writers of the Old Testament, inspired of God for the purpose, laid the foundation, preparing the way for the coming of Christ. And, after His coming, the writers of the New Testament, inspired by the same God, built the super-structure of Christianity upon the foundation. of the Prophets, as these were fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

To this it is proper to add, that Jesus Himself did not hesitate to endorse, without criticism, both Moses, and the Psalms, and the Prophets, often quoting from their writings, in proof of His Messiahship, and of the truth which He taught. At Nazareth, for example, He read from the Prophecy of Isaiah (61: 1 et seq.) "The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me; because Jehovah hath annointed me to preach good tidings to the meek etc.," and immediately interpreted the passage, saying "To-day hath this scripture been fulfilled in your ears, etc." (Luke 4: 18-21). Again He said, in another connection, "If ye believed Moses ye would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (John 5: 46-47). Again,. "Ye search the scriptures, because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me" (John 5: 39). "If they hear not Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded, if one rise from the dead" (Luke 16: 31). "And as were the days of Noah, so shall be the coming of the Son of man, etc." (Matt. 24: 3739). "And there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of Jonah the Prophet; for as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, etc."

Such are

(Matt. 12: 39-41. Confer Luke 11: 29-32). a few samples of the testimony of Jesus, which might be indefinitely multiplied. And, strange as it may appear, He seems to accept even the story of Jonah and the whale. Now if Jesus knew these stories to be false, He was a deceiver. If they are false and He did not know it, then He was deceived, in either case our faith in Him could not be maintained. But His frequent reference to Moses, and the Prophets, and the Psalms, using them in proof of His Messiahship, and of His divine mission, furnishes conclusive evidence of His faith in the Old Testament Scriptures. If now we consider, for a moment the elevated ethical character of Jesus and His manifest wisdom, it is inconceivable that he could deceive, or be deceived. And besides all this, He never attempted to prove anything scientifically, but taught as having authority, and appealed only to the Old Testament Scriptures, and the evidence of His own works, as sufficient for His purpose. Nor did He command His disciples to demonstrate what they were to teach. They were sent to proclaim the good tidings, not to analyze it scientifically, or to demonstrate it logically, but simply to proclaim the Gospel, and to demand faith in it, as the subjective means of appropriating salvation. The effect on the hearers was to be left to God whose Holy Spirit was given to work faith in their hearts by the preaching of the Gospel, and confirm it by the administration of the sacraments. Faith, wrought by the Spirit of God, is independent of logical ratiocination, or scientific verification. And St. Paul worked on this principle in Corinth and Athens, notwithstanding he was met by philosophers and scientists, who mocked at the absurdity of the resurrection, and resisted the simplicity of the Gospel, with the pride of learning. Science and philosophy are, doubtless, legitimate studies for the learned Christian, but neither is necessary for salvation, where faith alone is the means of personal appropriation. (See Mark 16: 16; John 8: 24; John 20: 29.)

Faith, therefore, rests on authority, not on scientific or

logical verification. Otherwise the great majority of men would be left in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity, and would perish in utter darkness, notwithstanding the light of the Gospel shines around them in the effulgence of its mid-day brightness. In fact the majority depend on authority for the greater part of their knowledge, even of things terrestrial and material. What do we know of the motions of the sun, moon and stars? What proportion of mankind can demonstrate the diurnal revolution of the earth on its axis? or its annual circuit around the sun? or the moon's monthly journey about the earth? We know these things because somebody says they are true. The same is true of our knowledge of other scientific discoveries. Who, for instance, can give the history of the formation of the strata of the earth, except as he learns it from the dicta of geologists, who alone are capable of recording it for the benefit of the unlearned and ignorant?

How much more, then, are we all dependent on authority for our knowledge of divine things, which can not be discovered by human reason, and are therefore subjects for divine revelation? We can not, therefore, accept the theories of destructive criticism, as to the incredibility of the stories of the Old Testament writers. Nor can we believe, when it comes to years of discretion, as happily in many instances. it has done, that science will contradict the Old Testament writers, or deny the predictive character of the Prophets, or reject the Messiahship of Jesus, as alas! in too many instances, it seems prone to do.

The Old Testament has weathered many storms of destructive criticism, and rationalistic scepticism, but it still stands as God's witness to divine revelation. And it, doubtless, will stand, as God's Message to dying men, long after the dogmatism of its critics, and the scepticism of scientists, have been forgotten, or remembered only, as "relics of a by-gone age." CARROLLTON, OHIO.

V.

ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TWENTIETH

CENTURY CHRISTIANITY.

BY THE REV. THOMAS W. DICKERT, A.M.

How

We are living in the best age of the world's history. thankful we ought to be that we have been permitted to enter the twentieth century, which gives every indication of becoming the most remarkable century of all ages. The stream of history coming down through the centuries, ever deepening, ever widening, has brought to us its garnered treasures, its complex life, its unsolved problems, its imperative duties, its untold possibilities; and, as it sweeps on before our gaze, it fascinates us and draws us spell-bound with it into the future, as we seem to hear God instructing some great leader, Speak to my children, that they go forward."

Christianity has been the motive power and the molding spirit of the nineteen centuries that have passed. As "the life of God in the soul of man" it will continue to wield an influence for the highest good until the truth is known which makes men free; until the many things which Jesus desires to reveal shall find minds and hearts that have the capacity to receive them; until the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man shall be universally realized; until the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ; until every knee shall bow and every tongue give praise to God.

The essential characteristics of this Christianity it is my purpose to present in this paper. That the stream of Christianity has flowed on in unbroken continuity from the days of Christ's earthly life to the present moment there is no doubt,

but that this stream has been ever changing as it passed from century to century is just as evident. We may say that the essence and life have been the same from the beginning until now, but the form of expression has changed from time to time; just as in the flow of a river the same water practically reaches the ocean that bubbled from the springs at its source, but the form of the river has been ever changing as it flowed through miles and miles of landscape, adapting itself to its surroundings and helping to conform its surroundings to itself.

While the Christianity of apostolic times was characterized by a marked simplicity, we cannot but believe that the germ of all later development must have been inherent in it. It cannot be hoped, even if it should be desired, that we shall ever get back to apostolic simplicity, for the centuries which have passed since then have contributed their influence and thought to the original store so as to make twentieth century Christianity, if not as simple as that of the first century, yet fuller and richer in every respect. The Spirit of God has been at work through the centuries, and to say that His work has been fruitless would be to cast reflection upon His divine power and influence. Those who believe in the evolution or development of religion must necessarily believe that the latest product of the Spirit's teaching and guidance is the best, and that twentieth century Christianity is superior to the Christianity of the first century.

It has been said that nineteenth century Christianity was critical, analytical, destructive; and that twentieth century Christianity will be more reverent, synthetic, constructive. While this contrast of the characteristics of these two centuries is in the main correct, it is misleading if we do not bear in mind that these somewhat antagonistic movements have been active in more centuries than these last two. I believe that reconstruction in theology will characterize the twentieth century as distinctly as criticism did the nineteenth, and this will be very comforting to many souls who, under the stress of the