Nazareth. The tradition has always been that he was born in Bethlehem. Why? For the reason that the Messiah, when he came, was to be born in Bethlehem. Why? Because he was to be of the royal line of David, and Bethlehem was David's city, so the tradition grew that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. But the two writers contradict each other. Matthew says that Joseph and Mary lived in Bethlehem. They go to Nazareth, because the tradition was so strong that Jesus was a Nazarene that he must make him live there part of his life. Luke tells us frankly that Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth. Then comes the device of the taxation or enrolment on the part of the emperor, so that Jesus could be born there. But we know from history that there was no such taxation or enrolment at that time. Even if there had been, there would have been no need of Joseph's going there to be enrolled; and, if Joseph had felt the necessity of going, there would have been no need of his wife, or his betrothed wife, going with him. So there is no actual historic ground whatever for believing that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. It is only that, being the Messiah, and the Messiah being the son of David, he must have been born in David's city.

In regard to the three wise men that came from the East. Why were there three? Jesus, having become king in the popular imagination, must have a star to herald his birth; and, as he was king of all the earth, being the son of God, there must come a representative from the three great continents known at that time. The three represented Europe, Asia, and Africa. They did not know that any such country as America existed, or there would have been more than three wise men.

It was

Then in regard to the sending out of the seventy. a tradition that there were seventy nations in the world. Jesus, then, as king of all the earth, sends out an ambassador to each of the nations. But, as a matter of fact, the idea of there being seventy nations was purely fanciful. There is no historic record of those nations, nor of any messenger having been sent out by the Messiah to them.

And so I might go on and refer to any number of other supposed facts in the life of Jesus, showing that they were written from the point of view of this Messianic belief, and for the sake of fulfilling some supposed prophecy. As you read hereafter the Gospels, or Matthew in particular, note how frequently you come across a verse like this: This, then, was done, in order that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets. There are some cases where there is a supposed quotation from a prophet, when the quotation as a matter of fact does not exist, and is purely a misconception on the part of the writer. The belief, then, that Jesus was the Messiah reshaped the traditions of his life and edited the records. This is the first point.

2. Note, in the next place, how important a part this belief played in developing the new conception as to the personality and character of Jesus. At first, when they asked, "Who is this man?" the answer was, "Why, he is the son of the carpenter from Nazareth." When it was asked, further, 66 Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?" it never occurred to the person to whom the question was put to say, "Oh, he did not come out of Nazareth: he came out of Bethlehem, in the royal line of David"; but he simply said, "Come and see what has come out of Nazareth." He is, then, simply the carpenter's son of Nazareth. There are curious inconsistencies that the careless reader does not note in the Gospels. When Mary goes up to the temple with Jesus at the age of twelve, she apparently does not know what a wonderful being he is; and yet, according to the stories, an angel had come and foretold his conception and birth, and she knew that he was a divine being; and yet, note, she seems astonished and overwhelmed because in talking with the doctors in the temple he showed unusual intelligence, and because he asserted his independence and ability to take care of himself. Yet, according to the tradition, Mary must have known that he was the son of God from heaven, and would naturally show unusual intelligence, and be able to look after himself. At first, then, Jesus was just this human

child, like other human children; but, after the influence of the preconceived idea that he was the Messiah, he became something more than human,- not God at first, but a divinely appointed messenger, accredited with supernatural power. Then he becomes a pre-existent being. This was not his first appearance. He was older than Abraham, and existed

After that he becomes a great opponent in heaven, in that

among the angels of heaven. leader among the angels, the famous war, of Satan himself, when he led the revolt for which he was cast out, with a third part of the inhabitants of heaven. Then by and by he becomes more than an angel, more than a leader of angels, the equal of God, the second person in the mysterious divine trinity. It takes two or three hundred years, however, for this growth to come to its complete fulfilment; but at the last, and always under the influence of this Messianic idea, he rises grade after grade in being until he becomes not king of earth only, but king of all worlds.

Then there is a discussion as to the interior make-up of his nature. He was God. To be sure, he was born of a human mother in Nazareth, so he was human. Then there must be some philosophic blending of this God and human nature. How? There was no end of theoriesthey would weary you, should I give them to explain. the mysterious supposed fact. His human life was not real: it was a phantasmal, a theatrical display. He was God, and God only. With some he was God wearing a human body. The orthodox doctrine came to be that he was very God, with two natures blended in one. If he had two natures, then did he have two wills that could have come in conflict, one of which was divine and one human? Or did he have two natures blended mysteriously together, and one will? This came to be the orthodox doctrine. So you see the growth, under the influence of this Messianic preconception, until he sits equal with God on the throne at his right hand, mediator and intercessor forever.

3. In the third place, note the influence that this precon

ceived idea had on the development of the Church. Jesus organized no church. No church existed at his death. Then his disciples gathered together; but the Church was a purely voluntary association, made up of those who believed that Jesus was the Messiah. If Jesus was king, the Church must become a kingdom. And so we find it, on the one hand, developed into the mightiest kingdom that this world ever saw; and, as God is King of kings and Lord of lords, so God's vicegerent and visible representative of God on earth speaks with his authority, and rules not only individual men, but empires, conferring favor even on the mightiest monarch by letting him hold his stirrup for him as he mounts his horse. You see, then, that under this idea of the kingship of the carpenter's son of Nazareth we have at last this mighty spiritual kingdom that has lasted for seventeen hundred years, the mightiest spiritual power that the world has ever seen. It grew up by perfectly natural steps and through the course of many years. The pope of Rome becomes the representative of God on earth, merely because Rome was the capital city of the Roman Empire. Disputed questions of the Church were referred to the bishops, and afterward to an assembly or council of bishops; but by and by the pope, sitting in the centre of the kingdom, in its capital city, claims authority over the whole spiritual welfare of the kingdom, equal to that which the emperor claimed over its secular affairs.

And here comes one of the most significant facts in the editing of the records. I postponed it to this time, because here is the proper place for its consideration. We are not quite certain that Peter ever visited Rome. But, in order that the papal power might reach back to apostolic authority and claim apostolic succession, it was determined that Peter must have been the first ruler or bishop of that Church. Then, as the papal power was grasped, there needed a divine authority to bolster it up and be its eternal pillar; and so the records are changed, and we find appearing in the Gospels that famous conversation between Jesus and Peter, in which

Peter, who had been called a devil and commanded to get behind his Lord, triumphed over all the disciples.

Take another illustration. Only a little while before this, it is said that the mother of Zebedee had come to Jesus, and asked that her two sons might sit, the one on the right hand and the other on the left of Jesus, when he came into his kingdom. But Jesus said he had no authority to do any thing of the kind, but referred all to the Father. And now Jesus is made to assume just that authority, and to give the keys to Peter. And he gives him authority to bind and to loose on earth and in heaven, so that hereafter and to all time the successor of Peter's authority, the wielder of Peter's power, holds absolute dominion over kingdoms and peoples, over bodies and souls of men, over their welfare in this world and their welfare forever.

4. Not only this. This influence of the Christ idea played a most important part in the development of that scheme of doctrine which has come to be considered orthodox throughout the ages. Jesus did not say much about doctrine, as I told you last Sunday. If he knew anything about the fall of man, he did not emphasize it. If he knew that he belonged to an infinite Trinity, he did not allude to it. Most of those doctrines which have come to be the great ones of the Church Jesus left almost entirely on one side. The great thing he preached was goodness, character, human service. These things have become almost nothing in the great scheme of faith which has been laid on the conscience of the world.

Note that Jesus, who was thought to be the Messiah, then king, came at last to be looked on as God himself. The central fact, then, of Christianity insisted that God came. down to this little earth. Came for what? Came to suffer,

came to die. Why? There must have been, since this thing occurred, some tremendous reason; and so we find one of the most famous theological treatises, one that perhaps has had as much influence as any other in shaping Christian thought in regard to this matter, the famous book of Anselm,