this way the wisdom of God distinguishes itself from the wisdom of men, and treats us in a manner as different from the treatment which we receive from man's wisdom, as these two wisdoms are different from each other.

The careful attention of the congregation is now solicited to an illustration of what we have already suggested, which we shall find in the conduct of our blessed Saviour, in his treatment of unbelievers.The Jewish common wealth, to whom Jesus was sent, was in a state of darkness and unbelief, when he commenced his ministry among them. The first important fact which was necessary to be believed by the people, and to convince them of which he first laboured, was, that he was a teacher sent of God. To induce the people to a belief of this fact, Jesus did not proceed as many teachers have done, even in our times. We are often told, in a very solemn manner, by teachers employed by human wisdom and human authority, that God has sent them; and we have the authority of their most positive declarations to support the assertion. There are many weak minds, persons of delicate nerves, who, beholding the solemn visage of the preacher, and hearing the grave, deep toned modulation of his voice, yield at once to the truth of the assertion, and are thereby prepared to receive every thing he utters as coming from the authority of heaven. So did not Jesus. He never treated unbelievers in this way; nor by such means did he attempt to gain the confidence of the people in his divine commission.

To what did Jesus refer the people for the proof of the fact that God had sent him? Hear his words:

"The works which I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me." The miracles which Jesus wrought, were of such a nature and character as could not be mistaken. The physical senses took cognizance of them, and were not in the least liable to be deceived. Had Jesus attempted to impose on the people by any works or performances of an occult nature; or had he endeavoured to persuade the people to receive him as a divine teacher by subtle arts and learned arguments, the case would have been widely different; and if he had succeeded to any extent, yet would he thereby have laid no solid foundation on which he could have built a church, that could not have been overthrown even by the same kind of impositions. But the evidences on which he rested to prove that he was a teacher divinely commissioned, were of such an astonishing character, so open to the inspection of all classes of the people, and under the eyes and inspection of his inveterate enemies, that they must violate the testimony of their senses in order to withhold belief.If Jesus had pretended to heal the sick, and had not actually done it, he would have been immediately detected; if he had pretended to give sight to the blind, and had not done it, he would have ruined his own character in less than three months; if he had pretended to raise the dead, and had not performed such a miracle, he would not have had his life spared, nor would he have deserved to live. Respecting such works no deception could have been practised. If he had not done these things, the people could not have believed that he did.

You recollect that Nicodemus came to Jesus by night, evidently to communicate to him the fact,

that he and his brethren of the Sanhedrim were convinced that his commission was divine, and to receive instruction from him. He undoubtedly went to Jesus by night, that he might not risk his reputation, and expose himself to be turned out of the Synagogue-to which he would have been exposed if he had openly professed to believe in Jesus. The darkness of night covered him, and shielded him from the odium of being cast out. His declaration goes to establish the point now under consideration. "We know that thou art a teacher sent from God; for no man can do the miracles which thou doest, except God be with him." He did not speak in the first person singular; he did not say, I am convinced of this important fact; but he said, we know—that is, we, the rulers of this that thou art a teacher sent of God.

people, know

The miracles

We are con

which thou doest are proof positive. vinced through the medium of our senses; and in our minds the fact is established.-Here we have a most striking example of the manner in which Jesus. treated unbelieving men, in order to bring them to the knowledge of the truth. This example shows how unbelievers ought to be treated in all ages, and in all countries. They should be accommodated with the necessary evidences, by which divine truth can be understood and reasonably believed.

When John, the forerunner of the Messiah, had baptized Jesus, he saw him walking, and exclaimed, "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!" Thus expressing his conviction, that the true and long expected Messiah had actually come. But when Herod had apprehended him, and cast him into prison, it seems that some shades

of doubt passed over his mind; and he wanted some farther assurance of this most desirable truth. He, therefore, sent some of his own disciples to Jesus, to request him to inform him whether he was the one who was to come, or whether they should look for another. What answer did Jesus direct these disciples to return to their master? Did he say, Go and tell John that you have it from my own lips, that I am the Messiah of whom Moses in the law and the prophets have spoken? No: his answer was, "Go, and show John again those things which ye do hear and see: the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them." John could no longer doubt. The miracles here specified were done before the eyes of his disciples, and they could not be deceived respecting them. They furnished full proof that Jesus was what John had before believed him to be.

If you please, we will pass in review one of the most inveterate cases of unbelief, which we find on divine record. It is the case of Thomas. After Jesus arose from the dead, and had appeared to some of his disciples, who informed Thomas of the joyful fact, he utterly refused his consent, and said, "Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not be lieve." Here was one who disbelieved those of his own acquaintance, who had seen Jesus alive from the dead, and had told him that they had seen him. Here was an unbeliever, who expressed his wilful determination not to believe, unless such conditions

could be complied with as he should prescribe. He must not only be convinced by the sense of sight, but must be accommodated with evidence of a tangible nature. How did Jesus treat this wilful unbeliever? Did he condemn him for his incredulity? Did he say, If Thomas refuses to believe, and if he has set up his will against the truth, and is even so presumptuous as to dictate the nature of evidence with which he must be accommodated, let him remain in unbelief, and let him be forever excluded from divine favour, and be doomed to everlasting wo? This would have been a fair example of the present mode of treating unbelievers; but so did not Jesus. Standing in the midst of the disciples, Thomas being present, Jesus said, "Peace be unto you." And turning to Thomas, he said, "Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered, and said unto him, My Lord, and my God!"-In this faithfully recorded instance of the divine condescension, in overcoming the most determined unbelief, we have most evidently set forth a striking specimen of that wisdom which is from above, which is easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits. And as this wisdom is without partiality, we have no good reason to believe that any unbeliever will ever be forever rejected of the Saviour, for want of evidence to convince him of truth divine.

The doctrine which Jesus taught, was widely different from that which the people had been accustomed to hear from their teachers. This wide distinction he clearly set forth as follows: "Ye have