first sight you would think that it did not. At first sight you
would fancy that it spoke of God in quite a different tone from the
second lesson.

In the second lesson, the words of Jesus the Son of God are all
gentleness, patience, tenderness. A quiet sadness hangs over them
all. They are the words of one who is come (as he said himself),
not to destroy men's lives, but to save them; not to punish sins,
but to wash them away by his own most precious blood.

But in the first lesson how differently he seems to speak. His
words there are the words of a stern and awful judge, who can, and
who will destroy whatsoever interferes with his will and his
purpose.

'I will at this time send all my plagues upon thine heart, and on
thy servants, and all thy people, that thou mayest know that there
is none like me in all the earth.' The cattle and sheep shall be
destroyed with murrain; man and beast shall be tormented with boils
and blains; the crops shall be smitten with hail; the locusts shall
eat up every green thing in the land; and at last all the first-born
of Egypt shall die in one night, and the land be filled with
mourning, horror, and desolation, before the anger of this terrible
God, who will destroy and destroy till he makes himself obeyed.

Can this be he who rode into Jerusalem, as on this day, meek and
lowly, upon an ass's colt; who on the night that he was betrayed
washed his disciples' feet, even the feet of Judas who betrayed him?
Who prayed for his murderers as he hung upon the cross, 'Father,
forgive them, for they know not what they do?'

Can these two be the same?

Is the Lord Jehovah of the Old Testament the Lord Jesus of the New?

They are the same, my friends. He who laid waste the land of Egypt
is he who came to seek and to save that which was lost.

He who slew the children in Egypt is he who took little children up
in his arms and blessed them.

He who spoke the awful words of the text is he who was brought as a
lamb to the slaughter; and as a sheep before the shearers is dumb,
so he opened not his mouth.

This is very wonderful. But why should it NOT be wonderful? What
can God be but wonderful? His character, just because it is
perfect, must contain in itself all other characters, all forms of
spiritual life which are without sin. And yet again it is not so
very wonderful. Have we not seen--I have often--in the same mortal
man these two different characters at once? Have we not