Messianic name, these contents I accept as
belonging to the office," this faith was sound and acceptable.

And, according to this Gospel, Jesus at once made it plain that His idea
of the Messianic office was not the popular idea, It was "eternal life"
He constantly proclaimed as the gift the Father had commissioned Him to
bestow; not physical life, not revived political life. So that it very
shortly became impossible for any one to make the confession that Jesus
was the Christ, in ignorance of what He Himself judged the Christ to be.
It may be said, therefore, that when Jesus required men to believe in
Him, He meant that they should trust Him as mediating efficiently
between God and them, and should accept His view of all that was needful
for this mediation. He meant that they should look to Him for life
eternal and for perfect fellowship with God. What was doctrinally
involved in this, what was implied in His claim regarding His eternal
nature, might or might not at once be understood. What must be
understood and believed was, that Jesus was empowered by God to act for
Him, to represent Him, to impart to men all that God would impart.

II. This being so, we may now inquire, what sufficient reason Jesus, as
already reported in this Gospel, has given why the people should accept
Him as the Christ. In these eight chapters what do we find related which
should have furnished the Jews with all the evidence which reasonable
minds would require?

1. He was definitely identified as the Christ by the Baptist. It was
John's function to recognise the person sent by God to fulfil all His
will, and to found a kingdom of God among men. For this John lived; and
if any man was in a position to say "yes" or "no" in response to the
question, Is this the Christ, the Anointed and commissioned of God? John
was that man. No man was in himself better qualified to judge, and no
man had such material for judging, and his judgment was explicit and
assured. To put aside this testimony as valueless is out of the
question. It is more reasonable to ask whether it is even possible that
in this matter the Baptist should be mistaken.

Jesus Himself indeed did not rest upon this testimony. For His own
certification of His dignity He did not require it. He did not require
the corroborative voice of one human being. It was not by what He was
told regarding Himself that He became conscious of His Sonship; nor was
it by an external testimony, even from