The Gift of a Son
​​For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.—Isa_9:6.

This prophecy was delivered by Isaiah in the reign of Ahaz, either publicly, in the presence of the king, or else (as is more probable) privately, to his own immediate followers, henceforth to be spoken of as the believing Remnant. How much of the actual future it was given Isaiah to see, no one can say. It may be that he expected to see the beginning of such a reign within the limits of his own lifetime, just as St. Paul perhaps expected to be alive (1Th_4:15) at the Second Coming of our Lord. As a matter of fact, however, no child who could truly be described as in Isa_9:6 was born until the birth of Jesus Christ. The day of Christ, in fact though not in all its circumstances, was shown to Isaiah in vision.

The subject is the Gift of a Son, and the obvious parts of it are (1) His Birth, (2) His Destination, and (3) His Name.
                                                                                 I
                                                                            His Birth

“Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given.”

1. A Child.—Why was the Redeemer born? Why did He come as a child? Why was not an angel sent to redeem men? Why did not God appear in the fulness of His glory? Because (1) redemption must come from within. If a movement is to catch on, as the modern phrase is, it must be a movement from within the society. It was Luther the monk who became the reformer of Roman Catholicism. (2) The Redeemer must be one of us in order to show what we may be. He is tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin, that He may Himself become a faithful and merciful High Priest, with a true feeling for our infirmities, and that He may also be to us a true example. (3) He must be one towards whom we can have the feeling of family affection. The mother’s love for her child must not be a hindrance to her love for her Saviour; they must be two streams flowing into one another, making one fuller and richer stream of love.

They all were looking for a king
To slay their foes, and lift them high.
Thou cam’st a little baby thing,
That made a woman cry.

The possession of a child of one’s own opens up the possibility of an entirely new world of experience, and therefore of an entirely fresh revelation of the First Author and Supreme Object of all experience. I think I have told you before what my first thought was when I caught sight of a little living, moving, grumbling thing, mouthing its fingers and rubbing its fists in its eyes, on the floor before the fire. It was as if the Father in heaven had fairly (if it is not irreverent to say so) shaken hands, offered me His hand, and said, “Thou art forgiven.”1 [Note: R. W. Barbour, Thoughts.]

2. This is the meaning of the phrase “unto us.” As Isaiah used it, the phrase had a restricted meaning. Even when the fulfilment came, and the angels announced to the shepherds, “Unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord,” it was still a Saviour for the people of Israel that was promised. But when the Saviour appeared men saw immediately that He could not be confined to Israel. Even the Samaritans recognised Him as the Saviour of the world.

Still, just as Isaiah’s prophecy was made to the faithful Remnant in Israel, so the fulfilment is only to those who receive Him. “He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God.”

On the centenary of the birth of George Stephenson there was an imposing demonstration at Newcastle. A vast procession filed through the town, carrying banners in honour of the great engineer. In the procession there was a band of men who carried a little banner bearing the words, “He was one of us.” They came from the little village of Wylam, where Stephenson was born, and were proud of him as having been one of themselves.

3. This child is a gift. In this lies the glory of the gospel. It is this that makes it a gospel. Not of works: “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life.” And what does this gift of God carry with it? (1) A remedy for distress: “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden”; (2) An example of new life: “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ”; (3) Power to make the example effective: “I can do all things in Christ who strengtheneth me.”

“Not only is He the Wisdom of God, in which the world was made—not only the Revelation of God, who lighteth every man—but also the Power of God, to arrest the flood of evil, to push back the merciless curse, to force open the bolted gates; the Power by which the strong Will of God enters into action upon the field of human history, and works mightily, thrusting its victorious way against all the weight of hostile principalities and unkindly powers. With power He comes from heaven that you who receive Him may have power to become, in His adoption, sons of God.”1 [Note: H. S. Holland, Christ or Ecclesiastes, p. 28.]

                                                        II
                                                             His Destination

“The government shall be upon his shoulder.”

He is to bear the burden of kingship. Accordingly, when the wise men came from the East, they came inquiring, “Where is he that is born King of the Jews?”

1. Now these two, a child and a king, express the supreme desire of the ancient Israelites. The history of Abraham is the memorable example of the one, the history of Samuel of the other. The paradox of Jewish faith consisted in this, that it focused at once in a cradle and a throne. To meet Jewish aspiration, the Saviour had to be “born King.”

2. Kingship is a burden. The government is to be laid upon His shoulder. The only crown that the Messiah visibly wore on earth was a crown of thorns.

3. But this king is competent. Not as Cromwell’s son Richard who laid down the government which he was not fit to carry. Can we trust Christ? Every question of this questioning age is running up into that. If He is God, the everlasting Son of the Father; if He has overcome the sharpness of death; if all power is given to Him in heaven and on earth, then we stand safe. We have not been mocked with cunningly devised fables. If it is not so, His claims and our hopes fall in a common and irretrievable ruin.

(1) On Him depends our deliverance from the past. Christ alone frees us from the past. We may seek to bury it; we may say--

All that we two only know,
I forgive and I forego;
So thy face no more I meet
In the field or in the street.

It pursues us nevertheless; and the longer the world lasts the consequences of sin are more clearly traced, insomuch that Christian preachers of the doctrine of forgiveness often timidly minimise it, and fail to show it as a really supernatural thing.

(2) On Him hangs all our hope for the future. A great change has come over thought on the subject of the immortality of the soul. There were many, almost within memory, who held fast to that, though they rejected the distinctive doctrines of Christianity. In the life of Reid, the great Scottish philosopher, there is a letter which puts this with striking force. All that is fast disappearing. Now we believe in immortality because we believe in Christ.

In a little Perthshire town there was a minister of the Gospel whose name filled the district round like ointment poured forth. A Highland drover had occasionally to pass through this town. On one occasion he tarried over the Sabbath day and went to the church. He could not make much of a continuous English discourse. But at the end he heard the minister give out for singing a part of the 34th Psalm in the Scotch Version, of which the last verse is--

Ill shall the wicked slay; laid waste
Shall be who hate the just.
The Lord redeems His servants’ souls;
None perish that Him trust.

He understood the last line, and he waited for the minister in the vestry. “Sir,” he said, “you read from the Psalm Book, ‘None perish that Him trust.’ Is that true?” The man’s heart was opened. Often afterwards as he pursued his business and passed through the little town he went to see the minister. Locking hand in hand, the one or the other broke the silence by just saying, “None perish that Him trust.”

When I was in my native place, I went to see an old pupil who was on his death-bed, and I told him the story. A few days after my visit he died; and his parents told me that many a time, when he thought no one was noticing, he was heard during these days softly murmuring to himself, “None perish that Him trust.” He went into eternity leaning on that confidence.1 [Note: Dr. Edmond, in Christian World Pulpit, ix. p. 145.]

                                                      III
                                                                His Name
His name describes His character and work. It may be taken in four pairs of epithets.

1. Wonderful, Counsellor.—This means, says Skinner, either that He is a wonder of a counsellor, or else that He counsels wonderful things, according to the grammatical construction adopted. The meaning is the same as we find again in Isa_28:29, “This also cometh forth from the Lord of hosts, which is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working.” Now a counsellor does not counsel at random; he works according to a plan. This Child came with a definite plan—to seek and to save the lost. It was an offence then. It is an offence to the Pharisees still. But it has been wonderful in its working. To prove successful, however, it has to be tried. The Gospel of the grace of God has never failed with those who have put it to the proof; but it must be put to the proof.

A gentleman once visited a great jewelry store, owned by a friend. His friend showed him magnificent diamonds, and other splendid stones. Amongst these stones his eye lighted on one that seemed quite lustreless, and pointing to it, he said, “That has no beauty at all.” But his friend put it in the hollow of his hand, and shut his hand, and then in a few moments opened it again. What a surprise! The entire stone gleamed with all the splendours of the rainbow. “What have you done to it?” asked the astonished gazer. His friend answered, “This is an opal. It is what we call the sympathetic jewel. It only needs to be gripped with the human hand to bring out its wonderful beauty.”1 [Note: A. C. Price.]

2. Mighty God.—“Unto us a child is born—Mighty God”; what a leap. How did Isaiah make it? Ask rather, How did Thomas make it? Is not this the carpenter? Is not this Jesus of Nazareth, and can any good thing come out of Nazareth? Yet Thomas, who knew all that, answered and said, “My Lord and my God.” How did he know? How do we know still? We know from what He said, from what He did, from what He was, from what He is.

If Jesus Christ is a man--
And only a man—I say
That of all mankind I cleave to him,
And to him will cleave alway.

If Jesus Christ is a God--
And the only God—I swear
I will follow him through heaven and hell,
The earth, the sea, the air.

Everlasting Father.—If “Mighty God” was amazing, this is more amazing still. It may have been easier for Isaiah than it is for us. For do we not keep Father and Son distinct? But if they are distinct, they are yet one—I and the Father are one—they are one throughout all eternity. And to us the Son of the Father has all the attributes of Fatherhood. Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord Jesus has compassion on the multitude. Isaiah’s thought is very likely that He is to be more than king, that He is to be a father to His people, as the Russians call their Tsar “little father.” He is to gather the lambs in His arm and carry them in His bosom, and gently lead those that are with young.

4. Prince of Peace.—“Think not,” said Christ, “that I came to send peace on the earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword.” And so it has been suggested that the idea of Christ as a Prince of Peace is due not to the Gospels, but to this passage and to Milton--

But peaceful was the night
Wherein the Prince of Light
His reign of peace upon the earth began.

But there is no contradiction between Isaiah and St. Matthew. The first evidence of the gift of the Child is the sword. It is evident enough even in His lifetime. And it will be evident as long as good and evil exist together in the world. An older prophecy even than Isaiah’s said, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman.” Christ came to make that enmity real, and to make it last until the evil should be overcome by the good.

He came as Prince of Peace to the Remnant, to His own; not to those who cry “Peace, peace,” when there is no peace, but to those only who find peace through the blood of His Cross. In three ways He makes peace:—(1) By making God and man one in His Person—by becoming flesh and dwelling among us; (2) by making man and God one in His death; and (3) by reconciling man to man in His life. “Walk in newness of life,” says the Apostle; and among the signs of it: “As far as in you lies live peaceably with all men.”

Peace, then, means something. It means something more than fine sentiment or sonorous generalities. It means the readiness to abide by the decisions of reason and common sense, instead of brute force. It means a disposition to avoid unnecessary causes of hostility. It means mutual courtesy. It means firm insistence upon one’s own rights, but the recognition at the same time of others’ rights, and straightforward readiness to respect them. Ten times more effective in the cause of peace than all the courts of arbitration which we can ever call together would be the spectacle of a great nation refusing, in its consciousness of strength, to be irritated by petty grievances, turning a deaf ear to the howlings of popular prejudice, and asking at the hand of sister nations, not sharp advantages, but only justice and right. Without this disposition, arbitration is neutralised and made ridiculous and unoperative at the start. With it, it becomes the virtual rooting out of war.
(Great Texts comm)

(NaturalNews) Have you ever wondered what's really in vaccines? According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control's vaccine additives page, all the following ingredients are routinely used as vaccine additives:
• Aluminum - A light metal that causes dementia and Alzheimer's disease. You should never inject yourself with aluminum.
• Antibiotics - Chemicals that promote superbugs, which are deadly antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria that are killing tens of thousands of Americans every year.
• Formaldehyde - A "pickling" chemical used to preserve cadavers. It's highly toxic to the nervous system, causing blindness, brain damage and seizures. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services openly admits that formaldehyde causes cancer. You can see this yourself on the National Toxicology Program website, featuring its 12th Report on Carcinogens.
• Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) - A neurotoxic chemical called an "excitotoxin." It causes brain neurons to be overexcited to the point of death. MSG is toxic even when consumed in foods, where it causes migraine headaches and endocrine system damage. You should NEVER inject MSG into your body. But that's what health workers do when they inject you with vaccines.
• Thimerosal - A methyl mercury compound that causes severe, permanent nervous system damage. Mercury is highly toxic to the brain. You should never touch, swallow or inject mercury at any dose. There is no safe dose of mercury! Doctors and vaccine pushers LIE to you and say there is no mercury in vaccines. Even the CDC readily admits vaccine still contain mercury (thimerosal).
 
In addition, National Toxicology Programs admits in its own documents that: • Vaccinations "...may produce small but measurable increases in blood levels of mercury."

• "Thimerosal was found to cross the blood-brain and placenta barriers." • The "...hazards of thimerosal include neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity." (This means brain and kidney toxicity.)

• "...similar toxicological profiles between ethylmercury and methylmercury raise the possibility that neurotoxicity may also occur at low doses of thimerosal."

 "... there are no existing guidelines for safe exposure to ethylmercury, the metabolite of thimerosal."

• "...the assessment determined that the use of thimerosal as a preservative in vaccines might result in the intake of mercury during the first six months of life that exceeded recommended guidelines from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)..."

• ..."In the U.S., thimerosal is still present as preservative in some vaccines given to young children, as well as certain biological products recommended during pregnancy. Thimerosal remains a preservative in some vaccines administered to adolescents and adults. In addition, thimerosal continues to be used internationally as a vaccine preservative."
 
The report then goes on to say that the FDA studies thimerosal and somehow found it to be perfectly safe. It also states that vaccine manufactures are "working" to remove thimerosal from vaccines, but in reality it's still being manufactured right into the vaccines.
 
By the way, this report also reveals that the FDA requires preservatives like thimerosal only in so-called "multi-dose" vaccines -- vials that contain more than one dose of the vaccine. Drug companies could, if they wanted to, produce "clean" single-dose vaccines without any mercury / thimerosal. But they choose not to because it's more profitable to product mercury-containing multi-dose vaccines. As the report admits, "Preservatives are not required for products formulated in singledose vials. Multidose vials are preferred by some physicians and health clinics because they are often less expensive per vaccine dose and require less storage space." 
 
So the reason why your child is being injected with vaccine boils down to health care offices making more money and saving shelf space!

"Mercury in vaccines is a conspiracy theory! I've been told by numerous "skeptics" and doctors that there's no such thing as mercury in vaccines, and that any such suggestion is nothing more than a "wild conspiracy theory."

That just goes to show you how ignorant all the skeptics, doctors and health professionals really are: They have NO CLUE what's in the vaccines they're dishing out to people!

All they have to do is visit this CDC vaccine additives web page, which openly admits to these chemicals being used in vaccines right now. It's not a conspiracy theory, it turns out. It's the status quo of modern-day vaccine manufacturing! ​

Why I’m Not Getting a Flu Shot - https://philmaffetone.com/flu-shots/
Reporting flu vaccine science - https://www.bmj.com/content/360/bmj.k15/rr
Flu Shot Side Effects danger - https://www.wolfsonintegrativecardiology.com/flu-shot-side-effects-danger/
Flu Shots May Not Protect the Elderly or the Very Young - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-shots-may-not-protect-the-elderly-or-the-very-young/
The Flu Shot Remains The Most Dangerous Vaccine
Based on Injuries and Deaths Compensated by Government - https://www.mondialisation.ca/the-flu-shot-remains-the-most-dangerous-vaccine/5550163
Flu Shot Warning: The Controversial Flu Shot Pros and Cons You Need to Know - https://yurielkaim.com/the-flu-shot-pros-and-cons/
Thinking About Getting the Flu Shot?… Read This! - https://learntherisk.org/flu-shot/

Jehovah's Witnesses trace their origins to the nineteenth century Adventist movement in America . That movement began with William Miller, a Baptist lay preacher who, in the year 1816, began proclaiming that Christ would return in 1843. His predictions of the Second Coming or Second Advent captured the imagination of thousands in Baptist and other mainline churches. Perhaps as many as 50,000 followers put their trust in Miller's chronological calculations and prepared to welcome the Lord, while, as the appointed time approached, others watched nervously from a distance. Recalculations moved the promised second advent from March, 1843 to March, 1844, and then to October of that year. Alas, that date too passed uneventfully.

                                                           Jehovah Witness Beliefs

They believe that Jesus did not rise from the dead. Russell says His body either dissolved into gases or is still preserved somewhere. 
 
They believe that God is not triune (i.e., Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). 
 
They believe that there is no such thing as a hell of everlasting torment. Hell is just the grave. The wicked are simply annihilated. 
 
They believe that man has no spirit. 
 
They believe the Holy Ghost is not a person of the Godhead, just a "life force" of God. 
 
They exercise mind control over members. 
 
They believe that man must work to be part of "God's system of things".
 
They believe that only the 144,000 mentioned in the book of Revelation will live in heaven with God.
They believe all dead people will have a second chance for eternal life at the millennium. If you do not prove worthiness at this time, you'll be destroyed.
 
The believe the blood of Christ does not forgive sins, it gives us a "chance" to live again. They have NO assurance of salvation as Jehovah's Witnesses who supposedly know the truth.
 
They believe Jesus is the archangel Michael - Jesus is a created being.
 
They believe Jesus is just an agent of God, nothing more.
 
They believe that Jesus' second coming occurred invisibly in 1874. Russell's successor, Rutherford, says this was confirmed by the creation of the first labor organization in 1874.
 
They believed Russell when he said that in 1914 the millennium would occur and righteousness would be restored to the earth. As 1914 approached, he, and his successor, changed the date to 1915, 1916, 1924, 1928, and on and on to the present day! When you ask a Jehovah's Witness about this, they'll give you the party line, "Well, the Watchtower is reaching different levels of enlightenment."

Let's take a look at the story in the Gospels of Jesus' visit to Thomas after his resurrection, and see how he dispelled Thomas's fears and doubts about who He is.

                                                               Jesus and Thomas
​
Joh 20:24  But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 
Joh 20:25  The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, 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 believe. 
Joh 20:26  And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. 
Joh 20:27  Then saith he to Thomas, 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. 
Joh 20:28  And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. 
Joh 20:29  Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Now- below I've included a commentary from Great Texts; it gives an excellent discourse on this story, and greater insights that a serious student would find very interesting and clearly uses scripture to dissolve the error of Jehovah Witness' false teachings.

                                                               My Lord and My God

Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.—Joh_20:28.

It was a strange confession this, to be addressed by a pious Jew, who knew the meaning of his faith, to the man Christ Jesus, with whom as man he had companied, with whom he had eaten and drunk, whom he had heard speak in human words through human lips. The Jew believed in a God who had created men, who worked through them and ruled them, who was conversant with all their ways, who spoke to them and had spoken through them. But it was a God who was more immeasurably distant than imagination could bridge, whose ways were higher than men’s ways, and His thoughts than men’s thoughts, as high as the heaven is from the earth. He had spoken through men, but it is in that very consciousness of the prophets that the distance between God and man becomes most significant. It emphasizes just where man is highest; for in proportion to man’s goodness does he become conscious of his own sinfulness in the presence of the high and holy God. “Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts”—that had been the cry of Isaiah. “Ah, Lord God! behold I cannot speak: for I am a child”—that had been the confession of Jeremiah’s weakness. There was not one of these holy men of God who, if we had proposed to offer him the sort of reverence that is due to God, would have hesitated for a moment to rebuke it in the language of St. Peter, “Stand up; for I myself also am a man.” The last of the prophets, he who is called greater than the prophets, is conspicuous for this self-effacement in the presence of God, though in his case he took off the glory of his prophetic crown to cast it at the feet of Christ. Truly a strange confession this, to see one who knew the meaning of his belief in the one and only unapproachable God, and hear him speak to One who was truly Son of Man, truly Jesus of Nazareth, in the words “My Lord and my God.”

1. The text forms the climax of the Fourth Gospel. It is St John’s answer to the question, “Who then is this?” That question was asked by the people when Christ stayed the storm on the Sea of Galilee. They were astonished without measure, we are told, and said one to another, “Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?”

Four answers have been given to that question.

(1) First there is the answer which the people themselves gave. “Is not this the carpenter’s son?” they said. He was one of themselves. He had been born in Bethlehem; He had followed His father’s trade; He had lived amongst them, and they believed that they knew Him. They knew Him and all His kindred: “Is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?” He simply made an addition of one to the population of the town of Nazareth.

And this answer is given still. In our day there is scarcely a more popular answer than this. Jesus is a man; He makes an addition of one to the population of the world. He is a man, it is added, of supreme ability, originality, and earnestness. He is a man of most exceptional goodness. Those who make this answer have a little difficulty in agreeing as to just how good He was. Some go so far as to say that He seems to have been sinless, or at any rate that nothing sinful is reported of Him. But most will not go so far as that. They cannot believe that any man whose father and mother we know could be sinless.

In the shop of Nazareth
Pungent cedar haunts the breath.
’Tis a low Eastern room,
Windowless, touched with gloom.
Workman’s bench and simple tools
Line the walls. Chests and stools,
Yoke of ox, and shaft of plow,
Finished by the Carpenter,
Lie about the pavement now.
In the room the Craftsman stands,
Stands and reaches out His hands.

Let the shadows veil His face
If you must, and dimly trace
His workman’s tunic, girt with bands
At His waist. But His hands--
Let the light play on them;
Marks of toil lay on them.
Paint with passion and with care
Every old scar showing there
Where a tool slipped and hurt;
Show each callous; be alert
For each deep line of toil.
Show the soil
Of the pitch; and the strength
Grip of helve gives at length.
When night comes, and I turn
From my shop where I earn
Daily bread, let me see
Those hard hands—know that He
Shared my lot, every bit;
Was a man, every whit.

Could I fear such a hand
Stretched toward me? Misunderstand
Or mistrust? Doubt that He
Meets me in full sympathy?
“Carpenter! hard like Thine
Is this hand—this of mine:
I reach out, gripping Thee,
Son of man, close to me,
Close and fast, fearlessly.”

(2) The second answer is made by God. “This is my beloved Son.” The people of Nazareth claimed Him as theirs. He is one of us, they said. God’s answer is, He is not yours, He is Mine. The time may come when He will be yours also; He is not yours yet. He will be yours when you know that He is not simply an addition of one to the population of Nazareth; He will be yours when you know that He is not merely a man, but the Son of man. Meanwhile He is Mine; He is the Son of God. This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

This answer is not so popular in our day. It is not so comprehensive; it is said to be not so comforting. The great merit, we are told, of regarding Jesus as simply one of us is that we can then be sure of His sympathy. But is it enough to be sure of His sympathy? Must we not also be sure of His power? It is one thing to know that He is willing; is He also able to help us in every time of need? He who is the beloved Son of God has all the sympathy for us that the kindest-hearted man could have; and, much more than that, He is able to succour them that are tempted.

When our Lord Jesus Christ became Man, He identified Himself with humanity, in all its weakness, in all its sorrow, and (in a figure) in all its sin. An unflagging outpouring of sympathy, an untiring energy of benevolence, a continuous oblation of self-sacrifice—that was the life of the Son of Man upon earth. Many a man has borne his poverty more bravely because Jesus Himself was poor; again and again it has helped men in the furnace of temptation to think that

He knows what sore temptations mean,
For He has felt the same.

And the mourner in dark and lonely hours has found comfort in the remembrance that Jesus wept at a human grave, and knows all the bitter longings of his soul.1 [Note: S. C. Lowry, Lent Sermons on the Passion, 55.] His question still, to every sufferer who needs relief, to every sinner who needs pardon, is, “Believest thou that I am able to do this?” And the reply still is, “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.”
(3) The third answer is again the answer of the people—“This is indeed the Saviour of the world.” It was the answer given by those Samaritans who had discovered for themselves that Jesus could both sympathize and deliver. It was the answer of those who had had personal experience of His saving grace and power. “Now we believe,” they said to the woman of Samaria, “not because of thy speaking: for we have heard for ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world.” They had taken the answer of the inhabitants of Nazareth and the answer of God the Father and had put them together. He was both the carpenter and God’s Son.

And this is the final answer. There is no possibility of going beyond it. The answer of the inhabitants of Nazareth is shortsighted and very partial. God’s answer is partial also, since it has to wait our response before it can be made complete. But it is not short-sighted. It has within it the promise, as it has the potency, of the salvation of the world. It is God’s own expression of the momentous fact of history: “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son.” It only waits for that fact to have its fulfilment—“that whosoever believeth on him may not perish but have everlasting life.” The answer of the people of Samaria is complete and it is final. All that has yet to be done is to have its contents declared and appropriated. What does Saviour involve? And how is the Saviour of the world to be recognised as mine?

(4) Thomas declared its contents. The Saviour of the world is both Lord and God. He is Lord, for He is a man. The inhabitants of Nazareth knew that. He is also the supreme man. They did not know that; and when He claimed it they took Him to the brow of their hill to cast Him down headlong. Thomas had discovered that Jesus is Son of man, the representative Man, the Man to whom every man owes obedience. But He is also God. The people of Nazareth did not know that He was God: but God the Father knew—“This is my beloved Son.” That also was contained in the title which the Samaritans gave Him—“the Saviour of the world”—though they did not bring it out, and probably were not aware of it. Thomas brought it out, knowing as he did that no man, if he is only man, can save his brother or give to God a ransom for him.

But Thomas not only declared the contents of the Samaritans’ confession, he appropriated them. He said, “My Lord and my God”; from which we see that he was led along a path of his own, through his own personal experience, to this appropriation.

2. Now this is the confession to which the Fourth Gospel has been leading up. St. John began with the statement that the Word was God. He showed at once that he identified the Word with Jesus of Nazareth, for he said that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. Then he proceeded with the rest of the life of Jesus, selecting his incidents in order to show that he was right in identifying Jesus with the Word. He came quite early to the people of Samaria, who said, “This is the Saviour of the world.” But that was not definite enough; it was not individual enough. He proceeded with the life, recording its wonderful words and wonderful works, till he came to the death and the resurrection of Jesus. He reached his climax and conclusion in the confession of Thomas, “My Lord and my God.” Then he brought his Gospel to an end with that frank expression of the purpose of it—“These are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name.”

3. Is it not a remarkable thing that this confession was made by Thomas? We speak of Thomas as the doubter. Is it not astonishing that the doubting Thomas should have been he that rose to that great height of faith, and was able to say “My Lord and my God”? It may be that we are not so much astonished at it as our fathers were. Tennyson has taught us to believe that doubt may not be undesirable. At least he has taught us to repeat comfortably his words--

There is more faith in honest doubt,
Believe me, than in half the creeds.

But even to us it is surely a surprise to find that that man whom we have looked upon as most reluctant of all the Apostles to make the venture of faith, makes at last a venture which must, we think, have startled the rest of the Apostles as they heard it, calling this Jesus with whom they had companied all these days not only Lord but also God. But let us see if Thomas was the common doubter we have taken him for. We know very little of his history. Almost all we know from the Gospels is contained in four sayings.

(1) The first saying was uttered on the occasion of the death of Lazarus. Jesus and His disciples had left Judæa for fear of the Jews when word reached them in their seclusion that Lazarus was dead. Jesus announced His intention of returning to the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. The disciples remonstrated. “The Jews of late sought to stone thee; and goest thou thither again?” When Jesus persisted, “Let us also go,” said Thomas, “that we may die with him.” These are not the words of a vulgar doubter. They are the words of a man who counts the cost. If he errs in counting the cost too deliberately, at any rate he falls into fewer mistakes than the impulsive Peter. And it is the more creditable to him that, counting the cost so carefully, he makes so brave a decision as this.

(2) The second saying is spoken in the Upper Room. Jesus was trying to prepare the disciples for the impending separation. He was going away. They knew where He was going, did they not? “Whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.” But they did not know; and it was Thomas who uttered their ignorance: “Lord, we know not whither thou goest: and how can we know the way?” There is neither doubt nor conspicuous caution in the words; there is simply the mind of the practical man who is willing to go where he has to go but would like to see the way.

(3) It is from the third saying that Thomas has obtained the name of doubter. Jesus had risen from the dead, but Thomas could not believe it. No more could the rest believe it until they had evidence before them. Thomas happened to be absent when they had it, and he said, “Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.” With such an expression of determined disbelief to his credit, it is not to be wondered at that Thomas has received the name of doubting Thomas. Yet these are scarcely the words of a man who doubts habitually. They are rather the determination of a cautious and practical man to make sure that he has evidence enough to go upon. And God never refuses any man sufficient evidence. A few days afterwards Jesus offered Thomas the very evidence that he demanded. Thomas was wrong in relying so entirely on the evidence of the senses, and he was rebuked for that. “Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed. Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.” But it is to the glory of Thomas that when he did obtain sufficient evidence he believed with all his heart. As soon as he understood, he trusted; as soon as he knew, he loved. He needed no more than the evidence of the Resurrection to prove the Divinity. He made the great leap of faith and threw himself personally into the arms of a personal Saviour—“My Lord and my God.”

(4) “My Lord and my God.” This is the fourth saying of Thomas that we know. Thomas the doubter has left his doubt behind. He has outstripped his fellow-disciples. He has outstripped even the impetuous Peter, whose great confession,” Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” lacks the personal appropriation that marks the difference between insight and faith.

Men have generally passed on Thomas a very severe judgment. The Church, for ages, has branded infidel on his brow. But this judgment is one that is not justified by the facts, and cannot be entertained by us. At all times and even to this day people are quite ready to scatter such epithets about with an open hand. It is an easy and complacent way of disposing of men. But it is often a shallow enough device. We show thereby but little insight into the nature of men or of God. If we could look into the hearts of those whom we so fling away from us, we should often find deep enough sorrows there, struggles to which we ourselves are strangers, wrestlings for truth and light without receiving it, and yearnings pent up and hidden from the general eye.

There is not one believer who is not assailed by moments of doubt, of doubt of the existence of God. These doubts are not harmful: on the contrary, they lead to the highest comprehension of God. That God whom I knew became familiar to me, and I no longer believed in Him. A man believes fully in God only when He is revealed anew to him, and He is revealed to man from a new side, when He is sought with a man’s whole soul.

They bade me cast the thing away,
They pointed to my hands all bleeding,
They listened not to all my pleading;
The thing I meant I could not say;
I knew that I should rue the day
If once I cast that thing away.
I grasped it firm, and bore the pain;
The thorny husks I stripped and scattered;
If I could reach its heart, what mattered
If other men saw not my gain,
Or even if I should be slain?
I knew the risks; I chose the pain.
O, had I cast that thing away,
I had not found what most I cherish,
A faith without which I should perish,--
The faith which, like a kernel, lay
Hid in the husks which on that day
My instinct would not throw away!

4. How did Thomas reach his great confession? He reached it through the Death and the Resurrection. These are the two events which have occurred between the time when Thomas with the rest of the disciples forsook Him and fled, and the time when he said, “My Lord and my God.”

(1) He obtained “My Lord” first. The resurrection of Jesus gave him that directly. For Jesus had claimed the mastery, and to that claim God had now set His seal by raising Him from the dead. It was the simple confession of the Messiahship. His death seemed to show that He had made the claim unwarrantably, but the resurrection proved that He had made it with the approbation of God.

The title “Lord” as used at the time, had little more significance than the title “Sir,” as we use it in addressing men to-day. But as it fell from the lips of this man, I think I am right in saying that it came with a full and rich and spacious meaning. I do not think for a moment you can differ from me when I say that when Thomas on that occasion said, “My Lord,” in that word he recognized the sovereignty of Christ over his own life, and did by that word yield himself in willing submission to that sovereignty.1 [Note: G. Campbell Morgan.]

(2) But “Lord” alone may be useless. “Ye call me Master and Lord,” said Jesus, “but ye do not the things which I say.” And again, He warned them that many would say to Him “Lord, Lord,” to whom He would have to make the reply that He never knew them. To “My Lord” it is necessary to add “My God.”
​
Thomas obtained “My Lord” from Jesus’ resurrection. He found “My God” in His death and resurrection combined. We are apt to think that he must have found “My God” in the power which Jesus possessed or in the authority which He wielded; in His miracles or in His teaching. But His life and work could do no more than show that Jesus might be God. What proved Him to be God indeed was His suffering and death followed by His resurrection. For now it was evident that He need not have suffered and need not have died. It was evident that He had suffered and died purely out of love. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” It needs the love of God to lay down one’s life for one’s enemies. “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” “God is love,” and the Man who could not save Himself as He hung upon the cross could be nothing less than God.

If the conclusion that Jesus was God was based merely upon the fact of resurrection, I declare that it was not justified. Resurrection did not demonstrate deity. The Hebrew Scriptures told of resurrection of certain men from the dead. Put these out of mind if you can. Thomas had seen three dead ones come to life during the ministry of Jesus. He had seen Him raise the child of Jairus; he had seen the son of the widow of Nain given back to his mother after he had been laid upon the bier; and he had seen the raising of Lazarus, but he did not stand in the presence of Lazarus and say, My Lord and my God, because Lazarus was alive from the dead. If the confession was merely the result of resurrection, then I declare it was not justified. The fact that Christ was risen from among the dead is not enough to base the doctrine of His deity upon. But, as a sequence to all that had preceded it, I claim that he was justified. In that hour when Thomas became convinced that the One he had seen dead was alive from among the dead, there came back again to him with gathered force, focused into one clear bright hour of illumination, all the facts in the life and ministry that had preceded that resurrection.1 [Note: G. Campbell Morgan.]

Faith is not belief in fact, demonstration, or promise; it is sensibility to the due influence of the fact, something that enables us to act upon the fact, the susceptibility to all the strength that is in the fact, so that we are controlled by it. Nobody can properly define this. All we can say is that it comes by the grace of God, and that failure to see the truth is not so lamentable as failure to be moved by it.2 [Note: Mark Rutherford.]

​Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.