In reply, I asked—Whom did Jesus have reference to as being the least? Jesus was looked upon as having the least claim in all God's kingdom and was least entitled to their credulity as a Prophet, as thought kingdom, and was least entitled to their credulity as a Prophet, as though he had said—"He that is considered the least among you is greater than John—that is, myself." (Mill. Star, Vol. XX, pp. 455-6.)

6. The Manner of Christ's Teaching: "Next to what our Saviour taught may be considered the manner of his teaching; which was extremely peculiar, yet, I think, precisely adapted to the peculiarity of his character and situation. His lessons did not consist of disquisitions; of any thing like moral essays, or like sermons, or like set treatises upon the several points which he mentioned. When he delivered a precept, it was seldom that he added any proof or argument; still more seldom, that he accompanied it with, what all precepts require, limitations and distinctions. His instructions were conceived in short, emphatic, sententious rules, in occasional reflections, or in round maxims. I do not think that this was a natural, or would have been a proper method for a philosopher or a moralist; or that it is a method which can be successfully imitated by us. But I contend that it was suitable to the character which Christ assumed, and to the situation in which, as a teacher, he was placed. He produced himself as a messenger from Cod. He put the truth of what he taught upon authority. In the choice, therefore of his mode of teaching, the purpose by him to be consulted was impression; because conviction, which forms the principal end of our discourses, was to arise in the minds of his followers from a different source, from their respect to his person and authority. Now, for the purpose of impression singly and exclusively. (I repeat again that we are not here to consider the convincing of the understanding), I know nothing which would have so great force as strong ponderous maxims, frequently urged, and frequently brought back to the thoughts of the hearers. I know nothing that could in this view be said better, than 'Do unto others as ye would that others should do unto you.' The first and great commandment is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God; and the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. It must also be remembered, that our Lord's ministry, upon the supposition either of one year or three, compared with his work, was of short duration; that, within this time, he had many places to visit, various audience's to address; that his person was generally besieged by crowds of followers; that he was, sometimes, driven away from the place where he was teaching by persecution, and at other times, thought fit to withdraw himself from the commotions of the populace. Under these circumstances, nothing appears to have been so practicable, or likely to be so efficacious, as leaving, wherever he came, concise lessons of duty. These circumstances at least show the necessity he was under of comprising what he delivered within a small compass. In particular, his sermon upon the mount ought always to be considered with a view to these observations. The question is not, whether a fuller, a more accurate more systematic, or a more argumentative, discourse upon morals might not have been pronounced; but whether more could have been said in the same room, better adapted to the exigencies of the hearers, or better calculated for the purpose of impression. Seen in this light it has always appeared to me to admirable. Dr. Lardner thought that this discourse was made up of what Christ had said at different times, and on different occasions, several of which occasions are noticed in Saint Luke's narrative. I can perceive no reason for this opinion I believe that our Lord delivered this discourse at one time and place, in the manner related by Saint Matthew, and that he repeated the same rules and maxims at different times, as opportunity or occasion suggested that they were often in his mouth, and were repeated to different audiences and in various conversations.

"It is incidental to this mode of moral instruction, which proceeds not by the proof but upon authority, not by disquisition, but by precept, that the rules will be conceived in absolute terms, leaving the application, and the distinctions that attend it to the reason of the hearer. It is likewise to be expected that they will be delivered in terms by so much the more forcible and energetic, as they have to encounter natural or general propensities. It is farther also to be remarked, that many of those strong instances, which appear in our Lord's sermon, such as, 'If any men will smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also:' 'If any man will sue thee at law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also:' 'Whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain;' though they appear in the form of specific precepts, are intended as descriptive of disposition and character. A specific compliance with the precepts would be of little value, but the disposition which they inculcate is of the highest. He who should content himself with waiting for the occasion, and with literally observing the rule when the occasion offered, would do nothing or worse than nothing; but he who considers the character and disposition which is hereby inculcated, and places that disposition before him as the model to which he should bring his own, takes, perhaps, the best possible method of improving the benevolence, and of calming and rectifying the vices of his temper.

"If it be said that this disposition is unattainable, I answer, so is all perfection; ought therefore a moralist to recommend imperfections? One excellency; ought therefore a moralist to recommend imperfections? never mistaken, or never so mistaken as to do harm. I could feign a hundred cases in which the literal application of the rule, 'of doing to others as we would that others should do unto us,' might mislead us; but I never yet met with the man who was actually misled by it. Not withstanding that our Lord bade his followers not to resist evil, and 'to forgive the enemy who should trespass against them, not till seven times, but till seventy times seven,' the Christian world has hitherto suffered little by too much placability or forbearance. I would repeat once more, what has already been twice remarked, that these rules were designed to regulate personal conduct from personal motives, and for this purpose alone.

"I think that these observations will assist us greatly in placing our Saviour's conduct, as a moral teacher, in a proper point of view; especially when it is considered, that to deliver moral disquisitions was no part of his design,—to teach morality at all was only a subordinate part of it; his great business being to supply, what was much more wanting than lessons of morality, stronger moral sanctions, and clearer assurances of a future judgment." (Paley's View of the Evidences of Christianity, pp. 151, 2, 3.)

For further reflections upon the excellence of the manner of the Messiah's teaching, and especially for the consideration of added strength and beauties to the principles of the Sermon on the Mount, in the Book of Mormon, see Lecture on the Fifth Gospel (III Nephi) Defense of the Faith and the Saints, pp. 383-389.

LESSON XXII.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.) THE STATE OF THE WORLD AT MESSIAH'S ADVENT.

(A Discourse[A])

[Footnote A: This is a subject usually treated at great length in nearly all Ecclesiastical Histories; so that information is abundant. See "Mosheim, Ecclesiastical Institutes": also the same author's "History of Christianity in the First Three Centuries;" Schaff's "History of the Apostolic Church"; Neander's "History of the Christian Religion" Vol. I; Milman "History of Christianity" Vol. 1; Edersheisn's "Life and Times of the Messiah"; Vol. I, Introduction and Book I, Dr. Smith's "New Testament History," Book I, especially Appendix to Book I. Robert's "Outlines of Ecclesiastical History," Sec. II and notes.]