Christians, of all sects, could they be brought to reason impartially on the mission of Jesus, would have their faith shaken, from the following considerations:—Admitting, as all Christians do, that the Jewish religion is of divine authority, and had for ages been by the Jews considered as such, to set that aside and introduce another, required authority from heaven, but such authority was never given. The bare word of Jesus, that he was the sum and substance of the law of Moses both moral and ceremonial, seems to be insufficient. The Jews, however base or immoral they were, as a nation never showed a want of faithfulness when their religion was assailed. So that it appears, that to do away with the form of worship, and introduce a new order of things, required something more than the obscure sayings of Jesus, who was but little known at the time of his death. If, by the coming of Christ, a new dispensation was to supersede the old, then the highest and the most incontrovertible authority should be produced. But this was not the case, for Jesus often charged those whom he had cured of some disease, “to tell no man” how they were made whole: as much as to say, “Keep secret with respect to the person who restored you to your former state.” We need not wonder that the Jews rejected Jesus, seeing that he assumed an authority higher than that of Moses; for, at the giving of the law on the mountain, it was Jehovah himself who spake to them. The Jews, then, considered that the same God who gave the law, and he alone, must change it, or introduce another, and not a person whose object in coming they could not comprehend, and who taught doctrines, a very great portion of which, were of a threatening and menacing character. And, finally, so little did Christ’s disciples understand of his divine mission, that, when he was betrayed, Peter, the boldest of them all, became alarmed, and denied any knowledge of him. This was very strange in Peter, if it was a fact that he heard Moses and Elias, at a former time, conversing with his Divine Master. But be that as it may, Jesus is reported to have suffered death on the cross, one of his disciples informing against him to the rulers, for the paltry sum of thirty pieces of silver, and another swearing he never knew him. This has often happened, when a bold reformer has been taken into custody; his followers would disown and forsake him; but it is not likely that Peter would thus have acted, had he witnessed the mighty deeds said to have been done by Jesus. I remember hearing an Unitarian minister remark, that “If Moses could return from the dead, how he would be surprised to read what was written of him after his death; and that he would say that the wonderful things reported of him, he knew nothing about.” This, no doubt, would be the case with Jesus, as all his mighty works are recorded _of_ him, but none were recorded _by_ him.