His enemies called Him “Beelzebub, the Prince of the Devils;” “The fellow that deceiveth the people;” “a Nazarene;” “a sinner;” “a winebibber;” “a Sabbath-breaker;” “a blasphemer;” “guilty, _i.e._, deserving, of death.” It mattered not that they were unable to resist the wisdom with which He spake; that He did all things well, making both the deaf to hear and the dumb to speak; that He was proved to be versed in Divine letters, without ever having learned (of men); that His appeals to GOD for vindication as a teacher of truth and a forgiver of sins were visibly answered. They saw no beauty or comeliness in Him, nor anything that should make them desire Him; they would not come unto Him that they might have life. He was despised and rejected. It was when He had been exhibiting His credentials very openly and condescendingly, and when the witnesses, with marvellous obstinacy, had refused to believe what they saw, that drawing off their thoughts for the moment from Himself the fulfiller of prophecy, He bade them look back upon the prophecy itself and answer to themselves and to Him what it was they expected: “What think ye,” He demanded, “of Christ?” “Since you see not in me any resemblance to GOD’S portrait of His anointed One, tell me, tell yourselves what are the features for which you look. I am not the being whom you expect—what, then, do you expect? what think ye of the Christ?” But the question was a wide one, and had they been willing, it might have perplexed them to know how to begin to answer it. Therefore as though dealing with them as children, and considerately attempting to lead them on step by step, He immediately limits the inquiry to _one_ particular—First tell me “whose son is He?” Ye searchers and expounders of prophecy, what have you ascertained, what do you know of the descent of the Messiah? whose son is He? They say unto Him—“The son of David.” Now, if any of us, my brethren, were catechising Sunday School children, and they so answered such a question, we should commend the answer as true though imperfect, and we should patiently and encouragingly continue—“True; but has He not besides another Father? an elder and superior birth? Who else in Holy Scripture is called His Father?” It might be that then some would answer—“He is the son of Abraham,” or perhaps even “the seed of the woman.” We should bear with this, we should approve it; we should become more hopeful of leading them to the perfect answer, and we should therefore gently proceed—“It is so; but now you have traced back His earthly being to its source, tell me whether he had not another and previous existence, and if so from whom He derived it.”