teaching of Jesus, which Muhammad himself witnessed was the truth. Muhammad professed to believe that this true original teaching of Jesus had been so corrupted that it had lost all practical resemblance to its original form, and because of this supposed corruption he believed that Christians had wandered out of the true path. True Christianity—the teaching of Jesus—he never rejected.

Now, we have the right to ask Muhammadans on what ground the prophet based his claim to distinguish between Christianity as taught by Jesus, and Christianity as taught by the Church. What reason had he to maintain that what Jesus taught was true, but that what the Church taught was false? Are the arguments which he brought forward, if indeed he brought forward any, reasonable? Are they cogent? We have the right to ask these questions; for it is the same claim which Muhammadanism makes to-day, some 1,300 years after the death of the prophet. Muhammadans profess to regard Jesus as a prophet of God, and the truths which he taught as a divine Revelation; and yet they deny that the message which the Christian Church proclaims as the message of Jesus, is in accordance with what Jesus taught. Where, we ask our Muhammadan brethren, is the proof of this? We desire to remind them, further, that in asking this question we are not acting on the

aggressive. We are not making any attack on Muhammadanism. It is they who, though perhaps, they do not realize it, are attacking Christianity, while all the time professing to hold those truths which Jesus taught. To state that Christianity as taught by Jesus is true, but that Christianity as taught by the Christian Church is false, is to take up a position of pure arbitrariness unless proof of the charge can be shown. To fall back on the statement that Muhammad said so, is simply to beg the question. For before we can accept his dictum we must have proof that he understood what it was that he rejected, and that he had good ground for rejecting it. A man cannot really reject what he does not understand, and we desire historical proof that Muhammad was in a position to understand Christianity and was qualified to judge it. A man may for himself reject in practice what he does not comprehend, but his rejection can have no weight and no authority with others, unless it can be shown that he was right in rejecting it. Again, therefore, we ask what special knowledge had Muhammad of Christianity that he could definitely state that there was a difference between Christianity as taught by Jesus, and Christianity as taught by the Christian Church? The sources from which he could draw his information with regard to the teachings of Jesus are before us to-day. What