. 
 
 llltllillllllNlillllH 
 
 I II! i I 
 
 ' 
 
 
 HI I 
 
2*3* 
 
Cornell University Library 
 
 BT201 .D95 
 
 Self-revelation of Our Lord, by J- C. V 
 
 olin 
 
 3 1924 029 374 992 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029374992 
 
THE SELF-REVELATION OF 
 OUR LORD 
 
THE 
 
 SELF- REVELATION 
 OF OUR LORD 
 
 J. C. V. DURELL, B.D. 
 
 RECTOR OF ROTHERHITHE 
 
 LATE FELLOW OF CLARE COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE 
 
 AUTHOR OF "THE HISTORIC CHURCH " 
 
 Edinburgh : T, & T. CLARK, 38 George Street 
 1910 
 
Printed by 
 Morrison & Gibb Limited, 
 
 FOR 
 
 T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 
 
 LONDON : S1MPEIN, MAP SHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, AND CO. LIMITED. 
 NEW TORE : CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS. 
 
PREFACE 
 
 What is Christianity ? Few theological books have 
 been so widely canvassed in recent years as that in 
 which Professor Hamack set himself to answer 
 this question. To the present writer the answer 
 given by this remarkable work seems completely 
 inadequate. Up to a certain point it is fruitful 
 and suggestive. Aspects of Christianity are insisted 
 upon which are essential to any true understanding 
 of the faith ; but the conclusions arrived at are 
 partial and incomplete. The view taken of the 
 Person of Christ appears to rest upon a fatal 
 misreading of the evidence upon which our opinion 
 has to be formed. 
 
 The question as to what authorities are avail- 
 able for estimating the character of the teaching of 
 Jesus Christ is thus answered by Professor Harnack : 
 " Our authorities," he says, " for the message which 
 Jesus Christ delivered are — apart from certain im- 
 portant statements made by Paul — the first three 
 Gospels. Everything that we know, independently 
 
vi PREFACE 
 
 of these Gospels, about Jesus' history and his 
 teaching, may be easily put on a small sheet of 
 paper, so little does it come to. In particular, the 
 Fourth Gospel, which does not emanate or profess 
 to emanate from the apostle John, cannot be taken 
 as an historical authority in the ordinary meaning 
 of the word. The author of it acted with sovereign 
 freedom, transposed events and put them in a 
 strange light, drew up the discourses himself, and 
 illustrated great thoughts by imaginary situations. 
 Although, therefore, his work is not altogether 
 devoid of a real, if scarcely recognisable, traditional 
 element, it can hardly make any claim to be con- 
 sidered an authority for Jesus' history ; only little 
 of what he says can be accepted, and that little 
 with caution. On the other hand, it is an authority 
 of the first rank for answering the question, What 
 vivid views of Jesus' person, what kind of light and 
 warmth, did the gospel disengage I" 1 
 
 Our present study will show that although the 
 writer differs from Professor Harnack upon the 
 question of the authorship of the Fourth Gospel, 
 and thinks that the Professor has considerably 
 overstated the unhistoric element in its composition, 
 he is yet prepared to use the Gospel in very much 
 the way that is indicated in this quotation. He does 
 not lay stress upon the Gospel as a transcript of 
 history, but he regards it as an interpretation of 
 1 Harnack, What is Christianity? Eng. trans, pp. 19 f. 
 
PREFACE vii 
 
 history by one who was qualified to give a true 
 interpretation. 
 
 Hence the premisses upon which the present 
 study proceeds are not fundamentally different from 
 those upon which Professor Harnack builds. Our 
 data are much the same. But the difference in 
 the mode of interpretation is fundamental, and our 
 conclusions are wide apart. 
 
 For instance, Professor Harnack says that Jesus 
 " desired no other belief in his person and no other 
 attachment to it than is contained in the keeping 
 of his commandments." * In the opinion of the 
 present writer, this statement represents a rational- 
 ising tendency which is quite contrary to the 
 essence of Christianity. It is an outcome of the 
 desire to get rid of that element of mystery which, 
 as Dr. Figgis has so well shown in his Hulsean 
 Lectures, is inseparable from the Christian faith. 2 
 The Person of Christ stands at the centre of the 
 religion which He has founded, a Personality un- 
 fathomable and mysterious and, by the very fact 
 of its mystery, capable of satisfying human needs. 
 
 But Professor Harnack will not admit such an 
 interpretation of the Person of Jesus. He says, 
 once again, of Him that " the consciousness which 
 he possessed of being the Son of God is nothing 
 but the practical consequence of knowing God as 
 
 1 Op. cit. p. 125, Eng. trans. 
 
 s The Gospel and Human Needs, chap. ii. 
 
viii PREFACE 
 
 the Father and as his Father. Rightly understood, 
 the name of Son means nothing but the knowledge 
 of God." 1 It will be observed that the question 
 here is not as to the meaning which was conveyed 
 to the hearers by the words of Jesus, but as to the 
 meaning which Sonship had for Jesus Himself. 
 The present writer has tried to bring out clearly 
 the distinction between the claims of Jesus as He 
 Himself understood them, and the progressive 
 apprehension of those claims by those who heard 
 Him. It is admitted that during the Ministry 
 only a partial conception of the meaning of the 
 Divine Sonship of Jesus was reached by the 
 disciples. But we contend that Professor Harnack 
 is wrong in the position which he takes up when 
 he virtually limits the true contents of the Self- 
 revelation of Jesus to that which was apprehended 
 by His hearers during the Ministry. 
 
 The aim of this study is to trace the progressive 
 apprehension of the claims of Jesus by His 
 disciples, and then to show that the interpretation 
 of those claims which was given by the Apostolic 
 band is true. It is maintained that the data 
 upon which the first teachers of the gospel worked 
 lead necessarily to the Catholic interpretation of the 
 Nature and Person of Jesus. 
 
 The need for some such investigation as is here 
 attempted would seem to be very great at the 
 1 Op. cit. p. 128, Eng. trans. 
 
PREFACE ix 
 
 present time. For the cry is so often raised that 
 we must get back from the Christ of the Creeds to 
 the Christ of the Gospels. There is a frequent 
 demand for an undogmatic presentation of Chris- 
 tianity, which resolves itself ultimately into a mere 
 code of ethics. And it is said that such a Chris- 
 tianity represents the teaching of the Jesus of the 
 Gospels. 
 
 The present writer has fully admitted the facts 
 that give colour to such statements as these. He 
 has admitted that there was a very real limit placed 
 upon the dogmatic teaching of Jesus during the 
 Ministry, and he has pointed out how such a limita- 
 tion was inevitable. But his aim has been to show 
 that great and transcendent truths as to the Person 
 of Jesus lay in the background throughout and were 
 implicit in much that was said and done. These 
 truths subsequently became explicit in the light of 
 the Kesurrection and under the guidance of the Holy 
 Spirit. The gospel narrative, even as related by 
 the Synoptists, is not so simple as may perhaps at 
 first sight appear. It presents an enigma. And 
 it is only in the Christ of the Creeds that this 
 enigma can be solved. The only adequate inter- 
 pretation of the Gospels is to be found in the 
 Catholic faith. 
 
 It will be well to state shortly the assumptions 
 upon which we have proceeded in regard to the 
 authorship and composition of the books of the 
 
x PREFACE 
 
 New Testament. We have assumed that the 
 Second and Third Gospels are the genuine work 
 respectively of St. Mark and St. Luke. We have 
 made no assumption at all as to the authorship of 
 the First Gospel. It may be that St. Matthew was 
 connected with the composition of some document 
 that lies behind the First Gospel; the question, 
 however, is a difficult one, and we are not now 
 called upon to answer it. For our present purpose, 
 it is sufficient for us to assume, as we have done> 
 that the Gospel is to be dated shortly before the 
 catastrophe of 70 a.d. For the sake of conveni- 
 ence, we have spoken of the author by the 
 traditional name, St. Matthew ; but this is not 
 intended to suggest that the authorship is to be 
 ascribed to the Apostle of that name. 
 
 With regard to the sources which lie behind the 
 Synoptic Gospels, we accept the tradition which 
 connects St. Mark's Gospel with the preaching of 
 St. Peter. We accept also the theory that St. 
 Matthew and St. Luke both used the Gospel of 
 St. Mark, and that besides St. Mark they had access 
 to another document, which embodied a separate 
 tradition of incidents and teaching belonging to the 
 Ministry" of Jesus. A discussion as to the separate 
 sources of the narratives of the Birth and Infancy 
 is embodied in our examination of these narratives. 
 
 The position which we have taken up in regard 
 to the authorship and composition of the Fourth 
 
PREFACE xi 
 
 Gospel and of the Apocalypse will be stated in the 
 body of this work, when we have these writings 
 under consideration. 
 
 The genuineness of all the Epistles of St. Paul, 
 including the Pastorals, is assumed. The anonymous 
 Epistle to the Hebrews is dated shortly before the 
 outbreak of the Jewish war in 67 a.d. The 
 Lucan authorship of the Acts is assumed; and also 
 the genuineness of the First Epistle of St. Peter. 
 
 J. C. V. DURELL. 
 March 1910. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 BOOK I 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 From the Beginning of the Ministry to St. Peter's 
 Confession 
 
 1. Introduction ..... 
 
 Character of the Synoptic Gospels 
 
 The teaching of Jesus .... 
 
 Nature of His audience 
 
 The habits of thought of the time 
 
 2. The preparatory stages for the Ministry of Jesus . 
 
 The ministry of the Baptist . 
 
 His teaching as preparatory to a reception of Jesus 
 
 His position in relation to Jesus 
 
 His apprehension of the meaning of the Mission of 
 
 Jesus ..... 
 
 The Synoptic accounts of the Baptism of Jesus 
 The Johannine narrative 
 Reasons for preferring the Matthaean tradition 
 Interpretation of prophecy 
 The Baptist regarded Jesus as the Messiah . 
 His limited comprehension of Messiahship 
 The first disciples started from this standpoint 
 
 3. How Jesus first presented Himself . 
 
 He could not at first advance a Messianic claim 
 False character of the Messianic hope 
 A training in spiritual apprehension . 
 (Selection of a title : "Son of man" . 
 
 PAGE 
 1 
 1 
 
 2 
 3 
 3 
 3 
 3 
 4 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
XIV 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 4. Use of the title " Son of man '' 
 
 VTJse of the title in the Old Testament. 
 
 In the Psalms .... 
 1 In Ezekiel .... 
 
 The paradoxical theory that Jesus never used the 
 title at all . 
 
 Its primary meaning . 
 ''' Had it a Messianic meaning as used by Jesus 
 
 Messianic associations in Daniel 
 
 Messianic associations in Enoch 
 
 The title had no Messianic associations in the mind 
 of the people 
 
 Suitability of the title 
 
 Reply to the messengers of the Baptist 
 
 5. Meaning of the title " Son of man " 
 
 The ideal of human life 
 
 The Lord of the sabbath 
 
 The forgiveness of sins 
 
 What is involved in the claim to forgive sins 
 
 Messianic passages in the Matthaean tradition 
 
 The sign of Jonah 
 
 Preference for the Lucan order of events 
 
 The Parable of the Tares 
 
 Not in its chronological place . 
 
 The charge given to the Twelve 
 
 Matthaean additions . 
 
 Conclusion as to Messianic meaning of the title 
 
 6. The title "Son of God" .... 
 
 Not used by Jesus before St. Peter's confession 
 
 Narratives of the Baptism and the Temptation 
 
 The Demoniacs 
 
 Four Matthaean passages 
 
 The charge to the Twelve 
 
 The central passage of Divine Fatherhood 
 
 An alteration of phrase 
 
 The storm on the Lake 
 
 7. The positive claims of Jesus 
 
 An authority above the ancient Law . 
 \i The claim to be a prophet 
 The popular view of miracles . 
 The attitude of the people 
 The title " The Lqrd" does not yet occur 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 xv 
 
 ' ' The Son of David " : the title not yet given to 
 
 Jesus .... 
 
 Homage paid to Jesus . 
 St. Peter's confession 
 
 Conflicting evidence as to St. Peter's words 
 Beasons for accepting the Matthsean tradition 
 — Confession of Messiahship 
 A spiritual intuition . 
 Beasons for reticence . 
 _ Divine Sonship 
 
 The words to be interpreted by reference to the Old 
 
 Testament .... 
 The founding of the Church 
 
 CHAPTEE II 
 
 Fkom St. Pbtee's Confession to the Cktjcifixion 
 
 1. The circumstances at the opening of this period . 
 
 The deepening spiritual perception of the disciples 
 The attitude of the people 
 
 2. The title " Son of David " 
 
 A recognised title of the Messiah 
 
 The Messianic hope connected with David in the Old 
 
 Testament ..... 
 The title first appearing in the Psalms of Solomon 
 Their expression of the national hope . 
 The Davidic king 
 
 Twofold character of the Messianic hope 
 Popularity of the title in the time of Jesus . 
 The attitude of Jesus towards it 
 Its use discouraged 
 The element of truth it contains 
 The greater truth it overlooks 
 
 3. The eschatological teaching 
 
 Given throughout this period . 
 
 Connected with the title " Son of man " 
 
 Reason for association of eschatology with this title 
 
 The prophecy of Daniel 
 
 The claims of Jesus in the eschatological passages 
 
XVI 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Two great catastrophic events 
 
 The Son of man in relation to the Fall of Jerusalem 
 
 Executing the judgments of God in history 
 
 The Coming at the end of the world . 
 
 Characteristics of the Coming . 
 
 Expected shortly 
 
 The office of Judge 
 
 Absolute allegiance to Him demanded 
 
 Sin against the Son of man 
 
 Eesponse to His claim 
 
 Summary of the eschatological teaching 
 
 The essential nature of Jesus not yet indicated 
 
 The truths revealed point to truths greater still 
 
 4. The Divine Sonship of Jesus 
 
 The Self-consciousness of Jesus 
 '- His Boyhood .... 
 
 His Baptism .... 
 
 His Temptation 
 
 The Divine Fatherhood 
 " The Self-revelation in the Ministry . 
 
 The kingdom derived from the Father 
 
 The outlook is not Jewish but world-wide 
 
 The Self-revelation in the Passion 
 
 The correlative idea of Sonship 
 
 The parables . 
 
 Knowledge of the Final Coming 
 
 The central passage of the Synoptists 
 
 The prerogatives of the Son . 
 ' The revelation of love . 
 
 Apprehension of the claim thus made 
 
 The High Priest's question 
 
 How the answer of Jesus was understood 
 
 Significance of the centurion's exclamation 
 
 5. Summary of the Self-revelation of Jesus . 
 
 The Divine Sonship . 
 
 What this involves 
 
 The teaching as understood at the time 
 
 Nothing yet explicitly said as to His essential 
 
 Nature ...... 
 
 The doctrine of the Person of Jesus cannot be left at 
 
 the point which has been reached , , , 
 
 75 
 
 7G 
 
CONTENTS xvii 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 The Ministky in the Fototh Gospel 
 
 The First Period 
 
 PAGB 
 
 77 
 77 
 78 
 78 
 78 
 79 
 
 1. Character of the Fourth Gospel 
 
 Point of view of the writer 
 
 Circumstances of its composition 
 
 Its interpretation of history . 
 
 Possible criticism .... 
 
 Loss of historical perspective . 
 
 The life of Jesus read in the light of the Resurrec 
 tion ...... 
 
 Progressive character of the teaching obliterated 
 The narrative idealised and interpreted 
 It offers the solution of an enigma 
 Idealisation quite consistent with essential truth 
 
 2. Chronology of the Fourth Gospel . 
 
 Comparison with the Synoptic chronology 
 The place of St. Peter's confession in the narrative 
 A fixed point common to all . 
 
 A confession by St. Peter in the Johannine narra 
 tive ...... 
 
 Demarcation of the first period of the Ministry 
 
 3. The Johannine narratives .... 
 
 i. The series of testimonies in the opening chapter 
 Reasons for supposing that this is an idealisa 
 
 tion of history 
 ii. The cleansing of the Temple 
 Reference to the Father 
 Question raised by the later cleansing . 
 Ground for accepting both 
 A possible transference of teaching 
 iii. Nicodemus .... 
 
 Revelation of the Mission of Jesus __ 85 
 
 Spiritual life . . . . .85 
 
 No intention yet to declare His pre-existence 85 
 
 Paragraphs containing comments by the 
 
 Evangelist . . . . .85 
 
 The revelation they contain was given later . 86 
 
 79 
 80 
 80 
 80 
 
 80 
 81 
 
 81 
 81 
 
 82 
 82 
 82 
 82 
 
 83 
 84 
 84 
 84 
 84 
 
xviii CONTENTS 
 
 iv. The Woman of Samaria . 
 A Messianic declaration 
 Inconsistent with the Synoptic narrative 
 Possible explanations . 
 Probability that the conversation is idealised 
 v. The unnamed feast 
 
 Reference to the Father 
 
 The Jews' interpretation of the words . 
 
 Did St. John rightly gauge their mind ? 
 
 Did he unconsciously read his later knowledge 
 
 into what was said at the time ? 
 The comment of Jesus . 
 His own interpretation of His claim . 
 The parallel with the Synoptists 
 The teaching has reference to the Mission of th 
 Son, not to His essential Nature 
 vi. The discourse at Capernaum 
 The gift of eternal life . 
 Given through Jesus in virtue of His Mission 
 The Bread of Life 
 The teaching implies the highest transcendental 
 
 doctrine of the Person of Jesus 
 
 But this doctrine was not yet unfolded 
 
 Hence the teaching seemed inexplicable 
 
 ^ Emphasis was laid by Jesus not on His Person 
 
 but on His Mission . 
 
 Pre-existence apparently taught 
 
 The idea associated with this in the minds of 
 
 the Jews .... 
 
 Comparison with the Synoptists . 
 
 Marked difference in the mode of Self-revelation 
 Considerations that will in part account for the 
 
 difference ..... 
 A loss of true historical perspective in the Fourth 
 
 Gospel ..... 
 
 Deep spiritual perception of the Fourth Evangelist 
 An underlying harmony 
 Conclusion as to the early Self-revelation of Jesus 
 
CONTENTS xix 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 The Ministry in the Fouhth Gospel 
 
 The Second Period 
 
 PAGB 
 
 1. The later narratives .... 
 
 i. The Feast of Tabernacles . 
 
 EmphaBis laid upon the Mission of Jesus 
 
 His pre-existence 
 
 Interpretation of His words 
 
 The doctrine in the Last Discourses 
 ii. The Feast of Dedication . 
 
 The Divine Sonship 
 
 One with the Father 
 
 The meaning of the claim 
 
 Misunderstanding on the part of the Jews 
 
 The meaning explained by Jesus Himself 
 
 The full truth not exhausted by the teaching 
 then conveyed 
 
 Interpretation of His Mission . 
 iii. The raising of Lazarus 
 
 The bestowal of life 
 
 2. The Last Discourses 
 
 The source of eternal life 
 
 Union with the Father 
 
 The high-priestly prayer 
 
 The Mission bestowed by the Father . 
 
 The power derived from this . 
 
 Comparison with the Father . 
 
 Point of view from which comparison is made 
 
 No explicit teaching upon the essential Nature of th 
 
 Son . 
 The Mission of the Paraclete . 
 
 3. Conclusion as to the Self-revelation in the Ministry 
 
 Comparison with the Synoptists 
 
 The Fourth Gospel misses the gradual development 
 
 of the teaching of Jesus 
 It includes a strong subjective element 
 Yet its portrait is true to eternal fact . 
 The agreement with the Synoptists is deeper than 
 
 appears at first sight 
 We conclude that the Divine Nature of Jesus was 
 
 not revealed during the Ministry . 
 
xx CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 The Resurrection 
 
 1. The vindication of the claims of Jesus 
 
 The claims made during the Ministry 
 
 Later reflection needed to recognise what the claims 
 
 involved ..... 
 A further revelation necessary 
 The Resurrection supplied this 
 The Resurrection not understood before the event 
 
 2. The character of the Resurrection as revealed by the 
 
 Synoptists ..... 
 St. Mark's Gospel fails us, having lost its ending 
 The narratives of the First and Third Gospels 
 Spiritual perception needed for the recognition of 
 
 the Risen Jesus .... 
 His Body is spiritualised by the Resurrection 
 The Resurrection Body is real 
 The Resurrection witnessed to a victory over death 
 It was a vindication of His claims 
 The claims reasserted .... 
 The Divine Sonship .... 
 The baptismal formula 
 Its genuineness .... 
 
 The perpetual Presence of Jesus 
 The slowness of apprehension of the Apostles 
 The task of elucidating the significance of the Person 
 
 of Jesus ..... 
 
 3. The Johannine account of the resurrection life 
 
 The Resurrection is a spiritual fact . 
 
 The teaching of the grave-clothes 
 
 Spiritual perception required for the recognition of 
 
 Jesus ..... 
 
 The Risen Body not subject to material limitations 
 The Great Commission 
 
 4. Apprehension of the Self-revelation of the Risen Lord 
 
 He is accepted as bearing a unique Mission . 
 
 The Resurrection was regarded as proving the truth 
 
 of His claims .... 
 
 The question as to His essential Nature had not yet 
 
 been mooted .... 
 
CONTENTS xxi 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Consideration of the exclamation of St. Thomas . 124 
 What was its form in the original Aramaic ? . . 124 
 
 Probably no thought of ascribing Divinity to Jesus . 125 
 Yet St. John seems to quote his expression in this 
 
 sense ...... 125 
 
 An instance of ante-dating of a belief arrived at later 125 
 Use of the title " The Lord " . . . .126 
 
 Summary of the belief of the Apostles as the outcome 
 
 of the Resurrection ..... 126 
 A problem presented . . . . .127 
 
 The search for its solution . . . .127 
 
 BOOK II 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 The Eakly Pkeaching of the Apostles 
 
 1. Test of the accuracy of conclusion arrived at . . 129 
 
 The earliest preaching of the Apostles an indication 
 
 of the degree of apprehension reached . . 129 
 
 Their progress under the'guidance of the Holy Spirit . 130 
 Their starting-point after the Ascension must be 
 
 examined ..... 130 
 
 2. Contents of the first preaching . . . 130 
 
 Its central pivot the Resurrection . . . 130 
 
 The teaching of St. Peter . . . .130 
 
 The Resurrection as authenticating the claims of 
 
 Jesus .... . 131 
 
 His Divine Mission ..... 131 
 Its contents . . . . 132 
 
 The Exaltation of Jesus . . . 132 
 
 His present exercise of superhuman power . 133 
 
 Salvation through Him .... 134 
 
 The gift of life . . . . .134 
 
 Admission to spiritual privileges in Him . .134 
 
 3. The titles given to Jesus . . . .135 
 
 The Servant of the Lord . . 135 
 
 The Christ . . .135 
 
 Other titles . . . . .135 
 
XXII 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 The Son of God 
 
 The Lord 
 
 Special significance of this title 
 
 A naive belief enthusiastically held 
 
 PAGE 
 
 136 
 
 136 
 137 
 137 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 The Period covered by the First and Second 
 Missionary Journeys of St. Paul 
 
 1. The authorities for this period 
 
 2. The doctrine of St. Paul .... 
 
 The central place of the Resurrection is his teaching 
 The names of God and of Jesus coupled in parallel 
 
 terras 
 The Divine Sonship . 
 The Exaltation of Jesus 
 The Presence of Jesus in the Church 
 Salvation through Jesus 
 The gift of eternal life 
 The return as Judge . 
 Conception of the Last Judgment 
 First Epistle to the Thessalonians 
 Second Epistle to the Thessalonians 
 The Christology implied by this doctrine 
 
 3. The doctrine of St. James . 
 
 Its correspondence with the doctrine of St. Paul 
 
 138 
 138 
 138 
 
 139 
 139 
 140 
 141 
 
 141 
 142 
 143 
 143 
 143 
 144 
 145 
 145 
 145 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 The Letters of the Third Missionary Journey 
 
 1. The progress of St. Paul's apprehension . . . 147 
 
 A transcendent conception of the glorified Jesus . 147 
 Progressive knowledge based always on the original 
 
 tradition ...... 147 
 
 2. Contents of his doctrine ..... 148 
 
 Heightened view of the Exaltation of Jesus . . 148 
 His Sovereignty . . . . .148 
 
 He is on a level with the Godhead . . . 149 
 
 The Trinitarian benediction .... 149 
 
 The relation of Jesus to the Godhead . . . 150 
 
CONTENTS xxiii 
 
 PAGK 
 
 the Person of 
 
 1. Introductory ..... 
 
 Progressive knowledge of the facts 
 
 Influence of the knowledge upon Christian thought 
 
 2. Belief during the Ministry .... 
 
 The paternity of Joseph taken for granted . 
 
 3. Belief during the early decades of the life of the Church 
 
 Phenomena exhibited by the First and Third 
 
 Gospels ..... 
 Conflicting elements in the narratives 
 The narratives of the Birth and Infancy 
 Belief in the Miraculous Birth is fundamental 
 The conflicting elements in the Gospels indicate 
 successive stages in public knowledge 
 
 4. The growth of knowledge in the communities 
 
 The secret was first held by Joseph and Mary alone 
 The barrier to making the secret known 
 
 152 
 152 
 153 
 153 
 154 
 154 
 
 154 
 
 155 
 
 An essential Sonship ..... 150 
 
 The Adoptionist position definitely excluded . .151 
 
 Jesus is " the image of God " . 
 
 Thus He reveals God to man . 
 
 The pre-existence of the Son . 
 
 Possible allusion to the Virgin Birth 
 
 St. Paul's mysticism . 
 
 Glory of the pre-existent life of Jesus 
 
 A cosmic significance attaching to 
 Christ 
 The culminating truth 
 
 The acceptance of the claims of Jesus leads necessarily 
 to a belief that He is Divine . . . 155 
 
 The predicate "God " is applied to Jesus . . 155 
 
 Interpretation of a passage in the Epistle to the 
 Romans ...... 155 
 
 Consideration of the address to the elders of Ephesus 156 
 
 The doctrine of St. Paul is based always on the primi- 
 tive tradition . . . . .156 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 The Knowledge op the Virgin Birth 
 
 159 
 159 
 159 
 160 
 160 
 160 
 
 160 
 160 
 161 
 161 
 
 162 
 162 
 
 162 
 163 
 
 The women friends of Mary would be the first to be told 163 
 
xxiv CONTENTS 
 
 For a considerable period the communities in general 
 
 would continue to assume the paternity of Joseph 
 To this period the Genealogies belong 
 And also the source from which part of St. Luke : 
 narrative was drawn 
 
 5. Value of St. Luke's narrative 
 
 St. Luke's mode of collecting his material 
 
 His opportunities of obtaining information . 
 
 Some of his sources earlier than others 
 
 The Canticles, themselves very early, presuppose a 
 
 yet earlier tradition 
 The narratives of the Infancy were current at first in 
 
 private circles .... 
 
 Reasonable conjecture that St. Luke conveyed his 
 
 information to St. Paul 
 
 6. Introductory matter in St. Matthew's Gospel 
 
 In St. Matthew's Gospel we are on less sure historical 
 ground ..... 
 
 He probably embodies traditions of the early 
 Palestinian churches 
 
 He is entirely independent of St. Luke 
 
 Divergence of traditions easily accounted for . 
 
 Fundamental agreement with St. Luke as to th 
 Virgin Birth .... 
 
 7. Conclusion arrived at ... . 
 
 No general knowledge of the Virgin Birth before 
 60 a.d. ..... 
 
 The knowledge handed down till then in private circles 
 Embodied in documents at a very early date . 
 Gradually became the property of the Church at large 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 The Decade preceding the Fall of Jerusalem 
 
 1. Our anticipation of a fuller apprehension of the Self- 
 revelation of Jesus .... 
 Effect of the narratives of the Birth of Jesus . 
 The key was thus given to much that had been in 
 
 explicable ..... 
 The question asked .... 
 The message of the Angel of the Annunciation 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 XXV 
 
 The hint given of the great central truth 
 Our authorities for this period 
 
 2. Emphasis laid on truths previously apprehended 
 
 The present exaltation of Jesus 
 
 Thejulfilment of Hisjlissiqn . 
 
 His universal Sovereignty 
 
 His Headship of the Church 
 
 His cosmic functions ..... 
 
 His pre-existence 
 
 The goal of creation ..... 
 
 3. The Epistle to the Philippians .... 
 
 The Divine Nature of Jesus taken for granted and 
 
 made the premiss for argument 
 The meaning of iv nopiprj Seov . 
 The teaching incidentally given 
 
 4. The Epistle to the Colossians 
 
 The Divine Sonship an essential relationship 
 
 Vocabulary of the Alexandrian philosophy 
 
 The term eU&p 8co0 . 
 
 The Firstborn . 
 
 His relation to creation 
 
 The Son is uncreated . 
 
 His pre-existence is absolute 
 
 His Headship of the Church 
 
 The fulness of the Godhead in Jesus . 
 
 The Incarnation 
 
 5. The Epistle to the Hebrews 
 
 Its date and point of view 
 Its purpose 
 "The Son" . 
 God's eternal decree . 
 The Divine Nature of the Son 
 His Exaltation 
 Continuity of Person . 
 Fundamental agreement with St. Paul 
 Argument from the Old Testament 
 The title " God " probably given to the Son . 
 Words spoken of Jehovah transferred to the Son 
 Belief in the Divine Nature of Jesus not derived 
 from the Old Testament .... 
 The Eternal Priesthood of Jesus 
 
 PAGE 
 
 171 
 172 
 
 172 
 172 
 173 
 173 
 174 
 174 
 174 
 174 
 175 
 
 175 
 176 
 176 
 177 
 177 
 177 
 178 
 179 
 179 
 180 
 180 
 181 
 181 
 182 
 182 
 182 
 1S3 
 183 
 184 
 184 
 185 
 185 
 185 
 186 
 186 
 1S7 
 
 187 
 
 188 
 
XXVI 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 6. The Pastoral Epistles 
 
 The mystery of the Incarnation 
 The Childbearing of Mary 
 Eternal pre-existenoe . 
 Jesus is our great God and Saviour 
 
 7. The Epistle of St. Peter . 
 
 A view taken of the transcendent Personality of 
 Jesus which is only compatible with » belief that 
 He is Divine ..... 
 
 Probability that St. Peter realised what his doctrine 
 involved ...... 
 
 A recognition of varying levels of spiritual insight 
 within the apostolic circle .... 
 
 The faith of the whole Church 
 
 PAGE 
 
 188 
 
 189 
 189 
 189 
 189 
 190 
 
 190 
 
 190 
 
 191 
 191 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 The Closing Decade of the Centuky 
 
 1. The position of Christian teachers at this period . . 192 
 
 The influence of the Synoptic Gospels . . 192 
 
 The teaching of history in the life of the Church . 192 
 Aids to further interpretation of the Self-revelation 
 
 of Jesus ...... 192 
 
 2. The Church in pro-consular Asia . 193 
 
 The dominant influence of St. John . . . 193 
 
 Authorship of the Fourth Gospel . . . 193 
 
 Authorship of the Apocalypse . . . 193 
 
 Reflection of Johannine teaching . . . 194 
 
 Importance of the Ephesian witness . . . 194 
 
 3. The Christology of the Apocalypse. . . . 195 
 
 The vision of the glorified Christ . . . 195 
 
 His position in relation to the Father . . 196 
 
 His mediatorial function .... 196 
 
 His universal Sovereignty .... 197 
 Attributes ascribed to Him . . . .197 
 
 Implying that He is within the Godhead . . 198 
 
 4. Titles given by the Apocalypse to the Exalted Christ . 198 
 
 A series of titles expressive of unique dignity . 198 
 Ascription of a title which belongs exclusively to 
 
 God: " Alpha and Omega " . . . 198 
 
CONTENTS xxvii 
 
 "The Word of God" 199 
 
 The idea of a personal Logos .... 199 
 
 Comparison with the Christology of the Epistle to 
 the Colossians ..... 199 
 
 History of the phrase ' ' The Word of God " . .199 
 
 In the Old Testament . . . . .200 
 
 In the New Testament . . . .200 
 
 In the Book of Wisdom . . . .200 
 
 Meaning of the title in the Apocalypse . . 201 
 
 Mystery of the Person of the Exalted Christ . . 201 
 
 Final claim to supreme Sovereignty . . . 201 
 
 The full prerogatives of Deity ascribed to Jesus 202 
 
 The Apocalypse an enthusiastic utterance, not a 
 philosophical treatise .... 202 
 
 Christology of the Fourth Gospel . . . .202 
 
 The central question to which an answer was 
 sought . . . . . .202 
 
 The answer given by the Prologue to the Fourth 
 Gospel . . . . . .202 
 
 Its distinctive feature a new terminology . . 203 
 
 St. John's conception of the Logos . . . 203 
 
 His eternal Being ..... 204 
 
 His Incarnation ..... 204 
 
 In the light of this crowning doctrine, the transcen- 
 dent claims of Jesus become intelligible and fall 
 into place ...... 205, 
 
 Thus is completed a stage in the progressive appre- 
 hension by the Church of the Self-revelation of our 
 Lord ...... 206 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 The Truth of the Catholic Faith 
 The process of interpretation of the Self-revelation of 
 
 206 
 
 206 
 207 
 207 
 207 
 
 Was the conclusion justified by the premisses ? 
 Summary of the claims of Jesus 
 
 i. The claims in the Synoptic Gospels 
 
 The spiritual character of His Mission . 
 
xxviii CONTENTS 
 
 Jesus as Law-giver ; as the Christ ; as the Son 
 
 of man ..... 207 
 
 The universal Judge .... 208 
 The Divine Sonship . . . .209 
 
 Reserve in the teaching of Jesus . . 210 
 
 ii. The nature of the evidence of the Fourth Gospel 210 
 Its value for believers . . . .210 
 
 Its evidential value for inquirers . .211 
 
 The subjective element in the Gospel . .211 
 
 The historic claims of Jesus underlying the 
 
 Gospel 212 
 
 Jesus and the gift of eternal life . . 212 
 Corroborative evidence as to the teaching of 
 Jesus 212 
 
 2. The premisses of Christian belief .... 213 
 
 The meaning of the Resurrection of Jesus . . 213 
 
 Its twofold effect . . . . .213 
 
 The Exaltation of Jesus . . . .213 
 
 Character of the Apostolic witness . . . 214 
 
 3. The process of interpretation . . . .214 
 
 The handing on of the data to the theologians of the 
 
 Apostolic band ..... 214 
 St. Paul's interpretation of the original witness . 214 
 
 The witness of St. John . . . .215 
 
 His interpretation of the data . . . 215 
 
 The consensus of belief in the Apostolic band . 215 
 
 4. Validity of the process of interpretation . . .216 
 
 Our existing records are fragmentary . . .216 
 
 Hence we possess only a part of the evidence which 
 
 guided the Apostolic interpreters . . .216 
 
 The Fourth Gospel is itself an interpretation of the 
 evidence . . . . . .216 
 
 But even the fragmentary records that we possess re- 
 quire the Catholic interpretation of the Nature and 
 Person of Jesus ..... 217 
 
 The Holy Spirit guiding Apostolic interpretation . 217 
 Corroborative evidence from the life of the Church . 218 
 Summary of the argument .... 219 
 
 Index ....... 221 
 
THE SELF-REVELATION 
 OF OUR LORD 
 
 BOOK I 
 
 CHAPTEE I 
 
 FROM THE BEGINNING OP THE MINISTRY 
 TO ST. PETER'S CONFESSION 
 
 The Synoptic Gospels give us the story of our 
 Lord's Ministry and Passion in the form in which 
 that story was current in the earliest days of the 
 Church among the first generation of believers. 
 Other facts and other aspects of the gospel were 
 treasured by individuals or circulated in limited 
 circles. But the first public preaching of the 
 gospel was in substance what we find in the 
 Synoptic narrative. 
 
 We shall therefore do well to make this narrative 
 the starting-point in our inquiry. It represents 
 our Lord in contact with people drawn from very 
 i 
 
2 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 varied classes and of widely differing habits and 
 traditions. There was the inner circle of His 
 friends, including the Twelve. There was the 
 larger band of disciples with a looser degree of 
 attachment, such as the Seventy. There were 
 those who were temporarily attracted either by His 
 teaching, or by His mighty works, or by the hope of 
 gain. There were the leaders of religion — scribes, 
 Pharisees, lawyers, Sadducees, and officials of the 
 synagogue. And lastly, there were the outcasts 
 of society — tax-collectors, lepers, demoniacs, and 
 sinners. 
 
 In what way was our Lord thought of by the 
 varied classes which made up this motley crowd ? 
 What was their view of His Personality and His 
 Work ? Let us try to gather from the Synoptic 
 narrative what opportunity was given them for 
 forming an opinion. We shall have to examine 
 the teaching of Jesus. But it will not be sufficient 
 to analyse this teaching in itself. It will be 
 necessary also to consider it further in connection 
 with contemporary habits of thought and con- 
 temporary knowledge. For both words and events 
 have a significance which stands in very close 
 relation to the time to which they belong. In 
 order to estimate the effect which the teaching and 
 actions of Jesus would have upon His hearers, we 
 must listen to those words, and view those actions, 
 through the same medium as that which existed for 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 3 
 
 the hearers themselves. We shall then be in a 
 position to see, so far as the fragmentary character 
 of the evidence allows, what impression our Lord 
 designed to produce as to His Person and Work ; 
 and we shall also see what was the impression that 
 was actually formed by the disciples. 
 
 The earlier period of the Ministry finds a natural 
 climax in the confession of St. Peter. Let us then 
 deal with this period first. 
 
 What were the ideas, hopes, and beliefs in the 
 minds of the disciples when they first heard and 
 answered the call of Him who henceforward was to 
 be their Master ? The narrative of the Fourth 
 Gospel represents some at least of the first disciples 
 as having been under the influence of St. John the 
 Baptist and as having listened to his teaching. There 
 need be no difficulty in regarding this as genuine 
 tradition. The fame of St. John the Baptist spread 
 far and wide, and those whom Jesus chose as 
 disciples would be the very men whose tempera- 
 ment and aspirations would be likely to make them 
 turn to a preacher of righteousness such as the 
 Baptist. 
 
 Hence the testimony of St. John the Baptist to 
 Jesus would be the starting-point for their appre- 
 hension of the Person and Work of Jesus Himself. 
 They would accept the estimate which the Baptist 
 had formed of Jesus, and upon this as a foundation 
 
4 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the teaching of Jesus would be able to build. Our 
 initial inquiry, therefore, must be as to the testimony 
 which was borne by the Baptist to Jesus. 
 
 St. John the Baptist regarded his own work as 
 merely preliminary to the work of One greater 
 than he, who would follow him. " There cometh 
 after me He that is mightier than I, the latchet 
 of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and 
 unloose. I baptized you with water; but He 
 shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost " (Mk l 7f '). 
 The thought here is of One who would in- 
 augurate a mightier form of religion, endued with 
 spiritual power : One who would stand, as it were, 
 upon a higher plane, and whose work would differ 
 from his own not merely in degree but also in 
 kind. 
 
 Among those who came down to the Jordan to 
 be baptized was Jesus Himself. Did the Baptist 
 recognise Him as " the coming One," of whom he 
 had spoken ? The accounts are conflicting. The 
 Marcan tradition gives no hint of any recognition : 
 " Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was 
 baptized of John in the Jordan. And straightway 
 coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens rent 
 asunder, and the Spirit as a dove descending upon 
 Him : and a voice came out of the heavens, Thou 
 art My beloved Son, in Thee I am well pleased " 
 (Mk l 9_n ). The vision was seen and the voice 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 5 
 
 from heaven was heard by Jesus ; but the Synoptists 
 give no hint that these manifestations were given 
 to any others, whether to the bystanders or to the 
 Baptist himself. Indeed, the probable reading of 
 the Matthsean text clearly suggests a subjective 
 effect upon Jesus Himself alone : " the heavens 
 were opened unto Him " (Mt 3 16 . Note, how- 
 ever, that WH. omit axiTa>). 
 
 The impression we gather from the Synoptists is 
 that the source of the narrative was Jesus Himself, 
 for whom the vision and the voice had a profound 
 significance. We may suppose that He related the 
 story of this heavenly ratification of His Mission to 
 the disciples at a later date, when they had reached 
 such a point in their training as would enable them 
 to understand its meaning. 
 
 But though the Marcan tradition gives no hint of 
 any recognition of Jesus by the Baptist, we have a 
 further source, which is drawn upon by St. Matthew 
 and St. Luke, though used by them somewhat 
 differently. It may be that St. Matthew derived 
 from this source the statement which he makes that 
 when Jesus came to be baptized, " John would have 
 hindered Him, saying, I have need to be baptized 
 of Thee, and comest Thou to me ? But Jesus 
 answering said unto him, Suffer it now : for thus it 
 becometh us to fulfil all righteousness " (Mt 3 1 *'-). 
 There is no difficulty in accepting this addition to 
 
6 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the narrative. Jesus was probably already known 
 personally to His kinsman, and we may well 
 suppose that an intuitive perception would reveal 
 to the Baptist the fact that this was " the coming 
 One " of whom he had spoken. A glance into the 
 face of Jesus and the quick response of the heart 
 might well arouse in him his prophetic instinct 
 and lead to the knowledge of which St. Matthew 
 speaks. 
 
 This, indeed, is inconsistent with the narrative of 
 the Fourth Gospel, which states that there was no 
 recognition of Jesus by the Baptist previously to 
 the heavenly manifestations, and that these were 
 the divinely appointed tokens by means of which 
 the Baptist was led to recognise Jesus as Him who 
 was to come. " I knew Him not : but He that sent 
 me to baptize with water, He said unto me, Upon 
 whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descending, 
 and abiding upon Him, the same is He that 
 baptizeth with the Holy Spirit" (Jn l 33 ). Here 
 the vision is given to John the Baptist himself, and 
 is made the source of his knowledge of Jesus. 
 
 There are, however,^ indications that the Johan- 
 nine narrative is lacking in historical perspective. 
 For the character of the testimony here ascribed to 
 the Baptist must be held, in all reasonable prob- 
 ability, to belong to a later date : " I have seen, 
 and have borne witness that this is the Son of 
 God " (Jn l 34 ). In ascribing to the Baptist the 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 7 
 
 use of such a title, the Evangelist appears to be 
 anticipating a stage of thought which was only 
 reached at a later date. We shall therefore do 
 best to accept the Matthsean account of the Baptist's 
 recognition of Jesus. 
 
 We conclude, then, that the Baptist recognised 
 Jesus as " the coming One," to whom his own 
 prophecies had pointed. This much at least is 
 clear. But what further idea was involved 
 in this belief? To what extent was Jesus 
 regarded by him as coming in fulfilment of Old 
 Testament prophecies? Was He regarded- as the 
 Messiah ? 
 
 The Synoptic narrative interprets the mission 
 of the Baptist as the fulfilment of the prophecy 
 of Isaiah. 
 
 "Behold, I send My messenger before Thy face, 
 Who shall prepare Thy way ; 
 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, 
 Make ye ready the way of the Lord, 
 Make His paths straight" (Mk l 2 = Mt 3 3 = Lk 3 4 ). 
 
 There is, however, no indication in the narrative 
 that the Baptist himself thought of this prophecy in 
 connection with his work. But the triple occur- 
 rence of the quotation shows that the earliest Christian 
 tradition definitely regarded this prophecy as having 
 been fulfilled by the mission of the Baptist. It is 
 indeed quite possible that the connection may have 
 been claimed originally by the Baptist himself, as is 
 
8 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 stated in the Fourth Gospel (Jn l 23 ) ; but, as against 
 this, it may be noted that Jesus seems to be intro- 
 ducing a new idea when He connected this prophecy 
 with the work of St. John the Baptist after the 
 return of the Baptist's messengers to their master 
 in his prison (Mt ll 10 = Lk 7 27 )- 
 
 But whether the Baptist had this prophecy in 
 his mind or not, we can hardly doubt that he 
 thought of Jesus as the Messiah. The phrase 
 " the coming One " points to One whose coming bad 
 been definitely announced and definitely expected. 
 The Lucan statement that, as John was preaching, 
 all mused in their hearts whether he himself were 
 the Messiah (Lk 3 16 ), shows the condition of 
 expectancy which prevailed. And in this ex- 
 pectancy, though with fuller knowledge, the Baptist 
 had his share. 
 
 He regarded Jesus as the Messiah. And his 
 teaching shows what ideas he associated with 
 Messiahship. There is to be a stern judgment 
 upon sin and a vindication of righteousness. 
 Messiah's kingdom indeed is to be a kingdom of 
 the Spirit, but relentless war is to be waged against 
 evil. There will be a baptism of fire as well as of 
 the Spirit. The fan of judgment is in Messiah's 
 hand, throughly to cleanse His threshing-floor and 
 to gather the wheat into His garner ; but the chaff 
 He will burn up with unquenchable fire (Lk 3 16fi = 
 Mt 3 llf -). Yet it would seem that the Baptist's 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 9 
 
 view of the Messiah's work was limited and de- 
 fective. Subsequently the public ministry of Jesus 
 did not match the ideal in the mind of the Baptist. 
 The news brought to him of the work and teaching 
 of Jesus led him to question whether he had been 
 mistaken. Was Jesus " the coming One," or were 
 they still to expect another (Mt ll s = Lk 7 19 ) ? 
 Probably the Baptist had not been able to free 
 himself from the ideas of his time which had 
 grown up around the conception of the Messiah. 
 He probably expected the establishment of temporal 
 sovereignty, the destruction of evil by the use of 
 worldly force, and then the reign of righteousness 
 under conditions of earthly sovereignty. 
 
 When, therefore, the first disciples attached 
 themselves to Jesus, we may suppose that they 
 brought with them the ideas and expectations 
 which the Baptist had taught. They regarded 
 Jesus as " the coming One," the Messiah. 
 
 But in point of fact there was very little to 
 build on in this first belief with which the disciples 
 approached Jesus. It could not be made the point 
 of departure for fuller knowledge, because in itself, 
 as understood by the disciples, it contained so much 
 that was false. Jesus could not claim to be the 
 Messiah without appearing to sanction the mass 
 of false and worldly notions which had gathered 
 around the Messianic hope. It was necessary for 
 Him at the beginning to set aside the Messianic 
 
10 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 idea altogether. He would first by His spiritual 
 teaching lead His disciples to understand the 
 spiritual character of His Work and to look into 
 the depths of His Personality. Afterwards, when 
 spiritual apprehension had come, they could give 
 Him a title under which they might express their 
 new knowledge. Then, but not before, they might 
 acknowledge Him to be the Christ. 
 
 Hence the only sure foothold which the disciples 
 had taken over from the Baptist was their belief 
 that He who was now their Master had come 
 in some way to conquer sin and to set up a 
 kingdom in righteousness. Let us see, then, by 
 what means Jesus led them forward from this 
 point to a fuller understanding of His Person and 
 His Work. 
 
 It was necessary that He should describe Him- 
 self by some title which was not associated in 
 popular usage with false ideas. He could not call 
 Himself the Messiah for the reasons explained 
 above. He chose to call Himself " The Son of 
 man." 
 
 What, then, is the meaning which underlies this 
 title ? What suggestions would it convey as to the 
 Person or Work of Jesus ? To find the answer 
 to this question, let us trace its use in the Old 
 Testament. 
 
 The phrase is of frequent occurrence in the 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 11 
 
 Psalms and elsewhere. It is used as a poetic 
 synonym for " man." It stands, not for an 
 individual, but for " man " as such, the being who 
 possesses all that belongs to human nature. The 
 son of man is the possessor of manhood, with all 
 that manhood implies. The synonym is clearly 
 expressed in the 8th Psalm, after the manner of 
 Hebrew parallelism — 
 
 "What is man, that Thou art mindful of him? 
 And the son of man, that Thou visitest him? 
 For Thou hast made him but little lower than God, 
 And crownest him with glory and honour. 
 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of 
 
 Thy hands ; 
 Thou hast put all things under his feet : 
 All sheep and oxen, 
 Yea, and the beasts of the field ; 
 The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, 
 Whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas. 1 ' 
 
 (Ps 8 4ff ). 
 
 In this passage two ideas stand out clearly side 
 by side — the dignity and the dependence of man. 
 On the one hand, he is endowed with qualities 
 which raise him far above all other created beings 
 — qualities of soul which lift him up towards God 
 Himself, in whose image he is created. But on 
 the other hand, he is dependent at every turn upon 
 God. He can do nothing of himself. All that he 
 is and all that he achieves he owes to God, who 
 has deigned thus to dignify him. So the title 
 
12 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 " Son of man " implies a possession of all that is 
 essential to human nature : it stands for man as 
 God has endowed him ; man, whose achieve- 
 ments seem so disproportionately great when 
 considered in relation to his frailty and in- 
 significance. 
 
 With the same thought the phrase is used in 
 the Book of Ezekiel. It is the title by which the 
 prophet is addressed by Jehovah, who thus prefaces 
 the messages which Ezekiel is to deliver. Here 
 indeed the title is addressed to an individual, but 
 it implies that Ezekiel is addressed in virtue of 
 his manhood. He is to speak as a man to men; 
 to teach them what is expected of them in virtue 
 of their manhood ; to lead them to a true 
 conception _ of the relation of man to God. 
 So when Ezekiel receives the title "Son of 
 man," he is reminded of what, as a man, he 
 ought to be. It is a call to realise the ideal 
 of manhood, a reminder at once of weakness and 
 of dignity. 
 
 Here, then, is the point of view from which 
 Jesus chose this as the title under which He 
 might best express the relation which He 
 wished first to establish between Himself and 
 His disciples. He desired to be thought of as 
 the Son of man ; not as a son of man among 
 others, but as pre-eminently and uniquely the 
 Son of man, sharing indeed the nature of others, 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 13 
 
 but standing apart from them as the exemplar 
 and the type. 
 
 We may surely set aside as an incredible paradox 
 the theory that Jesus never used the title " the 
 Son of man " at all, and that its occurrence in our 
 Greek Gospels is due to a misunderstanding of the 
 Aramaic phrase which was actually used by Him. 
 The whole argument is a piece of ingenious con- 
 jecture, based on an imperfect knowledge of the 
 Aramaic dialects which were spoken in various 
 parts of Syria at that time. The theory runs 
 counter to all the direct evidence which we possess. 
 It is impossible to imagine that the whole of the 
 first generation of believers should have been totally 
 mistaken in their belief that Jesus had constantly 
 referred to Himself by a certain title, while all the 
 time the supposed title was a figment of the 
 imagination. 
 
 We need not hesitate to believe that Jesus 
 throughout His Ministry spoke of Himself as the 
 Son of man, and regarded this title as standing 
 in intimate connection with His Person and 
 Work. He is the Man in whom human nature 
 finds its fullest and most perfect expression, 
 the typical example of what a man is intended 
 to be. In Him each separate faculty finds its 
 perfect development, and each has its true pro- 
 portion and balance in making up the harmony 
 of the whole. Thus He exhibits in Himself the 
 
14 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 ideal of human nature : He is the Son of 
 man. 
 
 But a further question now arises as to the 
 meaning conveyed by this title. Was it associated 
 in the popular mind with the Messiah ? And was 
 Jesus, in using it, making in effect a claim to be 
 the Messiah ? 
 
 There seems to be no adequate reason for 
 supposing that the title was popularly associated 
 with the Messiah at that time. It is no doubt 
 true that the ideal figure, whom Daniel describes 
 as " like unto a son of man " (Dan 7 13 ), was inter- 
 preted at an early date as representing the Messiah. 
 But the phrase in Daniel is not the ascription of 
 a title ; it is a description of appearance. It 
 simply means that the form of the Being seen in 
 the vision was that of a man. There is no reason 
 to suppose that, when Jesus, who appeared as a 
 humble peasant of Galilee, took the title " Son of 
 man," His hearers would for a moment associate 
 it with the description of the august Being of 
 Daniel's vision, whose appearance indeed was that 
 of a man, but who came in the clouds of heaven. 
 
 There is, however, another use of the title, which 
 we must examine. It occurs several times in the 
 Similitudes of the Book of Enoch. There is a 
 vision of '' one whose face was as the appearance 
 of a man, and his face was full of graciousness, 
 like one of the holy angels." The angel who 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 15 
 
 accompanies Enoch thus explains the vision : " This 
 is the son of man who hath righteousness, with 
 whom dwelleth righteousness and who reveals all 
 the treasures of that which is hidden, because the 
 Lord of Spirits hath chosen him, and his lot before 
 the Lord of Spirits hath surpassed everything in 
 uprightness for ever. And this son of man, whom 
 thou hast seen, will arouse the kings and the 
 mighty ones from their couches, and the strong 
 ones from their thrones, and execute judgment 
 upon them" (Enoch 46). The Book of Enoch 
 has other passages to the same effect, which are 
 clearly Messianic prophecies. The Messiah is 
 thought of as a Being of superhuman power, who 
 shares the throne of God Himself and executes 
 judgment upon the earth. He is described as the 
 Son of man. 
 
 It will follow from this that among those who 
 were familiar with the Book of Enoch the phrase 
 " the Son of man " would be regarded as a title of 
 the Messiah. But the date of this portion of the 
 Similitudes has not been fixed with certainty. It 
 may quite possibly be post-Christian. But even 
 if it be dated before the ministry of Jesus, there 
 is nothing to show that those who listened to the 
 teaching of Jesus had any knowledge of the book. 
 There is therefore no reason to suppose that Jesus 
 took the title Son of man with any idea that it 
 would be associated with a Messianic claim. 
 
16 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 There is, on the other hand, strong reason to 
 believe the contrary. There is clear evidence that 
 a long time elapsed before Jesus made any claim 
 to be the Christ, or allowed any such claim to be 
 made on His behalf. It was at the close of a 
 prolonged period of companionship with the Twelve 
 that He asked, " Who say ye that I am?" And 
 the great commendation which St. Peter won was 
 a testimony to the faith which led him to realise 
 the truth : " Thou art the Christ." Had the title 
 " Son of man " implied Messiahship, this emphatic 
 praise would have been out of place. Moreover, 
 the prohibition which followed proves that no 
 public claim had been made. They were to tell 
 no man that He was the Christ. And, further, 
 those " possessed with devils " were silenced, 
 because they knew He was the Christ (Lk 4 41 ). 
 The time had not come to put before the people 
 a claim which as yet they would only misunder- 
 stand. Clearly, then, the familiar title, " the Son 
 of man," can have had no such associations in the 
 popular mind. 
 
 It was a title which in due course would fit in 
 well with the claim to Messiahship when that 
 claim had to be made. But in the meantime it 
 served the purpose of leading men's thoughts 
 towards a truer conception of the Person and 
 Work of Jesus. They must learn first the 
 significance of His perfect humanity, and then 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 17 
 
 they would be able to go forward to a deeper con- 
 ception of His Person. 
 
 In connection with this position taken up by 
 Jesus, we should note His reply to the messengers 
 of St. John the Baptist. They were sent with the 
 direct question, " Art thou He that eometh, or look 
 we for another ? " This was equivalent to asking 
 the question, " Art Thou the Messiah ? " Jesus 
 did not answer the question in words, but pointed 
 to the character and contents of His Work. The 
 inference that Jesus wished the Baptist to draw 
 was clearly this : that, putting aside the question 
 of His own Messiahship, His Work was of a totally 
 different character from that which popular beliefs 
 associated with the expected Messiah. Hence the 
 answer of Jesus to the messengers is an important 
 piece of self-testimony. It is an indication as to 
 the direction in which one must look to find what 
 Jesus regarded as the essential principles under- 
 lying His Work : " Go your way and tell John the 
 things which ye do hear and see: the blind 
 receive their sight, and the lame walk, the 
 lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, and the 
 dead are raised up, and the poor have good 
 tidings preached to them" (Mt ll 4f '). The Work 
 of the Son of man is to bring deliverance to 
 suffering humanity ; to give help where help is 
 most needed ; to show in fullest measure the 
 spirit of love. 
 
18 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 In this same spirit He claimed that in Himself 
 was fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah — 
 
 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, 
 Because He anointed Me to preach good tidings to the 
 
 poor : 
 He hath sent Me to proclaim release to the captives, 
 And recovering of sight to the blind, 
 To set at liberty them that are bruised, 
 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord " (Lk 4 18 '-). 
 
 Thus Jesus was concerned to lay stress upon 
 the character and contents of His Mission, not to 
 claim for it a title which had become associated 
 with false ideas. At the same time, His Mission 
 is one which has a Divine sanction. It is derived 
 from the Spirit of the Lord, who has anointed Him 
 for the work. 
 
 We have now cleared the way for an examination 
 of the positive teaching of Jesus. Let us see what 
 revelation He makes to us of His Person and 
 Work in connection with His chosen title, the Son 
 of man. 
 
 Jesus points to His mode of living. It is a life 
 of naturalness and simplicity, not clogged by any 
 artificial asceticism. " The Son of man is come 
 eating and drinking" (Mt ll 19 = Lk 7 34 ). But at 
 the same time He bears His full share of the 
 hardships of human life ; He shrinks from no 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 19 
 
 suffering which the fulfilment of His Mission in- 
 volves. " The Son of man hath not where to lay 
 His head" (Mt 8 20 = Lk 9 58 ). And further, He 
 requires that there shall be no shrinking from the 
 consequences of discipleship on the part of those 
 who follow Him. " Blessed are ye," He said to 
 the disciples, " when men shall hate you, and when 
 they shall separate you from their company, and 
 reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for 
 the Son of man's sake " (Lk 6 22 ). The Son of man 
 exhibits the ideal of human life under the circum- 
 stances in which He lived ; and He required of 
 His disciples that no threat of consequences should 
 be allowed to turn them from the pursuit of the 
 same ideal. 
 
 Let us now consider two passages in which the 
 title " Son of man " is associated with a claim of 
 authority. 
 
 The first of these is in connection with the 
 plucking of the ears of corn by the disciples on the 
 sabbath day. The accusation of the Pharisees, that 
 the disciples were acting unlawfully, was met by 
 the reply : " The sabbath was made for man, and 
 not man for the sabbath : so that the Son of man 
 is lord even of the sabbath" (Mt 12 8 = Mk 2™ 
 = Lk 6 5 ). The sabbath, that is, was instituted 
 in order to serve the purpose of man's higher 
 needs, to help him in his struggle to attain the true 
 ideal of human life. If at any moment the cere- 
 
20 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 monial restrictions which guard the sabbath become 
 a hindrance instead of a help in the struggle to fulfil 
 the true purpose of life, they may then be set aside. 
 Indeed, they ought then to be set aside ; for to 
 observe them in the letter would defeat the object 
 with which they were framed. Since, then, the 
 sabbath was made for man, and not man for the 
 sabbath, one whose conception of life and its 
 purpose is true will be entitled to decide for him- 
 self whether in any particular case such ceremonial 
 regulations ought to be set aside : he will be " lord 
 of the sabbath." More than all, then, it will 
 follow that the Son of man, whose ideal of life is 
 perfect and whose wisdom in pursuing His aims is 
 unquestioned, is " lord of the sabbath." But the 
 claim which the words imply is not essentially 
 different from the claim which might be made for 
 all men whose purpose is true and noble, and who 
 possess the higher wisdom as the guide of their life. 
 The difference is only one of degree. 
 
 The second passage which we have particularly 
 to examine occurs in the narrative of the healing 
 of the paralytic. Jesus prefaced the act of healing 
 by the claim to forgive the man's sins. The 
 scribes who were present murmured indignantly at 
 such a claim being made. It seemed to them to 
 amount to blasphemy. " Who can forgive sins but 
 one, even God ? " they said. Jesus maintained His 
 claim ; and He then effected the bodily healing of 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 21 
 
 the man as a proof that in making His claim to 
 forgive sins He was also speaking with authority. 
 " That ye may know that the Son of man hath 
 authority on earth to forgive sins (He saith to the 
 sick of the palsy), I say unto thee, Arise, take up 
 thy bed, and go unto thy house" (Mt 9 6 = 
 Mk 2 10 = Lk 5^). We have to inquire, then, 
 what is the significance of the occurrence of the 
 title " Son of man " in this connection. Does 
 Jesus claim to forgive sins in virtue of being the 
 Son of man — in virtue, that is, of being the perfect 
 exemplar of what a man should be ? 
 
 Now it would not be true to say that the Son of 
 man, simply as such, has the power of forgiveness. 
 But Jesus clearly regarded Himself as holding an 
 extraordinary commission from God, in virtue of 
 which He possessed authority to forgive sins. And 
 this commission was bestowed upon Him because of 
 His perfect knowledge of human nature and His 
 perfect exhibition of what human nature should 
 be. In other words, He has the power to forgive 
 sins, not because He is Son of man, but because 
 as Son of man He possessed perfectly the qualities 
 which made it fitting that the power of forgiveness 
 should be bestowed upon Him by God. It is 
 exactly this idea which is expressed in the Johan- 
 nine saying : the Father " gave Him authority to 
 execute judgment, because He is the Son of man " 
 (Jn 5 27 ). 
 
22 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 The claim involves an intimate knowledge of the 
 consciences of men and a power of reading men's 
 hearts. And indeed it was just this power, again 
 and again so strikingly shown, which aroused the 
 wonder of those who witnessed it. He knew 
 what was in man. And knowing what was in 
 man, He knew where forgiveness was possible and 
 where the message of forgiveness might be spoken. 
 Hence the word of forgiveness spoken by the Son 
 of man on earth was ratified in heaven. There was 
 no trenching upon the prerogative of God : for the 
 perfect knowledge of the Son of man enabled Him 
 to interpret God's will ; and in virtue of the 
 authority committed to Him He delivered the 
 message of forgiveness. 
 
 The same may be said of another incident in the 
 Lucan narrative, where the message of forgiveness 
 is spoken to the woman that was a sinner. " He 
 said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven " (Lk 7 48 ). 
 Here indeed the words of Jesus are in themselves 
 simply declaratory, but those who heard the saying 
 understood it as being more than a mere declaration, 
 and implying a claim to forgive. " Who is this," 
 they said, "that forgiveth sins also?" (Lk 7 49 ). 
 Presumably the words were actually spoken in an 
 authoritative form, as in the case of the paralytic. 
 
 We now have to examine three passages in the 
 Matthsean tradition, which are placed in the Gospel 
 at a period previous to the confession of St. Peter, 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 23 
 
 but which probably belong to a later date in the 
 ministry. 
 
 The first of these passages is that which relates 
 to the sign of Jonah. " As Jonah was three days 
 and three nights in the belly of the whale ; so shall 
 the Son of man be three days and three nights in 
 the heart of the earth " (Mt 12 40 ). The Matthsean 
 version of the saying makes Jonah a sign of the 
 Death and Eesurrection of the Son of man. But it 
 should be noticed that this interpretation of the 
 sign is peculiar to St. Matthew. St. Luke finds the 
 point of comparison in the idea of Jonah as a 
 preacher of repentance (Lk ll 30 ); and the prob- 
 ability is that this, being the simpler idea, 
 represents the original form of the saying in the 
 non-Marcan document. After the actual event of 
 the Eesurrection on the third day, it would be 
 natural to see a further similitude in the story of 
 Jonah. But it seems unlikely that, if the saying 
 had been originally spoken in the Matthsean form, 
 so striking a correspondence with the history of 
 Jesus should have been omitted in the Lucan 
 narrative. 
 
 But apart from the form of the saying, we have 
 to consider its chronological position. St. Matthew 
 places it before St. Peter's confession, while St. 
 Luke reverses the order. Now, since as a rule 
 St. Matthew's notes of time are less careful than 
 those of St. Luke, we shall probably do best in this 
 
24 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 case to prefer the Lucan order of events. It hardly 
 seems consistent with a natural process of develop- 
 ment in teaching, that the saying in its Matthsean 
 form should have been spoken at such an early date 
 in the Ministry. 
 
 The second Matthaean passage we have to con- 
 sider is the Parable of the Tares. And here we find 
 the introduction of a new idea. Not only is the 
 Son of man said to be the sower of the good seed, 
 which is explained to mean the introducing into the 
 world " the sons of the kingdom," but also He is 
 the supreme agent in the Great Judgment. " The 
 Son of man shall send forth His angels, and they 
 shall gather out of His kingdom all things that 
 cause stumbling, and them that do iniquity, and 
 shall cast them into the furnace of fire : there shall 
 be the weeping and gnashing of teeth " (Mt 13 41f -)- 
 In this parable the ideas are Messianic throughout : 
 Jesus makes a clear claim to be the Messiah. 
 
 Are we, then, to say after all that the title " Son 
 of man " received a Messianic interpretation at an 
 early period of the Ministry, and that Jesus at this 
 early date publicly claimed to be the Messiah? 
 This idea is contradicted by the mass of the 
 evidence. And indeed there is no reason for 
 supposing that this parable, which is peculiar to St. 
 Matthew, is recorded here in its chronological place. 
 For it is clearly the constant habit of St. Matthew 
 to gather together a number of sayings or a group 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 25 
 
 of parables, which bear on a single subject, and to 
 record them consecutively. Thus, in the thirteenth 
 chapter of the Gospel we have a group of parables 
 of which this is one, all bearing on one subject, 
 " the kingdom of heaven." They were doubtless 
 spoken on various occasions ; and it is probable 
 that some of them, including the Parable of the 
 Tares, belong to a late period in the Ministry. 
 
 But there is one more Matthsean saying, 
 recorded in the period anterior to St. Peter's 
 confession, in which the title " Son of man " is used 
 in a Messianic connection. The triple tradition 
 gives the account of the charge given by Jesus to 
 the Twelve on the occasion of their Mission to the 
 cities of Galilee (Mt 10 1 - 6 " 15 = Mk 6 7 - n = Lk 9 1 " 6 ). 
 To this tradition St. Matthew adds a further 
 charge, which appears to belong to a different 
 discourse, inasmuch as it is eschatological in 
 character (Mt 10 16-42 ). Indeed, the general 
 Synoptic tradition shows that it is little more than 
 a cento of passages gathered from later discourses, 
 spoken for the most part near the close of the 
 Ministry. In this Matthsean addition to the 
 charge, there comes the saying: "Ye shall not 
 have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son 
 of man be come" (Mt 10 23 ). Here clearly the 
 Son of man is thought of as the Messiah, and the 
 idea is eschatological. But the above considera- 
 tions will show that we need have no difficulty in 
 
26 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 regarding this saying also as belonging to a later 
 period. 
 
 Let us, then, draw our conclusions as to the use 
 of the title " Son of man " during this first period 
 of the Ministry. We may well believe that Jesus 
 used the title freely of Himself ; but it is not 
 likely that He intended it to have, or that it was 
 understood as having, any Messianic connotation. 
 This is what we should expect as antecedently 
 probable, having regard to the false beliefs that 
 had grown up around the idea of the Messiah in 
 the popular mind. And our investigation will 
 have shown that there is no real evidence to the 
 contrary. At a later period, when the time had 
 come for Jesus to put forward His Messianic claims, 
 He still retained the title " Son of man," and used 
 it in unfolding this further teaching about Himself, 
 which was not implied by the actual title. Yet 
 the title " Son of 'man " revealed a Personality and 
 a Work which in due time was seen to realise 
 the highest possible conception of what the Messiah 
 should be. 
 
 We must pass on now to a consideration of the 
 use of another title, "the Son of God." The 
 evidence seems to point to the conclusion that this 
 title was neither used nor implied by Jesus at 
 any time previous to St. Peter's confession. The 
 narratives of the Baptism and of the Temptation 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 27 
 
 prove indeed that Jesus Himself was conscious, at 
 least from the time of His public appearance, of 
 standing in the unique relation to God which this 
 title implies. At the Baptism, there was the 
 testimony of the voice from heaven : " Thou art My 
 beloved Son, in Thee I am well pleased " (Mt 3 17 = 
 Mk l u = Lk 3 22 ). Whether we were right or 
 wrong in the conclusion we came to, that this testi- 
 mony was heard neither by the Baptist nor by 
 the bystanders, it was certainly recognised by Jesus 
 Himself. In the narrative of the Temptation, the 
 devil makes his appeal to Jesus in two out of the 
 three temptations as the Son of God. " If Thou 
 art the Son of God, command that these stones 
 become bread" (Mt 4 3 = Lk 4 3 ); "If Thou art the 
 Son of God, cast Thyself down " (Mt 4* = Lk 4 9 ). 
 The narrative of the Baptism, if our supposition 
 in regard to it is correct, and the narrative of the 
 Temptation, in any case, must have come from 
 Jesus Himself. But the character of "the teaching, 
 which these mysterious narratives convey, makes 
 it probable that the unfolding of them to the 
 disciples took place at a late period of the ministry- 
 Historically, they belong to the beginning of the 
 Ministry ; but, as forming a part of the teaching 
 of Jesus, they probably have their place near the 
 close. The fact that the Evangelists put these 
 narratives into their chronological place leads to no 
 presumption that the disciples were asked at an 
 
28 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 early stage to ponder over the deep mystery of 
 their Master's relation to God. 
 
 Eather it would seem that Jesus deliberately 
 kept out of sight this aspect of His Person, which, 
 as the narrative of the Baptism and Temptation 
 show, occupied a place in His own mind all the 
 time. For whenever allusion was made to the 
 relation in which Jesus stood to God, the testi- 
 mony was at once suppressed by Him. 
 
 Examples of this occur in the case of certain 
 men who, in the language of the New Testament, 
 were possessed by unclean spirits. In each case 
 the possessed was the victim of madness. Now it 
 sometimes happens that the insane possess an 
 extraordinary faculty of instinct, which enables 
 them to hit upon a truth which logic and reason 
 would have been powerless to discover. And so it 
 came about that on more than one occasion these 
 poor mad creatures knew instinctively that He 
 who stood before them, and in whose eye was such 
 power, was greater than mere man. And with 
 irrational fear or cringing worship they paid Him 
 their homage. " What have we to do with Thee, 
 Thou Jesus of Nazareth ? art Thou come to 
 destroy us ? I know Thee who Thou art, the 
 Holy One of God" (Mk l 24 = Lk 4 M ). "The 
 unclean spirits, whensoever they beheld Him, fell 
 down before Him, and cried, saying, Thou art the 
 Son of God " (Mk 3 11 ). And the same instinctive 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 29 
 
 testimony came from the madmen of Gerasa (Mt 8 29 
 = Mk 5 7 = Lk 8 28 ). But Jesus made it His 
 constant practice to silence such utterances (Mk 
 3 12 , i-rrerifia, imperf. ; cf. Mk l 25 - M , Lk 4"). All 
 these prohibitions belong to the period of the 
 Ministry previous to St. Peter's confession, and they 
 seem to constitute a proof that during that period 
 our Lord kept out of sight the thought of His 
 special relation to God. 
 
 There are, however, four passages in the First 
 Gospel which we must examine before we can 
 establish this point. The first occurs in the 
 eschatological passage which St. Matthew adds to 
 the charge to the Twelve : " Every one therefore 
 who shall confess Me before men, him will I also 
 confess before My Father which is in heaven. But 
 whosoever shall deny Me before men, him will I 
 also deny before My Father which is in heaven " 
 (Mt 10 32 '-). Here the phrase "My Father," used 
 in such a connection, implies just the same special 
 and indeed unique relation to God as is conveyed 
 by the title " Son of God." But we have already 
 seen reason for supposing that this passage, though 
 included by St. Matthew in the charge to the 
 Twelve, belongs in reality to a later period in the 
 Ministry. 
 
 The same may be said of the great central 
 passage of Divine Fatherhood in relation to the 
 Son (Mt ll 25 - 27 = Lk 10 21f -). For while St. 
 
30 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Matthew places this passage before the confession 
 of St. Peter, St. Luke puts it subsequent to that 
 critical occasion. But St. Luke's notes of time, as 
 we have already said, are more exact than those 
 of the First Gospel ; and we may therefore quite 
 fairly adopt his order of events in this case. 
 
 We next have the Matthsean saying : " Whosoever 
 shall do the will of My Father which is in heaven, 
 he is My brother, and sister, and mother " (Mt 1 2 50 ). 
 In this case the parallel in St. Mark shows that the 
 saying in its original form contained simply the 
 phrase " the will of God " (Mk 3 35 ). St. Matthew's 
 phrase, "My Father which is in heaven," is a 
 paraphrase due to the Evangelist. 
 
 One more passage in St. Matthew's Gospel must 
 be noticed. In common with St. Mark and St. 
 John, he records the incident of the storm on the 
 Lake of Galilee, when Jesus came to the disciples 
 walking upon the sea. To this narrative St. 
 Matthew adds the further incident of the attempt 
 of St. Peter to walk on the water to meet Jesus. 
 And this addition, peculiar to St. Matthew, thus 
 closes : '' When they were gone up into the boat, 
 the wind ceased. And they that were in the boat 
 worshipped Him, saying, Of a truth Thou art the 
 Son of God" (Mt 14 32f -). There is, of course, the 
 possibility that the title here given to Jesus may 
 be due to the Evangelist. But, on the other hand, 
 there is no difficulty in supposing that the' im- 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 31 
 
 pressive exercise of power and authority shown by 
 Jesus evoked on a sudden the unpremeditated 
 ascription : " Thou art the Son of God." It is not 
 quite clear who were the speakers : whether the 
 disciples themselves, or the hired crew of the ship. 
 In any event, the incident does not make it 
 necessary to suppose that the title had actually 
 been used previously by Jesus Himself. The use 
 of the title by the maniacs would probably be 
 sufficient to suggest it at such a crisis, especially 
 when one remembers the peculiar degree of 
 reverence with which the insane are regarded in 
 the East. Our conclusion, then, is that there is 
 no passage in the Gospels which makes it necessary 
 to believe that the Divine Sonship formed part of 
 the teaching of Jesus during this first period of 
 the Ministry. 
 
 Let us now look further into the positive claims 
 made by Jesus. There is a very remarkable claim 
 to authority, which runs through the Sermon on 
 the Mount. Jesus claims an authority equivalent 
 to that which first gave its sanction to the Law 
 of Moses : " Ye have heard that it was said to 
 them of old time " (Mt 5 21 , etc.) : thus He intro- 
 duces a command from the Law. " But I say 
 unto you " (Mt 5 22 , etc.) : thus He sets aside the 
 letter of the old commandment, and replaces it by 
 a deeper commandment of His own. His words 
 
32 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 are not a mere interpretation of the old Law : they 
 go beyond it. The old Law had fulfilled its 
 purpose by making possible the higher teaching 
 for which it had prepared the way and which 
 must now take its place. But Jesus, in giving 
 this new teaching, is claiming for Himself a Divine 
 commission : He speaks with an authority derived 
 from God. And it was just this assumption of 
 authority which so amazed His hearers. To their 
 minds, so steeped in traditionalism, the claim 
 seemed to be one of astounding magnitude. " The 
 multitudes were astonished at His teaching: for 
 He taught them as one having authority, and not 
 as their scribes " (Mt 1 m -). 
 
 There is a further element in the early claims 
 of Jesus. He claims to be a prophet. This claim 
 is implied by His words in the synagogue at 
 Nazareth, where the people of His own city incur 
 His rebuke because they fail to recognise His 
 claim. " A prophet," He said, " is not without 
 honour, save in his own country, and among his 
 own kin, and in his own house " (Mt 1 3 57 = Mk 6 4 
 = Lk 4 24 ). The claim received public recognition 
 as a result of His mighty works. After the raising 
 of the widow's son at Nam, " they glorified God, 
 saying, A great prophet is risen among us: and, 
 God hath visited His people" (Lk 7 16 ). This 
 passage is of great importance, as showing the 
 normal effect which the mighty works of Jesus 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 33 
 
 had upon the people. The effect of such power in 
 any age would depend upon the habits of thought 
 of the time. To the people of Galilee it at once 
 suggested the kind of power which they associated 
 with a great prophet. For had not Elijah and 
 Elisha performed mighty works and raised the 
 dead ? Such works would not, to the minds of 
 the people of that day, imply anything higher than 
 the power of a prophet. The people therefore 
 were ready to admit this claim of Jesus. The 
 Pharisees also show that they were aware of the 
 claim, though they tried to discredit it. At the 
 meal in a Pharisee's house, when a woman came 
 in and anointed the feet of Jesus, the host " spake 
 within himself, saying, This man, if He were a 
 prophet, would have perceived who and what 
 manner of woman this is which toucheth Him, 
 that she is a sinner" (Lk 7 39 ). 
 
 We come now to the question, what attitude 
 towards Jesus was evoked by His Personality and 
 Teaching ? We can learn something from the titles 
 by which He was addressed. The title most 
 commonly given to Him was that of icvpio<s or 
 Lord. It is used by St. Peter after the draught 
 of fishes (Lk 5 s ) ; by the leper who sought to be 
 cleansed (Mt 8 2 = Lk 5 12 ; but om. Mk l 40 ); by 
 the centurion who besought Him for his servant 
 (Mt 8 6 , Lk 7 6 ; in parallel narratives, but not 
 3 
 
34 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 parallel passages) ; by the disciples in the storm 
 on the lake (Mt 8 25 ; but, in the parallel passages, 
 $i&d<TKa\o<; in Mk 4 38 , irmard,Tr]<i in Lk 8 24 ) ; by 
 two blind men (Mt 9 27 ) ; and by the Syrophenician 
 woman (Mt 15 27 = Mk 7 28 ). Jesus also puts the 
 title into the mouth of the unreal disciples, whose 
 allegiance is only in word (Mk 7 21f -). In all these 
 examples the vocative is used, and the title is 
 consequently anarthrous. It is a title of honour, 
 expressive of respect or reverence. It is such a 
 title as servants would give to their master or 
 pupils to their teacher. It does not imply any 
 exceptional position. 
 
 The substantive title " The Lord " (d Kvpio<i) does 
 not occur in this period of the Ministry. When 
 Jesus uses it in His charge to the man who had 
 been possessed of the legion, He almost certainly 
 uses it not of Himself but of God : " Go to thy 
 house unto thy friends, and tell them how great 
 things the Lord hath done for thee " (Mk 5 19 ). So 
 at least St. Luke understands it, for he substitutes 
 6 #eo? for 6 icvpios (Lk 8 39 ). But it is possible 
 that the framer of the original tradition may have 
 taken the title as referring to Jesus Himself. For 
 the narrative takes up the words of the charge, 
 replacing now 6 Kvpios by 'Irjcrofc : " He went his 
 way, and began to publish in Decapolis how great 
 things Jesus had done for him " (Mk 5 20 = Lk 8*°). 
 
 The title 8i8dcrica\o$ was naturally given to 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 35 
 
 Jesus by His disciples (Mk 4 s8 ), and it was in this 
 way that the Pharisees preferred to speak of Him 
 (Mt 9 11 , o StSacr/caXo? v/ia>v). St. Luke, as we 
 have seen, uses also the title iirioTaTij^ (Lk 5 6 
 324, 45^ a term expressive of authority, the equivalent 
 perhaps of the Jewish title Eabbi. The term is 
 peculiar to St. Luke. 
 
 One more title must be considered. According 
 to St. Matthew's Gospel, the title " Son of David " 
 was on two occasions given to our Lord during this 
 early period of the Ministry. St. Matthew gives 
 it as used by the two blind men (Mt 9 27 ) and also 
 by the Syrophenician woman (Mt 15 22 ). The title 
 was Messianic, and its use would imply a recogni- 
 tion of Jesus as the Messiah. But is St. Matthew 
 accurate in regarding this title as having been 
 accorded to Jesus at this early stage of the 
 Ministry ? We have already seen strong reason 
 for believing that Jesus had not Himself made any 
 claim to be the Messiah. But, further than this, 
 there is evidence that the idea had not yet occurred 
 to the people. When Jesus asked the disciples 
 what conjectures were current as to His Personality, 
 and put to them the question, " Who do men say 
 that I am ? " 1 they answered, " John the Baptist : 
 and others, Elijah ; but others, One of the prophets " 
 
 1 A comparison of the parallel Synoptic passages shows that 
 this was the form of the question as preserved by the original 
 tradition. 
 
36 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 (Mt 16 u = Mk 8 28 = Lk 9 19 ). There is no sugges- 
 tion that any of the people thought of Him as yet 
 as the Messiah. Indeed, St. Peter's confession, 
 " Thou art the Christ," is placed in striking con- 
 trast to the popular ideas. 
 
 The popular attitude towards Jesus was one of 
 respectful homage. A typical attitude is that of 
 Jairus, who " fell at His feet " (Mk 5 22 = Lk 8") 
 and "worshipped Him" (Mt 9 18 ). This was the 
 homage of an Eastern salaam. On those who 
 understood Him better, a deeper impression was 
 made by the Personality of Jesus. St. John the 
 Baptist felt himself unworthy to baptize One 
 whose nobility of character he recognised (Mt 3 14 ). 
 St. Peter became deeply conscious of his own sin- 
 fulness in the presence of Jesus (Lk 5 8 ). The 
 disciples felt instinctively that Jesus was far above 
 them. They were impressed not only by His 
 authority and His mighty works, but by the 
 indefinable wonder of His Person. 
 
 We are now ready to examine the culminating 
 incident of this first period of the Ministry, the 
 confession of St. Peter. Jesus, having asked the 
 disciples what were the popular beliefs concerning 
 Him, went on to test the belief of the disciples 
 themselves. " Who say ye that I am?" It was 
 St. Peter who answered for the disciples. But 
 when we come to inquire what were the exact 
 terms of his answer, we are met by a difficulty. 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 37 
 
 For St. Mark reports simply the answer, " Thou art 
 the Christ" (Mk 8 29 ), while St. Luke has "The 
 Christ of God " (Lk 9 20 ), and St. Matthew gives the 
 fuller reply, " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the 
 living God" (Mt 16 16 ). Can we accept this full 
 reply as belonging to an original tradition ? We 
 may indeed deduce from the textual evidence that 
 the document underlying the Second Gospel con- 
 tained no more than St. Mark gives us. But St. 
 Matthew at this point evidently had access to an 
 independent tradition (see Mt 16 17-20 ), and it is 
 quite possible that the fuller form of St. Peter's reply 
 may rest upon this tradition and may be original. 
 
 All three Synoptists agree that on this momentous 
 occasion St. Peter confessed Jesus to be the Christ. 
 This was the goal to which the Work and Teaching 
 of Jesus up to this point had been leading. He 
 had made no such claim either directly or through 
 the adoption of a Messianic title. But He had 
 shown that the Mission with which He was 
 charged was to satisfy the people's deepest needs. 
 Through Him the blind received their sight and 
 the lame walked, the lepers were cleansed, the deaf 
 were made to hear, the dead were raised up, and 
 the poor had the gospel preached to them. St. 
 Peter had seen all this. And now, as by a flash of 
 spiritual intuition, he recognised that this was the 
 work of the Messiah, the chosen Deliverer, who 
 was to be sent from God. The old false ideas 
 
38 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 which had grown up around the Messianic hope, 
 earthly, fantastic, and extravagant, were set aside, 
 or at least fell into the background. St. Peter had 
 listened to the wonderful teaching of Jesus, who 
 spake as never man spake ; whose words were with 
 authority ; whose actions were all inspired by love ; 
 who in His own Person exhibited without flaw the 
 perfect ideal of human life. And the only possible 
 interpretation of this life came home to him with 
 the certainty of a Divine revelation. His Master 
 was indeed the Messiah, the Expected One, who 
 had been anointed for the work of deliverance, and 
 whose commission was from God Himself. And 
 the Matthsean tradition, in full accordance with 
 this, gives the answering commendation of Jesus : 
 " Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jonah : for flesh and 
 blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My 
 Father which is in heaven" (Mt 16 17 ). 
 
 St. Peter, through his companionship with Jesus, 
 had been led to a true conception of the Messiah. 
 But among the people at large the old false notions 
 still remained. The knowledge which the disciples 
 had gained must therefore remain for a time locked 
 up in their hearts. It was not possible to proclaim 
 the fact of Messiahship without arousing a fanati- 
 cism that would spring from the mistaken expecta- 
 tions of the people. So Jesus at once "charged 
 the disciples that they should tell no man that He 
 was the Christ" (Mt 16 20 = Mk 8 30 = Lk 9 21 ). 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 39 
 
 If now we accept as part of the original tradition 
 the additional testimony with which St. Matthew 
 credits St. Peter, in what sense shall we understand 
 the phrase, "The Son of the living God"? The 
 expression "the living God" is deeply suggestive 
 of the Old Testament, and the whole phrase should 
 be read in close connection with Old Testament 
 ideas. 
 
 Now, in the Old Testament the idea of sonship 
 with God implies a close relation to God and a 
 position of special privilege or authority. It does 
 not, however, imply any partaking of the Divine 
 Nature. It is ascribed to the race of beings, 
 whether human or not, who are thought of as ex- 
 isting before the Flood (Gn 6 2 - *) ; to the Judges, or 
 theocratic rulers of Israel (Ps 82 6 ) ; to the king, who 
 rules the people under God's authority (2 S 7") ; 
 and to an ideal personification of the nation of 
 Israel itself (Ex 4 22 ; cf. Hos ll 1 ). But the idea 
 of sonship culminates in the Psalms, where it is 
 ascribed to a mighty king whose throne shall be 
 established by God, and with whom God's covenant 
 shall be made for ever, 
 
 " I will tell of the decree : 
 
 The Lord said unto me, Thou art My son ; 
 
 This day have I begotten thee. 
 
 Ask of Me, and I will give thee the nations for thine 
 inheritance, 
 
 And the uttermost parts of the earth for thy posses- 
 sion " (Ps 2«). 
 
40 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 "He shall cry unto Me, Thou art my Father, 
 My God, and the rock of my salvation. 
 I also will make him My firstborn, 
 The highest of the kings of the earth. 
 My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, 
 And My covenant shall stand fast with him." 
 
 (Ps 89 26ff ) 
 
 Here, then, is drawn the figure of one who would 
 come in the power of God, and to whose coming 
 men looked forward in eager expectation in the 
 dark days of national sorrow and tragedy. He 
 would be pre-eminently Son of God; occupying 
 towards God a special, and indeed a unique, 
 relation ; and, in consequence of this relation, 
 wielding an unexampled authority. 
 
 Such was the point which the revelation of the 
 Old Testament had reached. And the use by St. 
 Peter of the phrase " the Son of the living God " 
 implies a belief that in Jesus this expectation was 
 fulfilled. Jesus is the Christ of Old Testament 
 prophecy, and as such occupies a unique position 
 of privilege and authority. He is charged with a 
 Divine Mission under the sanction of the living 
 God. 
 
 The answer of Jesus ratifies the confession. 
 Probably for the first time He now speaks of God 
 as " My Father which is in heaven " (Mt 1 6 17 ). 
 There had been from the first the revelation of the 
 general Fatherhood of God, embracing all mankind. 
 But the use of this new expression is a claim of 
 
THE BEGINNING OF THE MINISTRY 41 
 
 unique relationship. God is the Father of Jesus 
 in a way in which He is the Father of none other. 
 This much was contained in St. Peter's phrase, as 
 he understood it, " the Son of the living God." 
 
 But we must not import into St. Peter's words 
 a meaning which was not realised till later. There 
 is nothing, so far as the Synoptists are concerned, 
 to show that there had been anything in the 
 teaching of Jesus up to this moment which would 
 lead St. Peter to invest the phrase with any fuller 
 meaning than had belonged to it in the Old 
 Testament. He would not think of it as implying 
 a share in the Divine Nature. He would think of 
 Jesus as a man whom God had invested with a 
 unique Mission and to whom He had given'a unique 
 authority. He was the Christ by God's appoint- 
 ment, and so was charged with the work of satis- 
 fying the deepest needs of man. He stood closer 
 to God than any other could stand : for, in a sense 
 in which no other could bear the title, He was the 
 Son of the living God. 
 
 The Mattheean tradition gives a fitting close to 
 the incident. The confession of St. Peter had 
 amounted to an ascription to Jesus of spiritual 
 sovereignty. Jesus in reply indicates the method 
 whereby His spiritual sovereignty shall find expres- 
 sion upon earth. The Church shall be founded ; 
 and to the Church shall be committed the power of 
 
42 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 jurisdiction and discipline. The ground of this 
 delegated authority is to be found in the funda- 
 mental truth of the Person and Mission of Jesus, 
 to which St. Peter, however imperfectly, had borne 
 witness. " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I 
 will build My Church ; and the gates of Hades 
 shall not prevail against it. I will give unto thee 
 the keys of the kingdom of heaven : and whatsoever 
 thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven : 
 and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be 
 loosed in heaven" (Mt 16 18f -). Faith in the 
 Person and Work of Jesus had now reached a 
 point which allowed this promise to be given. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 FROM ST. PETER'S CONFESSION TO THE 
 CRUCIFIXION 
 
 Step by step Jesus had been leading the disciples 
 on towards a spiritual conception of His Mission. 
 The culmination of the first period of training had 
 been reached in the great confession of St. Peter. 
 Jesus was now acknowledged by him as the 
 Messiah; and this acknowledgment was made in 
 spite of the fact that the entire Life and Teaching 
 of Jesus was of quite a different character from 
 that which was associated in the popular mind with 
 the Messianic hope. 
 
 The great fact to which by a true spiritual 
 intuition St. Peter had been led was not as yet to 
 form the subject of a public announcement. The 
 disciples were to tell the saying to no man : they 
 were "strictly charged that they should not make 
 Him known." But, in spite of this, the idea now 
 began to spread in the popular mind that this 
 great Teacher, in whom such mighty works were 
 showing themselves, was the Messiah. They began 
 
 43 
 
44 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 to ask themselves whether this was not the Son of 
 David (Mt 12 23 ). 
 
 The title " Son of David " was a recognised de- 
 scription of the Messiah. The idea grew out of the 
 Davidic promises of the Old Testament, in which 
 God's unfailing blessing is promised to David's 
 house. Tor the deliverance and blessings which 
 are promised to the people of God were to come 
 through the righteous king, who should be of 
 David's line and sit on David's throne. Here, for 
 instance, is a prophecy from the Psalms : 
 
 " Then Thou spakest in vision to Thy saints, 
 And saidst, I have laid help upon one that is mighty ; 
 I have exalted one chosen out of the people. 
 I have found David My servant; 
 With My holy oil have I anointed him : 
 
 His seed also will I make to endure for ever, 
 And his throne as the days of heaven " (Ps 89 19 ' 29 ). 
 
 Accordingly, Isaiah says of the child that is born 
 to be the deliverer of the people : " Of the increase 
 of his government and of peace there shall be no end, 
 upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to 
 establish it, and to uphold it with judgment and 
 with righteousness from henceforth even for ever " 
 (Is 9 7 ). 
 
 And Micah looks to the city of David to pro- 
 vide the expected deliverer : " Thou, Beth-lehem 
 Ephrathah, which art little to be among the 
 thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 45 
 
 forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel ; whose 
 goings forth are from of old, from everlasting" 
 (Mic 5 2 ). 
 
 Hence the Old Testament contributed a circle of 
 ideas which connected the Messiah with the house 
 of David, and prepared the way for the use of the 
 term " Son of David " as a recognised Messianic title. 
 
 The title first appears in the Psalms of Solomon. 
 These psalms are a product of Palestinian Judaism ; 
 and they should almost certainly be dated shortly 
 after the conquest of Jerusalem by Pompey in B.C. 
 63. They reveal a condition of things in which 
 the memory of the sufferings and the humiliation 
 of those days was still fresh and vivid in the mind of 
 the writer. But the catastrophe had only the effect 
 of making his faith burn more brightly. The great- 
 ness of the need led him to emphasise and dilate 
 upon the Messianic hope. And this hope takes a 
 form definitely connected with the Davidic promises. 
 For though the kingdom of Israel was for the time 
 overthrown, yet David's house would never come 
 to an end. 
 
 "Thou, Lord, didst choose David as king over Israel, 
 And Thou didst swear to him concerning his seed for 
 
 ever, 
 That his kingdom should not fail before Thee." 
 
 (Ps Sol 17 6 " 7 .) 
 
 And then more definitely the hope of deliverance 
 is fixed upon one particular descendant of David's 
 
46 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 line. A son of David is looked for who shall 
 deliver Jerusalem. And so the prayer is offered: 
 
 " Behold, Lord, and raise up unto them their king, 
 even a son of David, 
 At the moment which Thou, O God, hast determined, 
 To reign over Israel, Thy servant. 
 
 And gird him with strength to shatter unrighteous 
 rulers "(Ps Sol 17 231 )- 
 
 The character of the kingdom of this son of 
 David is clearly laid down. He will bring deliver- 
 ance to the people and will be their righteous judge 
 (ib. 28 ). He is a righteous king and is divinely 
 instructed (ib. 35 ). 
 
 The expectation here unfolded is clearly the 
 Messianic hope. The king who is looked for is 
 Christ the Lord (Xpiarcxs icvpios, ib. 36 ). There is 
 no doubt here as to the Greek text. Schiirer in- 
 deed says that Xpia-rb<; icvpios is a mistranslation 
 of mil* nw, and adds that the correct rendering, 
 X/3KTTO? Kvpiov, is found in Ps 18 8 . But this is a 
 pure assumption, since the words there are both in 
 the genitive, and may quite well be in apposition 
 (virb p&fihov iraiZeia<i Xpicnov Kvpiov). There 
 is, moreover, no difficulty in this attribution of - 
 the term icvpios to the Messiah. It is not o 
 icvpios, which would have been understood as re- 
 ferring to Jehovah. The anarthrous use of the 
 word would offer a natural title of honour to 
 apply to the expected Messiah. He would be 
 an anointed Lord, 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 47 
 
 But further, the coming deliverer, who would sit 
 on David's throne and be of David's line, would 
 stand in a specially close relation to God; and 
 from this he would derive his strength : for — 
 
 "God lias made him mighty by His Holy Spirit, 
 And wise in understanding counsel with strength and 
 
 righteousness ; 
 And the blessing of the Lord shall be with him in 
 
 strength ; 
 And his hope in the Lord shall not grow weak." 
 
 (Ps Sol ll*»'-) 
 
 We may probably say that these psalms give us 
 a fairly accurate view of the Messianic hope as it 
 existed in the popular mind at the time of the 
 Ministry of Jesus. This hope had its two sides, 
 the temporal and the spiritual. And there would 
 be wide differences, according as the one or the 
 other of these two aspects was emphasised. The 
 humiliating political conditions of the day would 
 tend to thrust the idea of temporal deliverance 
 into prominence ; and worldly minds would forget 
 that the deeper hope looked forward to a kingdom 
 of righteousness founded on spiritual power. And 
 though there were some, and perhaps more than 
 we are inclined to think, who like Simeon and 
 Anna were filled with a spiritual hope, yet the 
 great bulk of the common people had little thought 
 of anything beyond a temporal deliverance. 
 
 Hence the title, Son of David, which we find 
 first in the Psalms of Solomon, as applied to the 
 
48 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Messiah, became naturally a favourite and common 
 designation of the expected deliverer. The people 
 longed to see a descendant of David sitting once 
 again on David's throne. 
 
 The Gospels afford us clear evidence of the 
 popularity of this title, as expressing best the 
 common hope. Thus it is used by Bartimaeus, who 
 appeals to the power that lay behind the title, as 
 affording the ground upon which he hoped to be 
 - healed : " Jesus, Thou Son of David, have mercy 
 on me" (Mt 20 30£ - = Mk 10 47f -=Lk 18 38 '-). The 
 popular expectation reached a climax in the 
 Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, when Jesus was 
 hailed as a King of David's line. The Synoptists, 
 while giving in different forms the acclamations of 
 the people, agree in representing their homage as 
 paid to One whom they thought of as the Messianic 
 King. St. Matthew and St. Mark definitely regard 
 Him as re-establishing David's line and David's 
 throne : " Hosanna to the Son of David : Blessed 
 is He that cometh in the name of the Lord ; 
 Hosanna in the highest" (Mt 21 9 ); "Blessed is 
 the kingdom that cometh, the kingdom of our 
 father David" (Mk ll 10 ). St. Luke, however, 
 merely has : " Blessed is the King that cometh in 
 the name of the Lord : peace in heaven, and glory 
 in the highest " (Lk 1 9 38 ). The first and second 
 Gospels doubtless stand nearest to the original 
 tradition at this point. St. Luke was not inter- 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 49 
 
 ested in the Davidic allusion, and moreover, he has 
 allowed his version of the words to be influenced 
 by the narrative of the vision of the angels to the 
 shepherds at Bethlehem (Lk 2 14 ). Going back, 
 therefore, to the Matthsean and Marcan versions, 
 we find Jesus proclaimed by the popular voice as 
 the Messianic King of David's line, and as deriving 
 His Mission from God. 
 
 The children in the Temple took up the same cry : 
 "Hosanna to the Son of David" (Mt 21 16 ); and 
 the claim implied by the acceptance of this homage 
 was made the ground of the accusation against Him 
 before Pilate. It was said that, in treason against 
 Caesar, He had made Himself King of the Jews 
 (Mt 27 n = Mk 15 2 = Lk 23 2 ). 
 
 But while accepting the title " Son of David " 
 as expressing one aspect of His Person and Mission, 
 Jesus distinctly hinted that the title was inade- 
 quate. It did not cover the whole ground. " How 
 say the scribes," He asked, " that the Christ is the 
 Son of David ? David himself said in the Holy 
 Spirit, 
 
 The Lord said imto my Lord, 
 
 Sit thou on My right hand, 
 
 Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet. 
 
 David himself calleth him Lord ; and whence is he 
 his son?" (Mt 22 46 = Mk 12 s7 = Lk 20* 4 ). 
 
 The Christ may indeed be called the Son of 
 David, as being an ideal King of David's line, 
 4 
 
50 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 wielding a spiritual sovereignty derived from God. 
 But this truth was only a partial one ; and even so 
 the title was liable to misunderstanding. Hence 
 Jesus discouraged its use ; and St. Luke, with his 
 freer range of thought and deeper spiritual in- 
 sight, cut it out altogether from his version of 
 the acclamation in the Triumphal Entry. Jesus 
 implied that the Christ was something greater 
 than an ideal king of David's line, however spiritu- 
 ally understood. What the greater truth was will 
 presently appear. 
 
 In the meantime, let us notice that Jesus claims 
 to be the bearer of a Divine Commission. As the 
 Messiah He is invested with a unique authority. 
 He stands absolutely above His disciples. " One 
 is your Master,'' He said to them, " even the 
 Christ" (Mt 23 10 ). In virtue of His Divine Com- 
 mission, He performs His mighty works. He 
 casts out devils : but He does this in virtue of His 
 relation to God. It is "by the Spirit of God" 
 (Mt 12 28 ); "by the finger of God" (Lk ll 20 ). 
 But further, the commission laid upon Him enables 
 Him in turn to commission others : " I send unto 
 you prophets, and wise men, and scribes" (Mt 23 M ). 
 In this way Jesus emphasises the character of 
 Messiahship as He understood it. The conception 
 thus shown is something very different from that 
 which was in the popular mind and which expressed 
 itself in the title " Son of David." It reveals a 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 51 
 
 spiritual power derived from God Himself and per- 
 petuating itself in 'the world. 
 
 We have next to consider the eschatological 
 significance of the Person of Jesus as unfolded in 
 a series of passages covering practically the whole 
 of the period with which we are now concerned. 
 It is to be noted that the eschatological teaching of 
 the Synoptists is uniformly and almost exclusively 
 connected with the title " Son of man." Thus at 
 the trial before the High Priest, in answer to the 
 High Priest's question, "Art thou the Christ, the 
 Son of the Blessed ? " Jesus said, "I am : and ye 
 shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand 
 of power, and coming with the clouds of heaven " 
 (Mt 26 64 = Mk 14 62 = Lk 22 69 ). The use of the 
 title " Son of man " is the more noteworthy in this 
 passage, for the idea contained in the High Priest's 
 question is that of Divine Sonship. Was Jesus, he 
 asks, the Son of the Blessed, the Son of God ? But 
 in the answer of Jesus, as soon as the eschatological 
 thought is introduced, the title is at once changed 
 to " Son of man." 
 
 Can we see why this title should be regarded, as 
 it clearly is by the Synoptists, as the distinctively 
 eschatological title ? Probably the reason is to be 
 found in this particular incident. For the reply of 
 Jesus is a clear allusion to Daniel's vision : " I saw 
 in the night visions, and, behold, there came with 
 
52 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man, 
 and he came even to the Ancient of Days, and they 
 brought him near before Him " (Da 7 13 ). It is true, 
 as we have already seen, that the phrase " son of 
 man," as used by the writer of the Book of Daniel, 
 is a description and is not a title. It means merely 
 that He whose glorious appearance is described was 
 in human form. But the phrase would be easily 
 associated in the mind of Jesus with the title 
 which He Himself had chosen to express the ful- 
 ness of His representative manhood. And so, 
 through this apocalyptic passage in Daniel, Jesus 
 might come to regard the title " Son of man " as 
 most appropriate to His eschatological claims. The 
 eschatological significance of the title does not lie 
 in the title itself, which we have already seen is 
 expressive primarily of the ideal manhood of Jesus. 
 But a secondary significance was given to the title 
 by Jesus ; and this, we may say, was the outcome 
 of an accidental association of ideas. It was, how- 
 ever, rendered easier by the fact that the eschato- 
 logical teaching of Jesus belongs exclusively to the 
 later part of the Ministry. There was therefore 
 time for a title, which Jesus adopted from the 
 beginning as characteristic of His Mission, to 
 acquire a secondary significance in connection 
 with His transcendent prerogatives as Supreme 
 Judge of mankind. 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 53 
 
 Let us now examine the claims made by Jesus in 
 these eschatological passages, in which He almost 
 always speaks of Himself as the Son of man. 1 "We 
 are met at the outset by a certain confusion of 
 thought. Two great catastrophic events were in 
 the mind of Jesus. There was first a temporal and 
 local judgment, the destruction of Jerusalem ; and 
 beyond this there was the universal judgment at 
 the last day. It would seem that the impending fall 
 of Jerusalem loomed so large in the minds of the 
 hearers of Jesus as to destroy the true sense of 
 perspective and to lead them in some measure to 
 confuse the one judgment with the other. At all 
 events, the eschatological discourses, as recorded by 
 the Synoptists, do not clearly distinguish between 
 what was said as to the fall of Jerusalem and the 
 sayings relating to the Last Judgment. 
 
 But it is at least clear that the Son of man is 
 regarded as executing judgment upon the guilty 
 city. Its punishment is a visitation from Him. 
 It is a " coming of the Son of man," swift and 
 irresistible as the lightning (Mt 24 27 = Lk 17 24 ). 
 The days of terrible distress and suffering in which 
 this judgment will be effected are " days of the Son 
 of man" (Lk 17 22 - 26 ), days in which the Son of 
 man is revealed (Lk 17 30 ). Hence the Son of man 
 claims the office of executing the judgments of God 
 through the temporal catastrophes that mark the 
 1 Mt 24 36 =Lk 13 3a is an exception. 
 
54 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 course of the world's history, of which the destruc- 
 tion of Jerusalem is taken as a conspicuous type. 
 
 It is, however, with the coming of the Son of man 
 at the end of the world that we are here principally 
 concerned. Let us examine what may be learnt as 
 to the character of that coming and the office 
 assigned to the Son of man. 
 
 First, we find emphasis laid upon its suddenness 
 and unexpectedness. In this respect it is compared 
 to the overwhelming of the world by the flood: 
 " As were the days of Noah, so shall be the coming 
 of the Son of man. For as in those days which 
 were before the flood they were eating and drinking, 
 marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that 
 Noah entered into the ark, and they knew not until 
 the flood came, and took them all away ; so shall 
 be the coming of the Son of man. . . . Therefore 
 be ye also ready : for in an hour that ye think not 
 the Son of man cometh" (Mt 24 37fl - ; cf. Lk 17 26 
 12*°). The duty of watchfulness is emphasised: 
 "lest coming suddenly He find you sleeping" 
 (Mk 13 36 ). And the same teaching is found in 
 the Parable of the Ten Virgins : " Watch there- 
 fore, for ye know not the day nor the hour'' 
 (Mt 25 13 ). 
 
 According to St. Matthew, the disciples asked 
 Jesus, "What shall be the sign of Thy coming, 
 and of the end of the world?" (Mt 24 3 ). But it 
 would appear that St. Mark preserves the original 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 55 
 
 form of the question : " What shall be the sign when 
 all these things are about to be accomplished ? " 
 (Mk 13 4 = Lk 21 7 ). The question, as asked, had 
 reference not to the final judgment, but to the 
 destruction of Jerusalem, as is shown by the reply 
 of Jesus. With St. Matthew, however, the principal 
 interest is with the final judgment ; and consequently, 
 in this apocalyptic discourse, in which the circum- 
 stances of the two judgments are interwoven, the 
 language is so modified in the First Gospel as 
 to make the thought of the final judgment pre- 
 dominant. 
 
 The Synoptists agree in regarding the final 
 judgment as following close upon the great 
 catastrophe of the fall of Jerusalem : " Immedi- 
 ately, after the tribulation of those days," the end 
 will come (Mt 24 29 = Mk 13 24 = Lk 21 27 ). "And 
 then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in 
 heaven" (Mt 24 80 ). The last words are peculiar 
 to St. Matthew, and correspond to the peculiar 
 form which St. Matthew gives to the initial question 
 asked by the disciples. The crucial words which 
 follow, and which belong to the triple tradition, 
 seem to make it clear that St. Matthew has in his 
 mind no other sign than the appearance of the 
 Son of man Himself in majesty : " They shall see 
 the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven 
 with power and great glory" (Mt 24 30 = Mk 13 26 
 = Lk 21 27 ). 
 
56 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Jesus then claims that He will return in the 
 glory of heaven at the end of the world. For His 
 office of Supreme Judge He will sit as Son of man 
 on "the throne of His glory" (Mt 1 9 28 ), while a 
 subordinate office of judgment will be committed 
 to the Twelve. For this work the angels are His 
 ministers. Their charge is to " gather together His 
 elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven 
 to the other " (Mt 24 31 = Mk 1 3 27 ). But the work 
 of the Son of man is not merely the justification 
 of the elect. He is the arbiter of the destiny of 
 all mankind : " When the Son of man shall come 
 in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then 
 shall He sit on the throne of His glory : and before 
 Him shall be gathered all the nations : and He 
 shall separate them one from another, as the 
 shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats" 
 (Mt 25 31fE -). As Supreme Judge He exercises a 
 royal prerogative (Mt 25 34 ): He is a King upon 
 His throne. 
 
 Such being the overwhelming majesty of the 
 Son of man, He has a claim upon the allegiance 
 of men, and demands that this allegiance shall be 
 openly acknowledged. St. Peter's confession is 
 followed by the assertion of this claim and the 
 consequences of refusing it: "Whosoever shall be 
 ashamed of Me and of My words in this adulterous 
 and sinful generation, the Son of man also shall 
 be ashamed of him, when He cometh in the glory 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 57 
 
 of His Father with the holy angels" (Mk 8 38 = 
 Lk 9 26 ). The saying is somewhat modified by St. 
 Matthew, who emphasises the judicial character of 
 the sentence : " The Son of man shall come in the 
 glory of His Father with His angels ; and then 
 shall He render to every man according to his 
 deeds" (Mt 16 27 ). St. Luke records the comple- 
 mentary saying : " Every one who shall confess Me 
 before men, him shall the Son of man also confess 
 before the angels of God" (Lk 12 8 ). 
 
 The Son of man, upon whom the unique com- 
 mission of judgment has been laid, requires that He 
 shall be confessed before men. Yet, even so, there 
 is a possibility of forgiveness for those who have 
 failed : " Every one who shall speak a word against 
 the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him : but unto 
 him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit it 
 shall not be forgiven" (Mt 12 31 = Mk 3 28 = Lk 
 12 10 ). The word spoken against the Son of man 
 admits of forgiveness ; but the sin stands in contrast 
 to that against the Holy Spirit. For this means 
 the reviling of that which is most awful and sacred ; 
 it is rebellion against the innermost spirit of the 
 Mind of God. This sin represents the final act of 
 impenitence, when no contrition is possible and 
 when, therefore, there can be no forgiveness. 
 
 The effect of the contrast drawn in this passage 
 is to emphasise the seriousness of sin committed 
 against the Son of man. For, even though such 
 
58 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 sin admits of forgiveness, it is placed only second 
 to another sin, for which no forgiveness is possible. 
 Jesus then makes His claim. But what, He asks, 
 will be the response to that claim ? " When the Son 
 of man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth ? " 
 (Lk 18 8 ). When the Son of man sits upon the 
 throne of His glory as Supreme Judge of all man- 
 kind at the Last Day, will He find acceptance or 
 rejection of the message He came to give ? No 
 answer is given, but the mere asking of the question 
 suggests a solemn warning. 
 
 Let us now sum up the teaching of these 
 eschatological passages upon the Person of Jesus. 
 The teaching is very striking and for the most part 
 belongs to the original tradition underlying the 
 Synoptic narrative. There is no reason for doubting 
 that in substance it is the teaching of Jesus Himself. 
 It represents Jesus, the Son of man, as endowed 
 with a unique office of transcendent majesty. He 
 is the agent in the execution of the temporal 
 judgments of God, such as the destruction of 
 Jerusalem. But, more than this, He is the Supreme 
 Judge of all mankind ; and in this capacity He 
 will appear in glory at the end of the world. The 
 angels are His angels : they bear His messages ; 
 they do His will. He passes sentence on all men 
 according to their deeds. He demands from all 
 men unswerving loyalty and obedience. 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 59 
 
 There is no statement, as yet, as to the essential 
 nature of Him upon whom this transcendent office 
 and royal prerogative is conferred. It is as Son of 
 man, ideal Eepresentative and Exemplar of the human 
 race, that He makes this tremendous claim. But 
 though no explicit statement is yet made that He 
 who asserts this claim is of other essence than the 
 sons of men, yet clearly reflection cannot allow the 
 matter to rest at this point. Questions are raised 
 which demand an answer. The office of Judge of 
 the human race requires for its discharge infinite 
 knowledge and infinite power. How can this belong 
 to one of the sons of men ? 
 
 The same question is suggested by the atoning 
 power which Jesus ascribes to His Death as Son 
 of man : " The Son of man came not be ministered 
 unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom 
 for many" (Mt 20 28 = Mk 10 46 ). Thus the Death 
 of the Son of man is said to pay the ransom for 
 the sins of men. And again, the shedding of the 
 life-blood of the Son of man is " for many unto 
 remission of sins" (Mt 26 28 ). Therefore the 
 Eucharist was instituted as a sacrificial meal. 
 The Son of man is Himself the Sacrifice upon 
 which His disciples feed. In accordance with His 
 bidding, they partake of His Body and His Blood 
 (Mt 26 26 - 29 = Mk 14 22 " 25 = Lk 22 16 " 20 ). 
 
 Behind this, again, there must lie a doctrine, 
 which has not yet become explicit, as to the Person 
 
60 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 of Him who calls Himself the Son of man. Clearly 
 the picture is not yet complete. Something further 
 is postulated, which remains yet to be revealed. 
 
 We must therefore again move forward. Our 
 next step must be to examine the concurrent 
 teaching during this period as to the relation 
 between Jesus and the Father. 
 
 From the time of His Baptism certainly Jesus 
 was conscious of standing in a special relation of 
 Sonship to God. Whether this consciousness 
 definitely existed before the Baptism, it is difficult 
 to say. We shall hardly think it right to attach 
 any doctrinal significance to the words of Jesus in 
 the Temple at the age of twelve : " Wist ye not 
 that I must be in My Father's house ? " (Lk 2 49 ). 
 The Fatherhood of God was at least in some 
 measure recognised by the Jews, and we should 
 especially expect to find it present to the minds 
 of that circle of devout men and women to which 
 the Holy Family belonged. We may well suppose 
 that as Jesus "advanced in wisdom and stature" 
 (Lk 2 52 ), the training He received would include 
 the thought of a Fatherhood of God embracing 
 His faithful people in love. Jesus, newly made a 
 " son of the law," would feel with special vividness 
 His Sonship to God, upon whose full service He 
 had now entered. Probably, therefore, the words 
 spoken in the Temple imply nothing more than a 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 61 
 
 claim to the privileges granted by God's covenant 
 with His people. 
 
 When, however, we come to the Baptism of 
 Jesus, we find a clear assertion of a Divine Sonship, 
 which is distinct from anything that could be 
 predicated of men in general. A voice from 
 heaven bears witness : " Thou art My beloved Son, 
 in Thee I am well pleased " (Mt 3 17 = Mk l 11 = 
 Lk 3 22 ). The question then arises whether this 
 constituted a new revelation in the mind of Jesus, 
 or whether it did but confirm an intuition which 
 had already come to Him through years of medita- 
 tion as He came to manhood. We cannot say. 
 But this at least is clear, that Jesus ascended from 
 the Jordan with a consciousness of standing in a 
 special relation to the Father. He knew Himself 
 to be pre-eminently the Son of God. 
 
 But the revelation of the Baptism, like that of 
 the Temptation which follows, was for the time 
 being for Jesus only. As we have already seen, 
 we must suppose that Jesus kept silence upon the 
 inner teaching of these incidents till a late period 
 in the Ministry. In the Temptation, Satan bases 
 his appeal on two out of three occasions upon the 
 Divine Sonship : " If Tbou art the Son of God, 
 command that these stones become bread " (Mt 4 3 
 = Lk 4 3 ); "If Thou art the Son of God, cast 
 Thyself down" (Mt 4 6 = Lk 4 9 ). From the 
 beginning of the Ministry, therefore, the funda- 
 
62 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 mental fact in the consciousness of Jesus is His 
 Divine Sonship. He is the Son of God in a sense 
 in which none can be His peer. 
 
 We have seen reason to conclude that this tran- 
 scendent fact was studiously kept out of sight by 
 Jesus in His teaching up to the critical occasion 
 of St. Peter's confession. But after that incident it 
 appears again and again. It is implied in the use 
 of the terms of Fatherhood and Sonship, which occur 
 so frequently in the second period of the Ministry. 
 
 Let us examine the passages in which God is 
 spoken of or addressed in this way — sometimes as 
 " My Father," sometimes " My heavenly Father," 
 or "My Father which is in heaven." 
 
 We have already noticed this usage in an 
 eschatological passage, speaking of the final judg- 
 ment, when the Son of man " cometh in the glory 
 of His Father with the holy angels." These words, 
 which are common to the three Synoptists, occur in 
 one connection in the second and third Gospels 
 (Mk 8 s8 = Lk 9 26 ) and in a different connection in 
 St. Matthew (Mt 16 27 ). This fact shows that they 
 belong to the original tradition, which underlies the 
 narrative upon which the triple Synoptic tradition 
 rests. If the original context of the words is 
 doubtful, the genuineness of the words themselves 
 is beyond question. There can be no doubt that 
 Jesus did in fact make the tremendous claim which 
 the words imply. 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 63 
 
 Jesus says of the children : " See that ye despise 
 not one of these little ones ; for I say unto you, that 
 in heaven their angels do always behold the face 
 of My Father which is in heaven" (Mt 18 10 ). At 
 the same time He speaks of God as " Your Father 
 which is in heaven " (Mt 1 8 U ) ; for God also stands 
 in the relation of Father to His people. But we never 
 find such a phrase as " our Father " expressive of 
 association of Jesus with the people as sons of God. 
 
 Jesus never brackets Himself with the people as 
 sharing with them the same degree of Sonship with 
 the Father. The Lord's Prayer is no exception to 
 this, for it is a prayer framed for the people to 
 use. The idea of Fatherhood in relation to Jesus 
 is quite different in kind and degree from the 
 Fatherhood of God in relation to the people. The 
 two ideas cannot be bracketed together. Jesus is 
 careful to keep them distinct. His own relation to 
 the Father is unique. 
 
 Next notice the promise of answer to prayer 
 based upon this very fact of Divine Sonship : " If 
 two of you shall agree on earth as touching any- 
 thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them 
 of My Father which is in heaven " (Mt 18 19 ). And 
 then follows the promise of Jesus to be present 
 with His disciples when they shall be gathered 
 together in His name ; it is a promise which implies 
 a mysterious element in His Being, differentiating 
 Him from others of mankind. 
 
64 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 When as King He sits to judge the world, He 
 will execute His office in virtue of His relation to 
 His Father. " Come, ye blessed of My Father," 
 will be His call to the righteous (Mt 25 34 ). The 
 kingdom, which is His as Son, is further emphasised 
 in its connection with His Father. So He gives to 
 the Twelve their delegated authority : " I appoint 
 unto you a kingdom, even as My Father appointed 
 unto Me, that ye may eat and drink at My table 
 in My kingdom; and ye shall sit on thrones 
 judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Lk 22 29t ). 
 
 Are we to say that this passage shows a merely 
 temporal outlook, and that its view is limited by 
 the horizon of Jewish thought ? It is natural to 
 connect with the promise contained in it the hope 
 shown by the question of the apostles immediately 
 before the Ascension : " Lord, dost Thou at this time 
 restore the kingdom to Israel ? " (Ac l 6 ). We 
 should probably say that Jesus in His promise was 
 conveying so much of the truth to the Twelve as 
 they were at the moment able to receive. The 
 promise is couched in Judaic terms : it by no 
 means follows that Jesus regarded the effect of 
 His Mission as confined within such limits. We 
 should not, indeed, be warranted in introducing 
 here the idea of a spiritual Israel, and saying that 
 under the figure of the twelve tribes Jesus indicates 
 a community drawn from all peoples, and making 
 up a spiritual kingdom of God. Eather, Jesus 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 65 
 
 speaks to His disciples as Jews, and promises them 
 a complete fulfilment of the true national hope, 
 rightly understood. This fulfilment should be one 
 outcome of the Gospel. It will be a part of the 
 effect of His Mission. 
 
 There, is, however, nothing to warrant the 
 assertion that Jesus here discloses a purely national 
 interest. Such an interpretation would be possible 
 if the passage stood alone. It must be interpreted 
 in the sense which the whole range of the teaching 
 of Jesus requires. The unique relation to the 
 Father which He claims for Himself makes it 
 impossible to suppose that He regarded His work 
 as limited by the national hope of the Jews : the 
 explicit statements, which we have already cited, 
 show that in fact He regarded His Mission as 
 world-wide in its bearing. 
 
 The intimate personal relation to the Father is 
 illustrated by the prayer in Gethsemane. Here the 
 Synoptists, while differing in the form of words 
 ascribed to Jesus at this sacred moment, yet agree 
 that it is as " Father " that Jesus addresses God. 
 "Abba, Father, all things are possible unto Thee" 
 (Mk 14 s6 ), writes St. Mark, keeping closest probably 
 to the original tradition ; " My Father, if it be 
 possible, let this cup pass away from Me " (Mt 2 6 39 ), 
 is St. Matthew's rendering; while St. Luke has 
 simply, " Father, if Thou be willing, remove this 
 cup from Me" (Lk 22 42 ). Jesus appeals to the 
 5 
 
66 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 sacred and intimate relation of Fatherhood at this 
 crisis in Gethsemane. 
 
 The same appeal is made a moment later when 
 He is seized by His captors. Kebuking St. Peter 
 for his attack upon the High Priest's servant, He 
 said to him, " Thinkest thou that I cannot beseech 
 My Father, and He shall even now send Me more 
 than twelve legions of angels ? How then should 
 the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be ? " 
 (Mt 26 53 '-). It is interesting to compare this with 
 the Johannine version of the words of Jesus in 
 response to the act of St. Peter : " Put up the sword 
 into the sheath : the cup which the Father hath 
 given Me, shall I not drink it?" (Jn 18 n ). The 
 First and Fourth Gospels have here the appearance 
 of appealing to a common tradition, of which their 
 recollection differs, while they agree in the central 
 fact of the reference of Jesus to His Father. 
 
 In the same spirit we have the first and last 
 of the recorded sayings spoken upon the Cross. 
 There is the prayer for the soldiers : " Father, 
 forgive them ; for they know not what they do " 
 (Lk 23 34 ), where, however, the textual authority 
 is weak. And there is the commendatory prayer 
 at the close : " Father, into Thy hands I commend 
 My spirit "(Lk 23 46 ). 
 
 Let us now notice the occurrence of the cor- 
 relative idea of Sonship. The Divine Sonship is 
 implied by the claim of Jesus to be free from 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 67 
 
 obligation to pay the half-shekel collected by the 
 Jews for the maintenance of the Temple worship. 
 The kings of the earth exact tribute of strangers, 
 but "the sons are free" (Mt 17 26 ). Jesus is free 
 because He is the Son in the Father's house. 
 
 A unique Sonship is claimed in the Parable of 
 the Wicked Husbandmen : " He had yet one, a 
 beloved son : he sent him last unto them, saying, 
 They will reverence my son. But those husband- 
 men said among themselves, This is the heir ; come, 
 let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours " 
 (Mt 21 37£f - = Mk 12 6fE ' = Lk 20 13ff -)- Here is the 
 description of a Sonship which belongs to One 
 alone. Jesus is the Son in a sense which no other 
 can share. 
 
 The same teaching is given in the Parable of 
 the Marriage Feast, which tells of " a certain king, 
 which made a marriage feast for his son, and sent 
 forth his servants to call them that were bidden to 
 the marriage feast : and they would not come " 
 (Mt 22 4 ). Here again the Sonship is unique and 
 the claim of allegiance is absolute. 
 
 In some passages the ideas of Sonship and 
 Fatherhood are placed side by side. It is said, 
 for instance, of the Final Coming that " of that 
 day or that hour knoweth no one, not even the 
 angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father " 
 (Mt 24 36 = Mk 13 32 ). In this passage we should 
 notice, the ascending order of dignity: the angels, 
 
68 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the Son, the Father. The Son is above the angels : 
 it is they who execute His commands. 
 
 Again the claim of Jesus is corroborated by the 
 voice of the Father Himself. The voice which at 
 the Baptism came probably to Jesus alone, bore the 
 same witness at the Transfiguration in the presence 
 of the three chosen disciples : " This is My beloved 
 Son: hear ye Him" (Mt 17 5 = Mk 9 7 = Lk 9 35 ). 
 This form of expression was, as we have already 
 seen, adopted by Jesus at a later date in the 
 Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen. In each case 
 there is the thought of a Divine Mission. The 
 beloved Son is sent by the Father, and claims to 
 speak in the Father's name. 
 
 Let us now try to understand more fully what 
 this claim of Sonship implies. We shall learn best 
 from a passage which lies at the very heart of the 
 Synoptic teaching. Let us quote the entire passage, 
 as given by St. Matthew : 
 
 "At that season Jesus answered and said, I 
 thank Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, 
 that Thou didst hide these things from the wise and 
 understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes : 
 yea, Father, for so it was well-pleasing in Thy sight. 
 All things have been delivered unto Me of My 
 Father : and no one knoweth the Son, save the 
 Father ; neither doth any know the Father save the 
 Son, and he to whomsoever the Son wiljeth tQ 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 69 
 
 reveal Him. Come unto Me, all ye that labour 
 and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 
 Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me ; for 
 I am meek and lowly in heart : and ye shall find 
 rest unto your souls. For My yoke is easy, and 
 My burden is light" (Mt ll 25 " 30 ). 
 
 The parallel passage in the third Gospel pre- 
 sents no important differences, with the exception 
 that the great invitation with which the passage 
 closes is not given by St. Luke (Lk 10 21f -). 
 
 Nothing can exceed the beauty of this appeal to 
 the Father. It reveals a perfect intimacy and an 
 unclouded confidence. The Son occupies a position 
 which belongs to Him alone. He possesses that 
 perfect knowledge of the Father which belongs to 
 ideal Sonship. This knowledge is His, in His own 
 right, by virtue of His essential Nature. It is His 
 prerogative as Son. 
 
 And this is a prerogative which belongs to Him 
 alone. No other can of himself possess a know- 
 ledge of the Father. No other possesses such a 
 nature as will lead to a knowledge of the Father 
 through its own inherent qualities. Man indeed 
 may come to know the Father, but only by means 
 of an endowment conferred upon his nature from 
 without. It is only by means of a revelation 
 bestowed by the Son that the Father, the Lord of 
 heaven and earth, can be known. Such knowledge 
 is no product of worldly wisdom. It is hid from 
 
70 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the wise and prudent, and is revealed to babes. 
 The Son, speaking in the heart of those whose 
 spiritual perception enables them to understand, 
 brings men to the knowledge of the Father. Here 
 indeed we are at the very core of the mysticism 
 of the Gospel. Everything is seen to centre in the 
 Person of Jesus. 
 
 Jesus, as Son, is the revealer of the Father. 
 And through this revelation He gives to man the 
 key to the meaning of life. His great invitation 
 is, " Come unto Me." Through Him the sorrows 
 and burdens of life have their bitterness removed. 
 Rest is given to the weary through bearing the 
 yoke of Jesus. For the path of discipleship is 
 the way along which Jesus leads men to the 
 knowledge of the Father. 
 
 Jesus then, as Son, claims to be the personal 
 agent through whom man's deepest needs are 
 satisfied. To Him is committed authority to do 
 that which man supremely needs. All things have 
 been delivered unto Him of His Father. 
 
 It is to be noted that this supreme revelation 
 of the Godhead in relation to man is given under 
 a metaphor drawn from family life. Human 
 instinct tells us that family life only finds its ideal 
 in perfect love. The several members of the 
 family are to be mutually united in the bonds 
 of love. Clearly, then, the fundamental thought 
 which underlies this great passage is the supreme 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 71 
 
 fact of love. They who are revealed to us under 
 the terms of Father and Son are united in the bond 
 of a mutual love, of which the most perfect human 
 love is but the faintest reflection. And thence love 
 goes forth from the Godhead to embrace mankind. 
 
 Teaching so deeply mystical would not at first 
 be fully apprehended in all its bearing. But little 
 by little it became widely realised that in giving 
 such teaching Jesus was making inferentially a 
 tremendous claim. So the demand grew for an 
 explicit statement as to what His words were 
 intended to convey. 
 
 We come, therefore, to the public avowal of 
 Divine Sonship in answer to the direct question of 
 the High Priest. St. Mark here probably keeps 
 nearest to the original tradition : " The High Priest 
 asked Him, and saith unto Him, Art Thou the 
 Christ, the Son of the Blessed ? And Jesus said, 
 I am" (Mk 14 61 ). St. Luke replaces the original 
 Jewish phrase " the Son of the Blessed " by its 
 equivalent, and renders the question, "Art Thou 
 then the Son of God?" (Lk 22 70 ). St. Matthew 
 gives additional colour to the words of the High 
 Priest, and writes : " I adjure Thee by the living 
 God, that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ, 
 the Son of God " (Mt 26 63 ). 
 
 The Synoptists are in substantial agreement. 
 Jesus was solemnly asked whether He made the 
 double claim to be the Messiah and also to be the 
 
72 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Son of God. Jesus accepted the challenge, and on 
 each count avowed His claim. 
 
 Now the question arises as to what idea was 
 conveyed to the minds of the chief priests by this 
 title, " the Son of the Blessed," or, as otherwise 
 rendered, " the Son of God." We should notice 
 that Jesus added to His affirmation the statement : 
 " Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at 
 the right hand of power, and coming with the clouds 
 of heaven " (Mt 2 6 64 = Mk 14 62f - = Lk 22 69 ). And 
 the claim thus made and expanded was denounced 
 as blasphemy. It was therefore regarded as in 
 some way trenching upon the prerogative of God. 
 
 It would appear, however, that to the minds of 
 the chief priests the crucial offence was the claim 
 to be the Messiah; for this is the part of the 
 claim of Jesus which they took up when, after 
 pronouncing sentence, the members of the Sanhedrin 
 proceeded to insult Him : " Some smote Him with 
 the palms of their hands, saying, Prophesy unto 
 us, Thou Christ : who is he that struck Thee ? " 
 (Mt 26 s8 ). It is probable that the claim to be 
 the Son of God would seem to the chief priests to 
 be of secondary importance. They would not 
 associate with it any idea of a unique relationship, 
 but would rather think of it as simply indicating 
 the bearer of a Divine mission. For them it would 
 be included, as the less in the greater, in the claim 
 to be the Messiah. 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 73 
 
 The claim made by Jesus at the trial before the 
 High Priest was taken up in mockery by the 
 chief priests and others at the Crucifixion : " If 
 Thou art the Son of God, come down from the cross. 
 . . . He trusteth on God; let Him deliver Him 
 now, if He desireth Him : for He said, I am the 
 Son of God"(Mt 27 40 ' 43 ). And the knowledge 
 that Jesus had made this claim is shown by the 
 centurion in his exclamation : " Truly this was the 
 Son of God " (Mt 2 7 54 = Mk 1 5 39 ). Here, however, 
 the Third Gospel reads : " Certainly this was a 
 righteous man" (Lk 23 47 ). 
 
 The concurrence of testimony of St. Matthew 
 and St. Mark shows that they reproduce an original 
 tradition. Probably a different tradition reached 
 St. Luke. He is not likely to have made such an 
 alteration in the words ascribed to the centurion 
 if the text was before him in the Marcan form. 
 The variation in the form of the words is therefore 
 carried back to a very early period in the formation 
 of the tradition upon which the Synoptic narratives 
 are based. But even if we accept the version 
 upon which St. Matthew and St. Mark agree, we 
 derive nothing from it beyond a corroboration of 
 the already established fact that Jesus had publicly 
 claimed the title " Son of God." 
 
 Let us now try to secure a general view of the 
 teaching in regard to His Person and Work which 
 
74 SELF,REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Jesus gave in this part of His Ministry with which 
 we are now concerned. The outstanding feature 
 in the portrait which He draws is clearly that of 
 Divine Sonship. In claiming to be the Son of 
 God, He is claiming to be the Messiah. For this 
 is a Messianic title ; and we accordingly find it 
 coupled with the title of "the Christ" in the 
 question of the High Priest at the trial. But in 
 the mouth of Jesus the title goes much further 
 than this. It is developed and explained as 
 expressing a unique relation to God, a relationship 
 which issues in an immediate knowledge of the 
 Father, which no other can possess except through 
 Him. And in virtue of this relationship to the 
 Father, there is conferred upon Him a universal 
 authority. Such is this power that through Him 
 the ills of humanity will be redressed. It is an 
 authority which will be exercised conspicuously 
 at the Last Day, when He will appear in royal 
 majesty as Universal Judge and as Arbiter of the 
 destinies of mankind. Jesus, then, would be under- 
 stood by the Jews as claiming a position absolutely 
 unique in character and infinitely above anything 
 that could be predicated of any other of the sons 
 of men. 
 
 But the question now arises, how much more 
 than this the teaching of Jesus would be held to 
 involve in the minds of those who accepted it. 
 Would they regard Jesus as claiming to possess 
 
FROM CONFESSION TO CRUCIFIXION 75 
 
 a nature essentially different from their own ? 
 The Synoptic narrative leads us to reply in the 
 negative. We should gather that Jesus was 
 regarded simply as a man, though endowed with 
 a power and authority such as no other man ever 
 had or could have. He was a man ; but yet He 
 was unique among men, and was raised infinitely 
 above all others. It would not appear impossible 
 to the philosophy of that age that one possessed 
 simply of human nature should receive from God 
 so transcendent a commission. It would seem, 
 therefore, that the disciples did not think of Jesus 
 as claiming to possess a nature essentially different 
 from their own ; nor, it would appear, had Jesus 
 as yet put forward any such claim. Indeed, we 
 may go further, and say that to have advanced a 
 claim to be essentially Divine, at the time when He 
 was still living under the conditions of earthly 
 existence, would have resulted in hopeless confusion 
 of thought in the minds of His hearers. It would 
 have been frankly unintelligible. 
 
 Let it be clearly understood that we are here 
 concerned not with the full truth as it presented 
 itself to the Mind of Jesus, but with that portion of 
 the truth which it was possible for Him to reveal 
 while still subject to the limitations of earthly life. 
 There is no ground for saying that the full truth 
 as to the Person and Nature of Jesus was conveyed 
 by the teaching which the Synoptists represent 
 
76 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Him as giving during the Ministry. A maturer 
 philosophy of life and being than that which the 
 Jews possessed shows us that the doctrine of Jesus 
 about His Person and His Work cannot possibly 
 be left at the point to which we have carried it. 
 Either we must reject it as incredible, or we must 
 acknowledge that it implies infinitely more than 
 has yet become explicit. 
 
CHAPTEE III 
 
 THE MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 
 
 The First Period 
 
 In passing from the Synoptic record of the 
 Ministry of Jesus to the Fourth Gospel, we are 
 conscious at once of a difference of atmosphere. 
 The Teaching of Jesus is given from a different 
 point of view from that to which the earlier 
 narrative has accustomed us. It comes to us not 
 as a simple historical record, but through the 
 medium of a striking personality. We accept the 
 traditional view that the Gospel is substantially 
 the work of the Apostle St. John and belongs to 
 the closing years of his life. It represents the 
 outcome of many years of meditation upon the 
 Teaching of Jesus to which he had listened. 
 Guided, as we believe, by the Holy Spirit, he had 
 come to see more and more deeply into the inner 
 meaning and purpose of the words whose bearing 
 could have been only in part apprehended at the 
 
 time, Through this long mental and spiritual 
 
 77 
 
78 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 process, it was inevitable that his own personality 
 should be to some extent impressed upon the form 
 which the Teaching of Jesus gradually assumed in 
 his mind. 
 
 It does not follow from this that the form thus 
 given to the Teaching of Jesus would be untrue. 
 An artist as he paints a portrait impresses his own 
 personality upon the presentment that grows under 
 his hand. For he selects and rejects at will from 
 the materials that lie to his hand. This detail is 
 reproduced ; that other is omitted ; a third is 
 idealised. His aim is to reveal personality and 
 character. And so the portrait, by the very fact 
 of its being an abstraction or an idealisation, 
 expresses the truth in a way that no photograph 
 can do. 
 
 St. John, then, sets himself to draw the portrait 
 of Jesus as that portrait through long years of 
 meditation had fixed itself in his mind. He aims 
 at reproducing the substance of the Teaching of 
 Jesus; and, in doing so, he gives it the form in 
 which its meaning was best expressed to his own 
 mind. 
 
 But while we maintain that the picture so 
 drawn is in its broad outline essentially true, it is 
 quite possible that it may be open to criticism 
 in detail. And, in particular, it may be subject to 
 criticism from the point of view of the idea which 
 is the subject of the present study. "We may ask 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 79 
 
 whether St. John's narrative shows a loss of the 
 sense of historical perspective. 
 
 Now a loss of historical perspective is possible 
 in two respects. St. John wrote at the close of a 
 long life, when sixty years of the life of the Church 
 lay, as a fertile land, behind him. During these 
 sixty years there had been an ever-ripening know- 
 ledge and a growing understanding of the deep 
 mysteries of the Christian Faith. For him every- 
 thing was read in the light of the Eesurrection 
 and in view of the Mission of the Spirit, of whose 
 power he was so conscious. It is therefore possible 
 that the knowledge which came to him after the 
 Eesurrection, and which could not have come till 
 then, may have been read into his recollection of 
 the Teaching of Jesus. It is possible that we may 
 find in St. John's account of the teaching of Jesus 
 during the Ministry flashes of truth which belong 
 only to the revelation of the Eisen Life. 
 
 But, further, within the Ministry itself the same 
 want of historical perspective may show itself. 
 Our aim has been to draw out the progressive 
 character of the Self-revelation of Jesus during the 
 Ministry. It is possible that, as St. John looked 
 back upon the Ministry over the long vista of 
 years, and saw it as a completed whole rather than 
 in its process, he may have ascribed to its earlier 
 stages teaching which in fact only belonged to the 
 later days. If, as we examine the Gospel, and 
 
80 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 compare it with the Synoptic record, we are 
 obliged to postulate here and there a loss of historical 
 perspective, this will not in any way impair our 
 conviction that the portrait as a whole is true. 
 Indeed, we shall feel that even where we must 
 regard the narrative as idealising and interpreting, 
 rather than as simply recording, it is pointing 
 towards the solution of a mystery. Apart from 
 the solution indicated by the Fourth Gospel, the 
 Life of Jesus would present an inexplicable enigma. 
 Jesus, according to the Synoptic record, gives an 
 account of Himself which cannot possibly be left 
 at the point to which the Synoptists take us. St. 
 John records the teaching of the same Jesus whose 
 story is told by the Synoptists. And, while re- 
 cording this teaching, he idealises and interprets 
 it. Our contention is that the idealisation and 
 interpretation, though they bear the impress of the 
 Evangelist, are yet true to fact. 
 
 In examining the Synoptic record of the 
 Ministry of Jesus, we found that a climax was 
 reached in the great confession of St. Peter. This 
 event marked an epoch in the progressive Self- 
 revelation of Jesus. During the earlier period we 
 traced a continuity of purpose in Jesus to lead the 
 disciples to a conception of the spiritual character 
 of His Mission, and at the same time to give a 
 spiritual character to their Messianic hope. He 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 81 
 
 would not declare Himself to be the Christ until 
 He had purified their expectation of what the 
 Christ was to be. Thus He planted in them a 
 faith which issued in the declaration of St. Peter 
 at Ceesarea Philippi. Further, we found that 
 during this period there was probably no allusion 
 to that unique relation to the Father which be- 
 comes prominent in the later teaching. Let us 
 now turn to the Fourth Gospel, and see how far 
 the picture which the Synoptists have suggested is 
 there corroborated. 
 
 Our first task must be to delimitate our earlier 
 period. At what point in the Fourth Gospel is 
 the confession of St. Peter to be interposed ? A 
 fixed point common to the Synoptists and St. 
 John is the feeding of the five thousand, which 
 took place shortly before the Passover, in the 
 second year of the Ministry. The Synoptic narrative 
 requires an interval of some three or four months 
 to elapse between this event and St. Peter's con- 
 fession, which consequently probably took place 
 in the late summer of the same year, and shortly 
 before the Feast of Tabernacles. It is therefore 
 to be placed in the period of which St. John says : 
 " After these things Jesus walked in Galilee : for He 
 would not walk in Judaea, because the Jews sought 
 to kill Him" (Jn 7 1 ). It is noticeable that St. 
 John ascribes to St. Peter at the beginning of this 
 period a confession very similar to that with which 
 6 
 
82 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the Synoptists credit him near its close : " Lord, to 
 whom shall we go ? Thou hast the words of 
 eternal life. And we have believed and know 
 that Thou art the Holy One of God " (Jn 6 68f -). It 
 follows, then, that the period of the Ministry up to 
 the confession of St. Peter is covered by the first 
 six chapters of the Fourth Gospel. Let us see how 
 far the teaching which Jesus is represented as 
 giving in this part of the Gospel agrees with the 
 conclusions to which we have been led by a study 
 of the Synoptists. 
 
 In the opening chapter of the Gospel we have a 
 series of remarkable testimonies to the Person and 
 Mission of Jesus. First, there is the testimony of 
 the Baptist, who refers to Jesus as " the Lamb of 
 God, which taketh away the sin of the world" 
 (Jn l 29 ), and as " the Son of God " : "I have seen, 
 and have borne witness that this is the Son of 
 God " (Jn l 34 ). Then comes the testimony of St. 
 Andrew : " We have found the Messiah " (Jn l 41 ). 
 Then there is the testimony of Nathanael, who 
 takes up and enlarges the words of the Baptist: 
 ' Eabbi, Thou art the Son of God : Thou art King 
 of Israel" (Jn l 49 ). And finally, there is the 
 mystical Self -revelation of Jesus Himself : " Verily, 
 verily, I say unto you, Ye shall see the heaven 
 opened, and the angels of God ascending and 
 descending upon the Son of man " (Jn l 61 ). Thus, 
 
I I I I I I I I 
 
 MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 83 
 
 at the very outset, in the days preparatory to the 
 opening of the Ministry, the complete portrait is 
 drawn ; the complete revelation is given and 
 accepted. Surely we must admit that St. John, in 
 this presentment of the initial testimony to the 
 Person of Jesus, has lost the sense of true historical 
 perspective. Jesus is acknowledged at once as 
 Lamb of God, Son of God, Messiah, King of Israel, 
 and Son of man : and that without any preparatory 
 discipline of the hearers, to enable them to grasp 
 the transcendent and spiritual truths which under- 
 lie these titles. The very completeness with which 
 the cycle of titles is rounded off is suggestive of an 
 artificial construction of the narrative. It is history 
 idealised. The complete portrait is drawn in the 
 mind of the Evangelist, and he shows its outlines 
 here at the outset : its meaning is to be progress- 
 ively unfolded through the progress of the Gospel. 
 
 We pass now to the account of the cleansing of 
 the Temple, which concerns us here as containing 
 a reference by Jesus to His Father : " Take these 
 things hence ; make not My Father's house a house 
 of merchandise " (Jn 2 16 ). Spoken thus, with the 
 claim to exercise authority, the words imply a 
 reference to the unique relation as Son to the 
 Father. But we have seen reason to believe that 
 the teaching of Jesus on this relationship belongs 
 only to the later period of the Ministry. It is 
 quite likely that St. John has transferred to this 
 
84 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 first cleansing of the Temple words which were 
 used upon the occasion of the second cleansing at 
 the close of the Ministry. It has indeed been 
 suggested that the Synoptic narrative and that of 
 the Fourth Gospel refer to the same event, and 
 that one or other of the authorities has misplaced 
 it in point of time. But a cleansing of the Temple 
 falls in so naturally among the closing events as a 
 conspicuous assertion of Messianic authority, that 
 we can hardly displace it from the position which 
 is assigned to it by the Synoptists. And, on the 
 other hand, if we accept the Johannine authorship 
 of the Fourth Gospel, it is impossible to suppose 
 that the Evangelist can have made the mistake of 
 transferring to the beginning of the Ministry an 
 event which in fact belonged to its close. There 
 is, however, no difficulty in supposing that such an 
 event took place at the beginning of the Ministry, 
 and that circumstances and sayings really belonging 
 to the later cleansing have been unconsciously 
 transferred to the earlier. 
 
 We come now to the revelation of Jesus to 
 Nicodemus. It is a revelation of His Mission 
 rather than of His Person. In contradiction to 
 the common rabbinical expectation of temporal 
 blessings and a material kingdom, Jesus points to 
 a spiritual power which transcends all natural 
 forces. He speaks of life on a new and higher 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 85 
 
 plane. This life, which is the heavenly life, had 
 never yet been attained. But Jesus claims to 
 possess it in virtue of His perfect humanity, as 
 Son of man, and as living in perfect harmony with 
 God. "No man hath ascended into heaven, but 
 He that descended out of heaven, even the Son of 
 man [which is in heaven] " (Jn 3 13 ). Jesus is to 
 go forward to.fulfil His Mission, of which the out- 
 come is to be the bestowal upon others of this 
 higher life, which He Himself possesses. "As 
 Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even 
 so must the Son of man be lifted up : that whoso- 
 ever believeth may in Him have eternal life " 
 (Jn 3 1 *'-)- 
 
 Does Jesus at this early stage declare His pre- 
 existence ? It is not necessary to give His words 
 this meaning. He has descended out of heaven. 
 But it is possible to interpret this as simply 
 meaning that He has come into the world charged 
 with a Mission from God. The emphasis through- 
 out the interview is upon His Mission rather than 
 upon His Person. He reveals Himself as the Son 
 of man, charged with a task for humanity, rather 
 than as the Son of God, whose essential Nature is 
 other than that of mankind. 
 
 The next succeeding paragraph in which the 
 unique Divine Sonship is unfolded contains, not 
 the words of Jesus, but the comment of the Evan- 
 gelist : " God so loved the world, that He gave His 
 
86 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him 
 should not perish, but have eternal life. For God 
 sent not the Son into the world to judge the world ; 
 but that the world should be saved through Him " 
 {Jn 3 16f -). Here and in the verses that follow 
 (vv. 16 ~ 21 ) we have St. John's explanation given 
 in the light of subsequent knowledge ; and it in- 
 volves truths which were only unfolded later. 
 
 We have a similar paragraph of comment by 
 the Evangelist at the close of this same chapter 
 (vv. 31 ~ 36 ). Here the comment is suggested by the 
 testimony of the Baptist to Jesus as the bridegroom. 
 And the train of thought thus suggested leads once 
 again to a statement of the essential relation of 
 the Father and the Son, and the claims which the 
 Son has upon the obedience of mankind. "The 
 Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things 
 into His hand. He that believeth on the Son 
 hath eternal life ; but he that obeyeth not the 
 Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth 
 on him" (Jn 3 35 '-). In estimating the degree to 
 which the Fourth Gospel fails in true historical 
 perspective, we shall not of course put in evidence 
 such passages as these, which are simply comment 
 on the part of the Evangelist. St. John does not 
 represent the teaching they contain as having been 
 given upon the occasions with which he connects 
 them. He is using his subsequent knowledge, and 
 the deeper insight which had come to him with 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 87 
 
 fuller experience, to throw light upon the earlier 
 teaching and to show the fuller revelation of which 
 it was laying the foundation. 
 
 St. John next takes us to the narrative of the 
 conversation of Jesus with the woman of Samaria. 
 The narrative is remarkable as containing a direct 
 Messianic declaration on the part of Jesus : " The 
 woman saith unto Him, I know that Messiah 
 cometh (which is called Christ) : when He is come, 
 He will declare unto us all things. Jesus saith unto 
 her, I that speak unto thee am He " (Jn 4 25f -). The 
 woman subsequently goes into the city to meet her 
 acquaintances with the words : " Come, see a man, 
 which told me all things that ever I did : can this 
 be the Christ?" (Jn 4 29 ). Then, through inter- 
 course with Jesus, the men express a wider belief 
 still. They say : " Now we believe, not because of 
 thy speaking : for we have heard for ourselves, 
 and know that this is indeed the Saviour of the 
 world " (Jn 4 42 ). 
 
 Now we must admit that such a declaration as 
 is ascribed here to Jesus runs counter to all that 
 we have learnt from the Synoptic narrative. There 
 Jesus is represented as studiously avoiding the 
 title of Messiah through all the early part of His 
 Ministry. And even when He had led St. Peter 
 on to confess Him as the Christ, He bids him keep 
 this knowledge secret. He will not make the claim 
 
88 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 openly because of the false associations that had 
 gathered around the title. 
 
 But the Synoptic narrative is concerned for the 
 most part with the Ministry in Galilee, and it is 
 just possible that considerations that would be of 
 force among a Galilean or Judeean audience would 
 not have the same force in Samaria. It is, how- 
 ever, difficult to suppose that Jesus would have 
 departed so far from His constant policy at this 
 early period of His Ministry, even in Samaria, as 
 to openly declare Himself to be the Christ. Pre- 
 sumably also St. John was not himself present at 
 this interview with the woman. The simplest 
 theory is that he is trying as best he can to re- 
 construct the incident from information with which 
 Jesus may have supplied him, and that he has by 
 this means given a literary shape to the conversa- 
 tion with the woman. 
 
 We have next to examine the teaching which 
 St. John connects with an unnamed feast at 
 Jerusalem. There is nothing in the narrative to 
 identify this feast, which is placed between the 
 first and second Passovers that occurred in the 
 period covered by the Ministry of Jesus. At this 
 feast, in reply to the Jews, Jesus defended Him- 
 self for healing on the Sabbath by saying, "My 
 Father worketh even until now, and I work" 
 (Jn 5 17 ). St. John makes a statement as to the 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 89 
 
 interpretation which the Jews put upon these 
 words : " For this cause therefore the Jews sought 
 the more to kill Him, because He not only brake 
 the sabbath, but also called God His own Father, 
 making Himself equal with God " (Jn 5 18 ). 
 
 Now the question first arises whether St. John 
 was right in his estimate of what was in the mind 
 of the Jews. Did the Jews really regard these 
 words as implying a claim to equality with God ? 
 A much lower interpretation of the words than 
 this would have been sufficient to arouse their 
 indignation. If they thought nothing more than 
 that Jesus was claiming a special relationship of 
 high privilege, which He held to have been con- 
 ferred upon Him by God, this would have been 
 quite enough to account for their anger. 
 
 And moreover, we have to consider the possibility 
 that St. John himself read into the words of Jesus 
 not merely the meaning which Jesus intended 
 them to convey at the time, but the full meaning 
 which subsequent knowledge and further revelation 
 showed that they would bear. 
 
 At all events, St. John reports the comment of 
 Jesus Himself upon this saying. Let us see what 
 it amounts to. It implies a close and intimate 
 relationship between the Son and the Father. 
 This is a relation of complete dependence and 
 perfect harmony. " The Son can do nothing of 
 Himself, but what He seeth the Father doing : 
 
90 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 for what things soever He doeth, these the Son also 
 doeth in like manner" (Jn 5 19 ). It is a relation 
 of love, which shows itself in the power conferred 
 upon the Son. This power has already found ex- 
 pression in the signs which have been wrought. 
 But not yet has the full extent of the authority 
 committed to the Son been revealed. For to the 
 Son is committed the bestowal of the supreme gift 
 of life, and He it is through whom the Father's 
 judgment of mankind will be executed. Hence 
 it follows that those who claim to honour the 
 Father must also honour the Son (Jn 5 20 " 25 ). The 
 cardinal points insisted upon are two. First, the 
 possession of life, which means eternal life, is pre- 
 dicated of the Son as a special endowment from 
 the Father, while others are to receive this gift 
 through Him. Secondly, there is the prerogative 
 of judgment : " As the Father hath life in Himself, 
 even so gave He to the Son also to have life in 
 Himself : and He gave Him authority to execute 
 judgment, because He is the Son of man" 
 (Jn 5 26t -). 
 
 It will at once be felt that this passage is largely 
 parallel to the great Synoptic passage descriptive 
 of the relation of the Son to the Father. There is 
 the same committal of authority : " All things have 
 been delivered unto Me of My Father" (Mt 11 27 = 
 Lk 10 22 ). And the claim to execute judgment is 
 the same as that which Jesus so frequently in the 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 91 
 
 Synoptic Gospels makes for Himself as Son of man. 
 The distinctive thought of the Fourth Gospel is 
 that of the possession of life as an essential 
 characteristic of the Son and the bestowal of this 
 gift upon mankind through Himself. This teaching, 
 indeed, upon the supreme gift of life is woven into 
 the innermost texture of the teaching of St. John. 
 
 But in all this setting forth of the relation of 
 the Son to the Father, and the power which is 
 vested in the Son, we may say that the question 
 of the essential nature of the Son does not really 
 emerge. The emphasis is upon the Mission which 
 has been laid upon the Son, and the authority 
 which that Mission carries with it. Nothing is 
 said as yet as to the essential nature of His Person. 
 The Son appears as One who has been invested 
 with a unique Mission by the Father, and who 
 therefore occupies a unique position and fulfils a 
 unique function. All this is really parallel to the 
 teaching of the Synoptists, though in them it 
 belongs to a later stage of the Ministry, and even 
 then is less fully developed. The special contri- 
 bution which the Fourth Gospel makes to our 
 understanding of the Mission of Jesus is its 
 teaching upon the subject of the bestowal of 
 eternal life. 
 
 This is the point which is emphasised and 
 elaborated in the great discourse which St. John 
 
92 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 connects with the feeding of the five thousand. 
 The gift of eternal life is to be bestowed upon 
 believers through their union with Himself. So 
 Jesus opens His discourse by directing the attention 
 of the people to this gift, which comes through 
 Him : " Work not for the meat which perisheth, 
 but for the meat which abideth unto eternal life, 
 which the Son of man shall give unto you: for 
 Him the Father, even God, hath sealed " (Jn 6 27 ). 
 It will be noticed that the emphasis here is laid 
 not upon the essential Nature but upon the Mission 
 of Jesus. The gift is promised through Him, not 
 in virtue of His Nature or Person, but in virtue of 
 the appointment of the Father. 
 
 Upon this follows the deeply mystical teaching 
 about the Bread of Life, the Flesh and Blood of the 
 Son of man. It tells of the bestowal upon men of 
 the power of the Humanity of Jesus, in its com- 
 pleteness ; it points to the assimilation within 
 themselves of that which is in Jesus ; and so it 
 leads, through a mystical living union with Him, to 
 the participation of His Life. 
 
 Now we must surely admit that such teaching 
 as this, unless we empty it of almost all its 
 meaning, is inexplicable apart from the highest 
 transcendental doctrine of the Nature and Person 
 of Jesus. But our contention is that no such 
 teaching was yet given, or indeed could be given 
 till Jesus was glorified. Not till the revelation of 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 93 
 
 the Eesurrection and the Kisen Life could any 
 doctrine of the Divine Nature and Person of Jesus 
 emerge. Accordingly, we find that to the Jews 
 the teaching of Jesus was frankly unintelligible. 
 "They said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, 
 whose father and mother we know ? how doth 
 He now say, I am come down out of heaven ? " 
 (Jn 6 4Z ). And again, when the teaching is further 
 developed, they ask, " How can this man give us 
 His flesh to eat ? " (Jn 6 62 ). With their premisses 
 any such notion was an impossibility. Accordingly, 
 many of those who till then were disciples of Jesus 
 are represented as leaving Him in consequence of 
 this teaching. And even the Twelve are not 
 spoken of as understanding it. They accept it 
 because of their deep personal trust in Jesus. 
 They felt instinctively that He had " the words of 
 eternal life" (Jn 6 68 ). But they did not yet 
 possess the data that would show them how such 
 teaching could have a real meaning. 
 
 Let us then state our conclusion with reference 
 to the mystical teaching of this great discourse. 
 On the one hand, unless it is to be emptied of its 
 deepest meaning, it requires the highest doctrine 
 of the Divine Nature and Person of Jesus ; and it 
 must therefore remain an unexplained mystery 
 until that doctrine had been revealed. On the 
 other hand, there was not as yet, and there could 
 not be, any such teaching upon the Person of 
 
94 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Jesus ; and the teaching here given did in fact 
 remain a mystery till after the Eesurrection of 
 Jesus from the dead. 
 
 Here, as before, emphasis is laid not upon the 
 Person, but upon the Mission of Jesus. Jesus 
 offers these gifts because the Mission laid upon 
 Him by the Father authorises Him to do so. " As 
 the living Father sent Me, and I live because of 
 the Father ; so he that eateth Me, he also shall 
 live because of Me" (Jn 6 57 ). The Father has 
 sent Him : that fact is proclaimed. The promise 
 of the gift of life and the conditions of the gift 
 must be taken on trust, till the full doctrine could 
 be revealed. 
 
 We have already noticed that in the conversation 
 with Nicodemus, as recorded by St. John, Jesus 
 seems to speak of a pre-existence before His life 
 in the world. S/> again it is here. " I am come 
 down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but 
 the will of Him that sent Me " (Jn 6 38 ). And again 
 He asks of the Jews, "What then if ye should 
 behold the Son of man ascending where He was 
 before ? " If St. John is here reporting Jesus aright, 
 we must admit that a point has been touched 
 beyond what the Synoptists include in their repre- 
 sentation of the Self-revelation of Jesus during the 
 Ministry. But even so, the idea of pre-existence 
 would not, to Jewish minds, carry with it a claim 
 to Divinity. Such a claim would to them be 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 95 
 
 unthinkable, as conflicting, they would suppose, 
 with monotheism. But the idea of pre-existence 
 was familiar to them. In at least some schools 
 of Jewish thought pre-existence was predicated of 
 the Messiah. 
 
 We have now reached the point in St. John's 
 narrative which corresponds to the division which 
 the Synoptic narrative led us to make in the 
 Ministry of Jesus. Let us sum up the conclusions 
 to which a comparison of the Fourth with the 
 earlier Gospels has led us. We certainly do not 
 find in St. John's narrative the same progressive 
 unfolding of the teaching of Jesus about Himself 
 that marks the Synoptic account. The marked 
 reticence which is ascribed to Jesus in the early 
 part of the Ministry by St. Mark and St. Luke, and 
 to a less extent by St. Matthew, is hardly observ- 
 able in the Fourth Gospel. No doubt the difference 
 in the description of the early teaching may be to 
 some extent accounted for by the fragmentary 
 character of the Synoptic tradition, and may be 
 partly due to a difference of audience. It is 
 natural to suppose that the teaching given to an 
 educated audience in Jerusalem would differ in 
 character and substance from that given to the 
 peasants of Galilee, But such a consideration 
 cannot go all the way in accounting for the differ- 
 ence between the Synoptic and Johannine dis- 
 courses. And indeed we have to remember that 
 
96 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the memorable instruction upon the Bread of Life 
 was given to just such a Galilean audience as that 
 which listened to the Synoptic parables by the 
 lake side. 
 
 It appears, then, that we must admit a distinct 
 loss of true historical perspective in the Johannine 
 account of the early period of the Ministry of 
 Jesus. St. John ascribes to the early teaching 
 elements of Self-revelation which did not in fact 
 find expression till a later date. How far this 
 criticism of the Fourth Gospel should extend it 
 is probably not possible to say. No doubt the 
 deep spiritual capacity of St. John would enable 
 him to see more deeply than others into the full 
 meaning of the words of Jesus. And it is possible 
 that in places where his account of the teaching 
 of Jesus differs from that given by the Synoptists, 
 he is only rendering explicit a revelation that was 
 implicitly contained in the earlier teaching, but 
 which the framers of the common tradition failed 
 to grasp. 
 
 But let us now for a moment put aside the 
 question of progressive development in the teaching 
 of Jesus, and compare the revelation which we 
 have found in the early Johannine discourses with 
 that which is contained in the entire Synoptic 
 account of the Ministry. We find in St. John a 
 far fuller account of the meaning, purpose, and 
 power of the Mission of Jesus. This is especially 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 97 
 
 developed from the point of view of the gift of 
 eternal life, which comes through Him. And there 
 is the mystical conception of the union of Jesus 
 with the believer and the participation in the 
 powers of His complete humanity. But this 
 aspect of the Self-revelation of Jesus is developed 
 from the side of His Mission rather than from 
 the side of His Person. And though the idea 
 of pre-existence is introduced, there is no revelation 
 of the possession of a Nature essentially different 
 from that of man. No doubt the truths revealed 
 must remain inexplicable till such a revelation has 
 been given, and men must continue to ask, " How 
 can it be ? " And without doubt St. John's mind 
 was permeated through and through with his know- 
 ledge, subsequently gained, of the Person of Christ. 
 And no doubt this knowledge, from which it was 
 impossible for him to detach himself, must have to 
 some extent moulded the form which after long 
 reflection he gave to the discourses of Jesus. We 
 may therefore accept the conclusion that Jesus, 
 while in fact He unfolded the meaning and character 
 of His Mission and its results more fully than the 
 Synoptic narrative of the Ministry would have led 
 us to suppose, did not give during this early period 
 of the Ministry any revelation of the possession of 
 a Nature essentially different from that of man- 
 kind. 
 
CHAPTEE IV 
 
 THE MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 
 
 The Second Period 
 
 At the close of the period in which St. Peter's great 
 confession must be placed, St. John takes up the 
 narrative at the Feast of Tabernacles at Jerusalem. 
 The teaching given at this feast occupies the whole 
 of the seventh and eighth chapters. It is marked 
 by the same sense of a close intimacy between the 
 Son and the Father; and once again we find a re- 
 iteration and expansion of the central Synoptic 
 passage. The truth is emphasised that knowledge 
 of the Father can come only through the Son. 
 And so Jesus says to the Jews, " Ye know neither 
 Me, nor My Father : if ye knew Me, ye would know 
 My Father also " (Jn 8 19 ). 
 
 Jesus now refers with renewed emphasis to His 
 Mission. It is the Father who has sent Him 
 (Jn 8 18 ) ; He has not come of Himself (v. 42 ) ; the 
 words He speaks are those which He has received 
 from the Father (v. 26 ), and His actions are a carry- 
 ing out of the Father's will (v. 29 ). Since so high a 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 99 
 
 Mission has been laid upon Jesus by the Father, the 
 effect of His presence must be correspondingly great. 
 He has been charged to bring to men a revelation 
 of eternal truth. Hence He is able to say, " I am 
 the light of the world : he that followeth Me shall 
 not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light 
 of life "(v. 12 ). 
 
 But the most striking feature in the discourse at 
 the Feast of Tabernacles is the emphasis which 
 Jesus now lays upon His pre-existence : " I know 
 whence I came and whither I go" (v. 14 ). And 
 then more definitely : " I came forth and am come 
 from God ; for neither have I come of Myself, but He 
 sent Me " (v. 42 ). If these words had stood alone, it 
 might have been said that Jesus was only referring 
 to the coming forth to His Ministry when at His 
 Baptism there was given to Him the consciousness 
 of receiving a call from God. But He excludes any 
 such limitation of His meaning by closing the dis- 
 course with a statement which admits of no such 
 interpretation : " Verily, verily, I say unto you, 
 Before Abraham was, I am " (v. 58 ). 
 
 Now it may be maintained that Jesus in saying 
 this is merely claiming that He stands for eternal 
 principles. The principles embodied in His teach- 
 ing are not arbitrary or changing: they do not 
 belong to a temporary phase, as did the covenant 
 associated with Abraham. They did not come into 
 being : they " are." For they embody eternal truth. 
 
100 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 But it will probably be felt that to explain the 
 words of Jesus as referring solely to an ideal pre- 
 existence, such as this, is not satisfactory. We feel 
 obliged to take the words in their natural sense. 
 Jesus is claiming a personal pre-existence ; and 
 moreover, a pre-existence of which no beginning is 
 predicated. But again, let us remember that pre- 
 existence was already regarded as an attribute of 
 the Messiah, and Jesus, in making the assertion, is 
 claiming no more than the Messiah was allowed, in 
 Jewish thought, to possess. 
 
 In the Last Discourses the doctrine of pre- 
 existence again becomes prominent. Jesus speaks 
 in parallel terms of His coming from the Father 
 and His return : ," I came out from the Father, 
 and am come into the world : again, I leave the 
 world, and go unto the Father" (Jn 16 28 ). He 
 implies that just as the life to which He is going 
 is a personal life of intercourse with the Father, 
 so He had a personal existence in communion with 
 the Father before the period of His earthly life. 
 In response to this statement, the disciples confess 
 their faith : " Now know we that Thou knowest all 
 things, and needest not that any man should ask 
 Thee : by this we believe that Thou earnest forth 
 from God" (Jn 16 30 ). To this confession of faith 
 Jesus refers in the great high-priestly prayer : 
 " The words which Thou gavest Me I have given 
 unto them ; and they received them, and knew of 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 101 
 
 a truth that I came forth from Thee, and they 
 believed that Thou didst send Me" (Jn 17 8 ). And 
 in this same prayer the pre-existence of Jesus is 
 carried back beyond the creation of the world. 
 Jesus speaks of the glory which He had with the 
 Father "before the world was" (Jn 17 5 ). 
 
 After the account of the Feast of Tabernacles, 
 the scene changes to the Feast of Dedication in the 
 winter of the same year. For it would appear that 
 the ninth and tenth chapters of the Gospel are 
 both to be associated with this feast. In this 
 section we find a direct assertion of Divine Sonship. 
 St. John is relating the incident of the healing of 
 the man who had been born blind. This man had 
 been put out of the synagogue by the Jews. Jesus 
 sought him out and said to him, " Dost thou believe 
 on the Son of God ? " 1 The man answered, " Who 
 is He, Lord, that I may believe on Him ? " Jesus 
 said, " Thou hast both seen Him, and He it is that 
 speaketh with thee " (Jn 9 36fl -). There is no diffi- 
 culty in accepting the statement of St. John that 
 this claim was explicitly made at this late period 
 of the Ministry. What Jesus meant by the claim 
 will appear from a consideration of the remarkable 
 controversy with which the teaching given at the 
 Feast of Dedication closes. This controversy we 
 now have to examine. 
 
 1 The reading, however, is uncertain. WH read "The Son 
 of man." 
 
102 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 We start with the assertion of Jesus, " I and 
 the Father are one" (Jn 10 30 ); and we have to 
 inquire what claim Jesus intended to make when 
 He used these words. St. John states that the 
 Jews interpreted the saying as meaning that Jesus 
 was claiming to be Divine. " The Jews," he says, 
 " took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus 
 answered them, Many good works have I shewed 
 you from the Father ; for which of those works do 
 ye stone Me ? The Jews answered Him, For a 
 good work we stone Thee not, but for blasphemy ; 
 and because that Thou, being a man, makest Thyself 
 God" (Jn 10 31fl -). But Jesus refused to accept 
 this interpretation of His words. This was not 
 the meaning He intended to convey. Let us quote 
 His reply to the Jews : " Jesus answered them, 
 Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods ? 
 If He called them gods, unto whom the word of 
 God came (and the scripture cannot be broken), 
 say ye of Him, whom the Father sanctified and 
 sent into the world, Thou blasphemest ; because I 
 said, I am the Son of God?" (Jn 10 34ff -)- Jesus, 
 then, disclaims the interpretation which the Jews 
 had put on His words. He states that He was 
 claiming a relation to the Father analogous to that 
 in which the divinely appointed judges of the Old 
 Testament stood to God. And He explains this 
 further as a relation founded upon the Mission, 
 for which God had sanctified Him and which He 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 103 
 
 had now laid upon Him. So, once again, we find 
 that what Jesus is desirous to teach is not the 
 meaning of His Person, but the fact and purport 
 of His Mission. He claims the title Son of God 
 on the ground that God has laid upon Him a unique 
 Mission, in virtue of which He is set apart from 
 all others. He is therefore one with the Father, 
 who has designated Him for this work. 
 
 It must not, of course, be supposed that Jesus 
 is denying that He is God. He is simply denying 
 that the question as to His essential Nature had 
 entered into His words. The question had simply 
 not arisen. Jesus would not raise it until the time 
 had come when the truth could be intelligible. It 
 must wait to be proclaimed till after the Eesurrection. 
 
 Meantime, the teaching at the Feast of 
 Tabernacles has added more to the revelation of 
 Jesus upon the meaning of His Mission. There 
 is the allegory of the sheep. Jesus is the Door 
 of the sheep ; for in Him is the entrance to eternal 
 life (Jn 10 7 ). He is the Good Shepherd, who lays 
 down His life for the sheep (Jn 10 n ). And this 
 He does in discharge of the Mission laid upon Him 
 by His Father (Jn 10 18 ). Thus, once again, from 
 the point of view of the Mission of Jesus, emphasis 
 is laid upon the gift through Him of eternal life. 
 " My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and 
 they follow Me : and I give unto them eternal 
 Iife"(Jn 10 2 "-). 
 
104 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 The raising of Lazarus gives occasion for further 
 teaching upon the same subject of the bestowal of 
 life. Let us quote the words spoken to Martha : 
 "Jesus said unto her, I am the Eesurrection, and 
 the Life : he that believeth on Me, though he die, 
 yet shall he live : and whosoever liveth and believeth 
 on Me shall never die" (Jn ll 26f -). Thus the 
 assertion is repeated that eternal life is bestowed 
 through Jesus and in response to belief in Him. 
 In answer to the appeal which Jesus makes to her 
 faith, Martha replies in terms which correspond to 
 St. Peter's confession as reported by St. Matthew: 
 "I have believed that Thou art the Christ, the Son 
 of God, even He that cometh into the world" 
 
 (v. 27 )- 
 
 The same doctrine that Jesus is the source of 
 eternal life is taught by the allegory of the Vine : 
 "I am the Vine, ye are the branches: He that 
 abideth in Me, and I in him, the same beareth much 
 fruit : for apart from Me ye can do nothing " 
 (Jn 1 5 6 ). There can only be life where there is 
 union with Jesus. So Jesus prays that the purpose 
 of His Mission may be fulfilled through the bestowal 
 of the gift of life in such a way that men will 
 acknowledge its authority and power : " Father, 
 the hour is come ; glorify Thy Son, that the Son 
 may glorify Thee : even as Thou gavest Him 
 authority over all flesh, that whatsoever Thou hast 
 given Him, to them He should give eternal life. 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 105 
 
 And this is life eternal, that they should know Thee 
 the only true God, and Him whom Thou didst send, 
 even Jesus Christ" (Jn 17 lfl- ). Once again let us 
 notice that emphasis is laid upon the Mission of 
 the Son rather than upon His Person or Nature. 
 The essential fact is that He presents Himself as 
 One whom the Father has sent ; He speaks with 
 the authority with which the Father has clothed 
 Him. He teaches men how to fulfil their true 
 destiny, for He leads them to the Father. He 
 throws full light upon the meaning and purpose of 
 life, for He teaches eternal truth. He brings men 
 into union with Himself, and so bestows upon them 
 the supreme gift of eternal life. And finally, a 
 Mission so tremendous in its power is claimed as 
 unique : nothing else can take its place. And 
 therefore Jesus sums up the effect of His Mission 
 in the pregnant saying, " I am the Way, and the 
 Truth, and the Life : no one cometh unto the 
 Father, but by Me" (Jn 14 6 ). 
 
 Nothing can be closer or more intimate than the 
 union of spirit with the Father which Jesus claims 
 in the Johannine discourses. So completely does 
 Jesus perform the will of God and express the 
 Father's character, that to know Jesus is to know 
 the Father. Note the question of St. Philip and 
 the reply of Jesus. Jesus had said, " If ye had 
 known Me, ye would have known My Father also : 
 
106 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 from henceforth ye know Him, and have seen 
 Him. Philip saith unto Him, Lord, shew us the 
 Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, 
 Have I been so long time with you, and dost thou 
 not know Me, Philip ? he that hath seen Me hath 
 seen the Father; how sayest thou, Shew us the 
 Father ? Believest thou not that I am in the 
 Father, and the Father in Me ? the words that I 
 say unto you I speak not from Myself : but the 
 Father abiding in Me doeth His works" (Jn 14 7fi -). 
 The entire high-priestly prayer breathes this 
 same spirit of complete harmony with the Father. 
 It shows itself especially in the petition that there 
 may be the same bond of unity among believers as 
 that which subsists in perfection of fellowship 
 between the Father and the Son. We have first 
 the prayer for the disciples themselves : " Holy 
 Father, keep them in Thy name which Thou hast 
 given Me, that they may be one, even as we are " 
 (Jn 17 u ). The allusion again is to the Mission 
 which has been given by the Father, in virtue of 
 which the disciples have been gathered together 
 and brought into one fellowship. Then the 
 thought is further developed, and is applied to 
 those who were to be led to believe in Jesus through 
 the preaching of the first disciples. The prayer of 
 Jesus is that they also may be one, " even as Thou, 
 Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also 
 may be in Us : that the world may believe that 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 107 
 
 Thou didst send Me " (Jn 1 7 21 ). Here once again 
 we get back to the thought of the Mission bestowed 
 by the Father. 
 
 Next let us notice how Jesus emphasises the 
 power which is His in virtue of His Mission. 
 "All things whatsoever the Father hath are Mine" 
 (Jn 16 15 ), says Jesus to the disciples. And again, 
 in the high-priestly prayer He thus addresses the 
 Father : " All things that are Mine are Thine, and 
 Thine are Mine: and I am glorified in them" 
 (Jn 17 10 ). But we have already heard this in the 
 central Synoptic passage : " All things have been 
 delivered unto Me of My Father (Mt 11 25 = 
 Lk 10 22 ). 
 
 The greatness of the Mission leads up to the 
 thought of the greatness of Him who has given the 
 Mission. Jesus looks forward to returning to the 
 Father when the work with which He is charged 
 is completed, and so He says to the disciples : " If 
 ye loved Me, ye would have rejoiced, because I go 
 unto the Father: for the Father is greater than 
 I"(Jn 14 28 ). 
 
 Now it is said that in making this comparison 
 Jesus is implicitly claiming to be Divine. The 
 reason given for this inference is that otherwise 
 the comparison would be meaningless. Certainly it 
 would be a pointless assertion to state baldly that 
 God is greater than man. But the underlying 
 
108 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 thought in the mind of Jesus is not that of God- 
 head or Manhood: the comparison arises simply 
 out of the thought of the Mission which fills His 
 mind. The major premiss in the argument is this, 
 that he who bestows a mission is greater than he 
 who receives it. The Father who has bestowed a 
 Mission upon the Son is greater than the Son 
 who receives this Mission and executes it in 
 obedience to the Father. Hence these words of 
 Jesus are not to be taken as bearing upon the 
 question of the essential Nature of the Son. This 
 question does not arise. 
 
 We come now to the revelation by Jesus of an 
 extension of His Mission. Out of His Mission is 
 to arise the Mission of the Paraclete, who is to be 
 sent in His name : " The Comforter, even the Holy 
 Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He 
 shall teach you all things, and bring to your 
 remembrance all that I said unto you" (Jn 14 26 ). 
 Indeed, in such close relation does the Mission of 
 the Paraclete stand to the Mission of Jesus, that 
 Jesus declares that He Himself will send the 
 Paraclete : " When the Comforter is come, whom I 
 will send unto you from the Father, even the 
 Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, 
 He shall bear witness of Me" (Jn 15 26 ). The 
 Mission of the Paraclete will be to carry forward 
 and give effect to the work of Jesus. And Jesus 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 109 
 
 too will carry on His work, though in another 
 sphere. For He goes to prepare a place for His 
 disciples (Jn 14 2 ). 
 
 We have now examined the Johannine presenta- 
 tion of the Self-revelation of Jesus up to the close 
 of the Ministry ; and we have found very little in 
 the records of the later stages of the Ministry 
 which goes beyond the Self-revelation that was 
 implicitly contained in the first six chapters. 
 These, it will be remembered, carried us up to 
 the crisis of St. Peter's confession. Certainly the 
 truths taught in outline, or only implicitly, in the 
 earlier discourses are in the later chapters more 
 fully developed. The doctrine of pre-existence, for 
 instance, becomes more definite and more extended. 
 The scope and effect of the Mission of Jesus is fully 
 revealed under an abundance of allegory and 
 metaphor. The relation of the Son to the Father 
 is regarded from fresh points of view. The Mission 
 of the Paraclete appears as standing in close 
 relation to the Mission of Jesus. Throughout the 
 whole Gospel the gift of eternal life stands out con- 
 spicuously as the great and abiding consequence of 
 the Mission of the Son : this is no less conspicuous 
 in the early discourses than it is in the later. 
 
 As a result of this analysis, we cannot help 
 feeling that the element of progress and gradual 
 development in the Self-revelation of Jesus which 
 
110 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 we traced clearly in the Synoptic narrative has 
 been largely lost sight of by St. John. This indeed 
 is hardly to be wondered at. Looking back as he 
 did over a long span of years, and interpreting, as 
 was inevitable, the sayings of Jesus in the light of 
 the fuller revelation which he had subsequently 
 received, he seems to have read into the earlier 
 teaching truths which in fact were only proclaimed 
 at a later time. 
 
 It is probable that there is a large subjective 
 element in the Johannine discourses. The Fourth 
 Gospel is, at least in some measure, an idealisation 
 of the life and teaching of Jesus rather than strict 
 history. How far the subjective element extends 
 it is impossible to say. 
 
 But to admit this is not to say that the Gospel 
 is untrue. On the contrary, those who believe in 
 the Mission of Jesus and in the Mission of the 
 Paraclete, whose work it is to guide men into all 
 the truth, will feel that in this Gospel we have an 
 interpretation of the Life and Teaching of Jesus 
 which is essentially true. We do not claim for it 
 a photographic accuracy in reproduction of detail, 
 or even an accurate presentation of the method of 
 Jesus. But we do say that a true spiritual insight 
 has enabled St. John to look beneath the form of the 
 Message and to present to us its eternal significance. 
 
 In comparing the Fourth Gospel with the 
 
MINISTRY IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 111 
 
 Synoptist narratives, we have seen that St. John 
 fails to bring out as clearly as do the earlier 
 Gospels the progressive element in the Teaching 
 of Jesus. Let us turn now from the mode of 
 presenting the revelation to a comparison of the 
 Gospels in regard to the sum-total of truth that is 
 revealed. A careful examination of the words 
 attributed to Jesus in the Fourth Gospel has 
 Bhown us that the question of His essential Nature 
 does not really arise. He is the Son of God : and, 
 as such, He claims a unique prerogative, a relation- 
 ship which He shares with no other. But this 
 Sonship with God is thought of as revealing, not 
 His Nature, but His Mission. The question of the 
 essential Nature of Jesus does not really arise in 
 the Johannine discourses of the Ministry any more 
 than it does with the Synoptists. The final charge 
 brought against Jesus, as stated in the Fourth 
 Gospel, is exactly the same as that which we have 
 already found in the earlier Gospels : " He made 
 Himself the Son of God " (Jn 19 7 ). The difference 
 between the two presentations of the teaching of 
 Jesus is that St. John expresses with greater fulness 
 the effect and power of His Mission, and the 
 Person of Jesus is invested with greater mystery. 
 The discourses of the Fourth Gospel do indeed 
 present a problem, but they offer no hint of the 
 solution of the problem. They do not anticipate 
 the Self-revelation of Jesus, which could only be 
 
112 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 given through and after the Eesurrection. In this 
 the Fourth Gospel shows a fundamental agreement 
 with the Synoptists. Jesus is the Christ, the Son 
 of God ; He is charged with a Mission of over- 
 whelming importance, and is invested with tran- 
 scendent authority. Such is the summary of His 
 Self-revelation in all the Gospels alike. We now 
 pass to the mighty event of the Eesurrection, 
 through which came the further revelation, showing 
 how it could be that Jesus could make for Him- 
 self so tremendous a claim. 
 
CHAPTEE V 
 
 THE RESURRECTION 
 
 Jesus during the Ministry made, as we have seen, 
 claims of overwhelming magnitude for the Mission 
 with which He had been charged by the Father. 
 The functions which this Mission involves are, we 
 may well say, of practically infinite extent. But 
 whatever may be the truth as to the essential 
 Nature and Personality of Jesus, the teaching upon 
 this subject did not become explicit during the period 
 covered by the Ministry. The high authority which 
 Jesus asserted, and the tremendous functions which 
 He claimed, were regarded as arising out of the 
 Mission which the Pather had laid upon Him, 
 rather than as flowing from His own Personality. 
 It was left for later reflection to consider what kind 
 of Nature and Personality were postulated by such 
 claims. But in the meantime the claims themselves 
 were advanced without any scientific co-ordination. 
 There was no attempt as yet made to show how 
 such prerogatives could meet in One who presented 
 Himself in human nature. 
 8 
 
114 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Before any such explanation could be given, a 
 further revelation was necessary, which should have 
 the effect first of authenticating the claims which 
 had been made, and then of throwing light upon 
 the question how such claims could possibly be true. 
 The further revelation that was necessary was the 
 Kesurrection of Jesus from the dead. 
 
 It is true that the Eesurreetion had been foretold 
 by Jesus, and foretold more than once, during the 
 Ministry. But no mere statement before the event 
 could possibly convey any real conception of the 
 truth and its significance. Indeed, the announce- 
 ment fell almost on deaf ears, and was only recalled 
 when the prophecy had been fulfilled. 
 
 Let us then see what our records teach us as to 
 the character of the Kesurrection. Here again, as 
 in our examination of the teaching of the Ministry, 
 it will be convenient to consider separately the 
 Synoptic records and the narrative of St. John. 
 
 St. Mark's Gospel has lost its original ending, 
 and consequently has nothing to tell us beyond 
 the bare fact of the Eesurreetion. For the 
 existing ending, both in its longer and its shorter 
 form, belongs to the second century, and therefore 
 lies outside our present inquiry. St. Mark, then, 
 has no information to give us upon the character 
 of the Eisen Life of Jesus, as inferred from the 
 manner of His appearances. 
 
 But from the narratives of St. Matthew and St. 
 
THE RESURRECTION 115 
 
 Luke we learn that the conditions of life after the 
 Kesurreetion were entirely changed. The Body of 
 Jesus was transformed in character and appearance. 
 Thus the two disciples on the road to Emmaus 
 failed to recognise Him as He walked with them 
 and spoke to them of the Christ (Lk 24 16 ). But 
 their subsequent recognition of Him was as signifi- 
 cant as the failure to recognise Him on the way. 
 He was known through the characteristic action of 
 the breaking of the bread (Lk 24 31 ). It was only 
 through the awakening of a spiritual perception 
 that Jesus could be recognised under the changed 
 conditions of the Risen Life. And in accordance 
 with this same necessity we find that when Jesus 
 appeared to the disciples on the mountain in Galilee, 
 there were some that doubted (Mt 28 17 ). They 
 did not possess that spiritual perception without 
 which no recognition of Him was possible. 
 
 We may indicate in some measure the change 
 that had passed over the Body of Jesus, by saying 
 that the Body was now spiritualised. It was no 
 longer subject to the conditions of space ; it was no 
 longer bound by the limitations of matter. Jesus 
 could suddenly disappear from view. When the 
 two disciples at Emmaus recognised Him, "He 
 vanished out of their sight" (Lk 24 31 ). 
 
 He could as suddenly appear. When the two 
 returned to Jerusalem, they came to the room 
 where the Eleven were gathered together ; and 
 
116 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 while they were speaking of the events that had 
 happened, Jesus appeared in the midst (Lk 24 36 ). 
 
 But the Body of Jesus, though spiritualised, was 
 real. Proof of this was deliberately offered by 
 Jesus. The disciples were bidden to handle Him 
 and see. " A spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye 
 behold Me having" (Lk 24 39 ). And, further, He 
 took food and did eat before them (Lk 24 43 ). 
 
 Jesus, then, in His human Body had conquered 
 death and stood before the disciples in a new and 
 glorified life. It was a revelation which transcended 
 all experience, and it was given in such a way as to 
 leave no doubt as to its reality (Ac l 3 ). Thus it 
 served the purpose of authenticating the claims 
 made by Jesus during the Ministry. Jesus had 
 won the supreme victory over death. He had 
 emerged triumphant from the great conflict. And 
 standing thus before the disciples in a life that was 
 incontestably real, but yet under conditions which 
 lifted His being above the limitations of matter 
 and space, He showed Himself as the Resurrection 
 and the Life. By His Resurrection He had made 
 good His claim to the allegiance and belief of men. 
 He had established the truth of the tremendous 
 assertions He had made during the Ministry as to 
 the Mission with which He had been charged by 
 the Father, and the functions and powers which had 
 been entrusted to Him. 
 
 Accordingly, the appearances to the disciples give 
 
THE RESURRECTION 117 
 
 occasion for the reassertion of these claims under 
 certain of their aspects. He speaks as the Christ, 
 and reaffirms the content of the Messianic work, 
 exaltation through death. " Behoved it not the 
 Christ to suffer these things, and to enter into His 
 glory ? " (Lk 24 26 ). And again more fully : " Thus 
 it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and rise 
 again from the dead the third day ; and that repent- 
 ance and remission of sins should be preached in 
 His name unto all the nations, beginning from 
 Jerusalem " (Lk 24 46f '). Thus the outcome of His 
 Mission is the possibility of forgiveness of sins to 
 all mankind. 
 
 The Mission of Jesus was then to be carried 
 forward through the mission of the Apostles. They 
 had been witnesses of the Death and of the fact 
 of the Eesurrection (Lk 24 48 ). They were to go 
 out into all the world to bear this witness to Him 
 (Mt 20 19 , Ac l 8 ). He Himself was to constitute 
 the centre of their message. Remission of sins was 
 to be in His name (Lk 24 47 ). 
 
 While Jesus bases His Mission explicitly upon 
 the fact that He is the Christ, He at the same time 
 connects the execution of it with the doctrine of 
 His Divine Sonship. When speaking of His work 
 in sending the Holy Spirit, He appeals to the re- 
 lation of Fatherhood in which God stands to Him : 
 "Behold, I send forth the promise of My Father 
 upon you" (Lk 24 49 ). There is, however, some 
 
118 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 doubt whether the phrase in this form is original, 
 for when St. Luke alludes to it again in the Acts, it 
 appears as " the promise of the Father " (Ac l 4 ), not 
 " My Father." If these words represent the saying 
 as actually used by Jesus, it would follow that He 
 was referring, not to the special relation in which 
 He Himself stood to God, but to God's universal 
 Fatherhood to mankind as a whole. 
 
 But in any event we have in St. Matthew's 
 Gospel an assertion of Divine Sonship in the 
 formula of Baptism, prefaced by a claim to the 
 endowment of supreme authority : " Jesus came 
 to them and spake unto them, saying, All 
 authority hath been given unto Me in heaven 
 and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make 
 disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into 
 the name of the Father and of the Son and of 
 the Holy Ghost : teaching them to observe all 
 things whatsoever I commanded you" (Mt 28 18ff -). 
 There is no reasonable ground for doubting the 
 authenticity of these words. They undoubtedly 
 belong to the original Gospel of St. Matthew, the 
 documentary evidence being unimpeachable. And 
 moreover, they harmonise perfectly with the 
 teaching of Jesus in the Ministry, as given in 
 the Synoptic tradition. For Jesus has already 
 appeared there as the Son, endowed with a 
 wholly unique Mission by the Father, and in- 
 vested with powers and functions such as no 
 
THE RESURRECTION 119 
 
 other can possibly approach. Baptism into the 
 name of the Father and of the Son and of the 
 Holy Ghost goes no further than to imply an 
 acceptance of those claims which had been 
 already advanced. It sets a seal upon the 
 Synoptic tradition. And indeed, the universal 
 practice and belief of the Apostolic Church in 
 regard to baptism makes it practically certain 
 some such command as this was given in some 
 such terms as are here recited by St. Matthew. 
 
 We must note, also, as bearing upon the 
 character of the Mission of Jesus, His promise of 
 perpetual presence. He who at the end of the 
 world will be the universal Judge, will till then 
 bestow His unfailing presence upon the Church : 
 "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end 
 of the world " (Mt 28 20 ). 
 
 We have tried to show that the process by 
 which Jesus revealed Himself and unfolded His 
 Mission to the Apostles was in fact very gradual. 
 But yet, even so, the apprehension of the truths 
 revealed lagged far behind the unfolding of them. 
 Even at the very moment of the Ascension, the 
 disciples showed that they had not really grasped 
 the essentially spiritual character of His Mission. 
 They had not even then rid themselves of their 
 national and temporal expectations. So they 
 asked : " Lord, dost Thou at this time restore 
 the kingdom to Israel ? " (Ac l 6 ). 
 
120 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 But though their apprehension was so im- 
 perfect, the facts were now all in their hands. 
 They had listened to the marvellous setting out 
 of His claims by Jesus in the teaching during 
 the Ministry ; they were witnesses to the Besurree- 
 tion, in all its glory and spiritual significance, 
 whereby Jesus had given proof of His right to be 
 believed in regard to the claims He had made. Here 
 were the facts upon which reflection was to work, 
 under the God -given guidance of the Holy Spirit, 
 who was shortly to be bestowed upon the Church. 
 But as yet the materials which the Life and 
 Teaching and Besurrection of Jesus had given 
 were quite unco-ordinated. The Church, under 
 the guidance of the Holy Spirit, would be charged 
 with the task of elucidating the meaning and 
 consequences of the tremendous statements which 
 had been made and of the marvellous Life which 
 had been revealed. This task could only be 
 carried out gradually and stage by stage. 
 
 But before we pass on to consider the process 
 of reflection upon the facts already given, let us 
 note how the teaching upon the Besurrection 
 which we have derived from the Synoptists is 
 accurately confirmed by St. John. 
 
 The narratives of the Fourth Gospel bring out 
 clearly the essential truth that the Besurrection 
 was a spiritual fact. This appears to be almost 
 
THE RESURRECTION 121 
 
 certainly the meaning underlying the description 
 in which such emphasis is laid upon the position 
 of the grave-clothes (Jn 20 7 ). 1 St. John says 
 that he "saw and believed" (Jn 20 8 ). That is, 
 St. John, looking back over the long vista of 
 years, ascribed his first insight into the meaning 
 of the Kesurrection to what he saw in the un- 
 tenanted grave. He implies that the linen cloths 
 were lying in the place of burial, just where they had 
 been when they enfolded the Body of Jesus. They 
 bore witness to the fact that the Body had passed 
 away from them, leaving them undisturbed. Hence 
 it followed that the Body was now spiritualised. 
 It was no longer subject to the restraints of matter. 
 Under its new conditions it had entered where 
 limitations of space are not. 
 
 It is hardly necessary to suppose that all this 
 was at once realised by St. John when first the 
 grave-clothes were seen by him. But there seems 
 little doubt that he wishes to imply that their 
 position in the grave was a sign of which the 
 meaning became clear in the light of subsequent 
 events. It was then recognised as revealing a 
 transcendent spiritual truth. 
 
 Thus, at the outset of the Kesurrection narratives, 
 as told by St. John, we are prepared for an insist- 
 ence upon the spiritual character of the Besurrec- 
 
 1 Cf. Lk 24 12 , where, however, the text is of doubtful genuine- 
 ness. 
 
122 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 tion. Accordingly, we find, as in the Synoptic 
 Gospels, that recognition of the Eisen Jesus 
 depends upon the awakening of spiritual faculties. 
 Mary Magdalene fails to recognise Him till He 
 calls her by name, and thus induces a spiritual 
 contact with Himself (Jn 20 14fl -). And then the 
 lesson of the spiritualising of His presence is 
 taught by His prohibition : " Touch Me not ; for 
 I am not yet ascended unto the Father" (Jn 20 17 ). 
 He is no longer to be known under temporal and 
 material conditions, but through the faculties of 
 the spiritual life. The same truths are brought 
 out in the narrative of the appearance by the 
 Sea of Galilee, when Jesus stood on the beach, 
 but " the disciples knew not that it was Jesus " 
 (Jn 21 4 ). 
 
 Again, as in the Synoptic Gospels, we have the 
 sudden appearance and disappearance of Jesus, 
 " the doors being shut," indicating just as before 
 that the life of the Eesurrection Body is not 
 subject to material conditions (Jn 20 19 - 26 ). 
 
 Turn now to the commission given to the 
 disciples : " Jesus said to them again, Peace be 
 unto you : as the Father hath sent Me, even so 
 send I you. And when He had said this, He 
 breathed on them, and said unto them, Eeceive 
 ye the Holy Ghost : whose soever sins ye forgive, 
 they are forgiven unto them : whose soever sins 
 ye retain, they are retained" (Jn 20 21£E -)- Here 
 
THE RESURRECTION 123 
 
 again we have essential agreement with the 
 Synoptic narrative, though another aspect of 
 the great commission now finds expression. He 
 who declared that as Son of man on earth He 
 had power to forgive sins, now commits the same 
 judicial authority to His Church (cf. Mt 16 19 18 18 ). 
 And as in the narrative of St. Luke (Ac l 11 ), so in 
 the Fourth Gospel, the commission given to the 
 Apostles, and through them to the Church, leads 
 on to the thought of the Eeturn. Jesus, who has 
 triumphed over death, and whose triumph finds a 
 symbolic consummation in the Ascension to the 
 right hand of God, will one day come again to 
 His waiting Church (Jn 21 22 ). 
 
 Thus the Johannine narrative draws again the 
 same lines that appear in the Synoptic portrait of 
 the Eisen Life, only with greater fulness of detail 
 and with more intent to interpret the meaning. 
 
 The Gospels agree in showing that the revela- 
 tion of the Kisen Life of Jesus led the Apostles 
 to give to Jesus their wondering and reverent 
 allegiance. They admitted His unique authority ; 
 they accepted the truth of His Mission. They 
 believed that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of 
 God" (Jn 20 31 ). 
 
 But it would appear that their belief, so far, 
 consisted in an acceptance of the Mission of Jesus, 
 as described by Himself. The Resurrection was 
 regarded as an authentication of the claims of 
 
124 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Jesus, as One chosen and sent by God and 
 charged with functions that were altogether 
 unique. We shall find that this account of the 
 belief of the disciples is required by the tone and 
 substance of the early preaching, which we shall 
 proceed to examine in the next chapter. 
 
 And this fact must govern our interpretation 
 of the exclamation of St. Thomas as reported in 
 the Fourth Gospel. At the manifestation to him 
 of Jesus in the Eisen Life, St. Thomas exclaimed, 
 " My Lord and my God " (Jn 20 28 ). 
 
 It may be doubted whether we have here in the 
 words of the Greek Gospel an accurate representa- 
 tion of the words which St. Thomas uttered. He 
 bears an Aramaic name, and we may presume he 
 spoke in Aramaic. It was probably some startled 
 exclamation expressive of the deepest wonder and 
 awe : " My Lord God ! " The invocation of the 
 name of God would be an ejaeulatory address to 
 the Eternal God, who had vouchsafed to him so 
 tremendous a revelation. It would thus not 
 be addressed to the Eisen Jesus, and is not to be 
 taken as expressing a conviction, suddenly arrived 
 at, that Jesus Himself is God. This seems to be 
 the most probable account to give of the words 
 that were forced from his lips at a moment of 
 overwhelming wonder and joy. 
 
 On the other hand, however, there is no doubt 
 that St. John intends to make a different use of 
 
THE RESURRECTION 125 
 
 the expression of St. Thomas. He regards it as 
 the climax of his Gospel, and with it the Gospel, 
 as originally written, finds a fitting close : for the 
 twenty-first chapter is an afterthought, a later 
 addition. He tells us that his aim had been so to 
 write as to lead men to believe in Jesus as the 
 Christ, the Son of God (Jn 20 31 ); and we need 
 not doubt that he uses the title " Son of God " in 
 the full meaning which Christian thought in the 
 first century recognised must be attached to it. 
 He wishes to produce belief in Jesus as the 
 Eternal Son, co-essential with the Eternal Father. 
 And he reports the exclamation of St. Thomas in 
 a form which would express this tremendous truth. 
 Thus he indicates the full faith in the Eternal 
 Person of Jesus which he, together with the whole 
 Church of the Apostolic Age, had come to recognise 
 as absolutely required by the tremendous claims 
 which Jesus had made in His Ministry, and which 
 by His Eesurrection He had established. 
 
 We must believe that St. John fails to keep a 
 true historical perspective when he ascribes to 
 St. Thomas the use of an expression which would 
 naturally be taken as attributing to Jesus Divine 
 Nature as well as a Divine Mission. But, on the 
 other hand, we need not doubt that the use of the 
 title " the Lord," as applied to Jesus, dates from 
 the appearances after the Eesurrection. It is 
 uncertain whether it belongs to the true text in 
 
126 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the words ascribed by St. Matthew to the angel at 
 the tomb (Mt 28 6 ), but it occurs in the Fourth 
 Gospel in the narrative of the appearance at the 
 Sea of Galilee. The disciple " whom Jesus loved 
 saith unto Peter, It is the Lord" (Jn 21 7 ). In 
 the days of the Ministry it was usual for the 
 disciples and others to address Jesus as "Lord" 
 (icvpie), which simply has the significance of Eabbi. 
 But not till after the Eesurrection is Jesus referred 
 to as " the Lord " (o Kvpios). The title implies a 
 unique honour, which the disciples were led to 
 offer to Him by the marvellous revelation of the 
 Kisen Life. 
 
 Let us then sum up what the Eesurrection 
 taught the disciples. They beheld Jesus glorified, 
 His Body transformed and spiritualised. They 
 saw in this a wonderful exaltation by the power 
 of God, which was consummated at the Ascension 
 into heaven. 
 
 They felt that through this triumph Jesus had 
 vindicated His claims. He had made a claim to 
 the possession of a unique Mission with functions 
 transcendently great. He had made a claim to be 
 the Life-giver ; and this claim His victory over 
 death made good. And He had made the supreme 
 claim that it is given to Him to control the final 
 issues of humanity as Universal Judge. Jesus then 
 had vindicated His claims by His Eesurrection. 
 
THE RESURRECTION 127 
 
 And He is at once proclaimed as requiring 
 allegiance. He is pre-eminently " the Lord." 
 
 But still the thought of the disciples is occupied 
 with His Divine Mission and His personal dignity. 
 The question as to His essential Nature has not 
 yet arisen. The problem which the first believers 
 had to face was the question how the great truths 
 which had been revealed to them in Jesus could 
 be co-ordinated. Was there any transcendent fact 
 which they postulated, and which, when once 
 grasped, would make the separate revealed truths 
 fall into a consistent whole ? 
 
 We now have to trace the growing apprehension 
 of the Apostolic Church as it felt its way towards 
 the great consolidating truth which lies behind the 
 claims that Jesus had made. 
 
BOOK II 
 
 CHAPTEE I 
 THE EARLY PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES 
 
 We have attempted so far, by a critical examina- 
 tion and comparison of the four Gospels, to ascertain 
 the character of the Self-revelation of Jesus up 
 to the time of the Ascension, and also to estimate 
 the degree to which this Self-revelation had been 
 apprehended by the Apostles. The accuracy of 
 the conclusions at which we have arrived will 
 now be tested by our examination of the earliest 
 preaching of the Apostles themselves. For their 
 earliest preaching will be an expression of the 
 mental and spiritual state which they had reached 
 after the Ascension. They preached the gospel 
 as Jesus had delivered it to them and as they 
 apprehended it in the light of the Eesurrection. 
 They preached with heart and mind illuminated 
 by the Holy Spirit, bestowed upon them at Pente- 
 cost. So, as time went on, under the continued 
 guidance of the Holy Spirit, they learnt to see 
 9 
 
130 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 more and more deeply into the meaning of the 
 revelation of Jesus and to understand more fully 
 His Person and His Work. 
 
 But though from the very beginning the appre- 
 hension of the Apostles would thus deepen and 
 grow, the point at which the preaching started 
 would be the embodiment of that degree of under- 
 standing which had been reached on the date of 
 the Ascension. Certainly the first preaching would 
 not fall below that standard. And consequently an 
 examination of the contents of the earliest preaching 
 will show whether we have been right in limiting, 
 as we have done, the degree to which the Apostles 
 by this time had apprehended the Self-revelation 
 of Jesus. 
 
 Now we find that the central pivot upon which 
 the earliest teaching hinges is the fact of the 
 Eesurrection. The Apostles come back to this 
 fact again and again. The disciple who is to be 
 chosen to make up the number of the Twelve 
 must have this qualification, says St. Peter, that 
 he " companied with us all the time that the Lord 
 Jesus went in and went out among us, beginning 
 from the baptism of John, unto the day that He 
 was received up from us" (Ac l 22 ). And the 
 reason for possessing this qualification was that 
 he might be a witness to the fact of the Eesurrec- 
 tion. Twice in the course of his speech at 
 
EARLY PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES 131 
 
 Pentecost St. Peter recurs to the Eesurrection : 
 God raised up Jesus, " having loosed the pangs of 
 death" (Ac 2 2i ) ; "This Jesus did God raise up, 
 whereof we all are witnesses " (Ac 2 32 ). The 
 same cardinal fact is the climax of St. Peter's 
 teaching about Jesus to the people in the Temple 
 after the healing of the lame man. Here again 
 he insists upon the Eesurrection as the work of 
 God, and claims to be able to give his personal 
 testimony to the fact (Ac 3 15 ). The same state- 
 ment is reiterated in the defence before the 
 Sanhedrin (Ac 4 10 ). And after the release of 
 St. Peter and St. John, the teaching of the whole 
 company of the Twelve is thus summed up : " With 
 great power gave the Apostles their witness of 
 the Eesurrection of the Lord Jesus : and great 
 grace was upon them all " (Ac 4 33 ). Once more : 
 in the instruction of Cornelius, St. Peter leads up 
 to the fact of the Eesurrection as a work of God, 
 and speaks of the Apostles as specially chosen for 
 the work of witnessing to this truth (Ac 10 40 ). 
 
 Thus it is easy to see that in these early days 
 the Apostles pictured the Eesurrection as authen- 
 ticating the claims of Jesus. We have now to 
 ask how they regarded these claims. 
 
 Jesus was regarded as being endowed with a 
 Mission from God. St. Peter at Pentecost speaks 
 of Him as " Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of 
 God unto you by mighty works and wonders and 
 
132 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 signs, which God did by Him in the midst of 
 you" (Ac 2 22 ). And in the address after the 
 healing of the lame man, the purpose of this 
 Divine Mission is stated : " Unto you first God, 
 having raised up His Servant, sent Him to bless 
 you, in turning away every one of you from your 
 iniquities " (Ac 3 26 ). The Mission is given in 
 fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy (Ac 4 26 ), 
 and is inaugurated by a Divine anointing (Ac 4 27 ). 
 By this anointing the gift of the Holy Spirit was 
 conveyed to Jesus of Nazareth, and He was 
 endowed with power for the carrying out of His 
 work (Ac 10 38 ). The Mission will culminate in 
 the execution of the office of Universal Judge. 
 And the performance of this transcendent office 
 is ascribed, not to the essential Nature of Jesus, 
 but to the fact that God has designated Him for 
 it. He is "ordained of God to be the Judge of 
 quick and dead " (Ac 10 42 ). 
 
 The great present fact in the minds of the 
 Apostles in regard to Jesus is that He is exalted 
 to a position of unique majesty in heaven, at the 
 right hand of God. But they regard Him as 
 occupying this position not by a right inherent in 
 His Personality, but by the operation of God. He 
 is " by the right hand of God exalted " (Ac 2 33 ) ; 
 " God hath made Him both Lord and Christ " 
 (Ac 2 36 ); "The God of our fathers hath glorified 
 His Servant Jesus" (Ac 3 13 ); "He is the stoae. 
 
EARLY PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES 133 
 
 which was set at nought of you the builders, 
 which was made the head of the corner " (Ac 4 11 ) ; 
 "Him did God exalt with His right hand to be 
 a Prince and a Saviour " (Ac 5 31 ). And, further, 
 this belief in the exalted condition of Jesus is 
 confirmed by objective vision. Thus Stephen, 
 " being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly 
 into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus 
 standing on the right hand of God, and said, 
 Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son 
 of man standing on the right hand of God " 
 (Ac 7 65f -). And also to Saul the persecutor, 
 journeying on his way to Damascus, Jesus appeared 
 in dazzling glory (Ac 9 5 ). 
 
 And accordingly, to Jesus, thus believed to be 
 exalted in glory, is ascribed the continued exercise 
 of superhuman power. It is He who has sent 
 His Spirit upon the Church (Ac 2 33 ). In His 
 Name the lame man was healed by St. Peter and 
 St. John (Ac 3 6 4 10 ). The prayer of the Church 
 to God is that signs and wonders may be done 
 through the Name of His holy Servant Jesus 
 (Ac 4 30 ). St. Peter said to iEneas, " Jesus Christ 
 healeth thee: arise, and make thy bed" (Ac 9 34 ). 
 And straightway he arose, healed by the power 
 of Jesus. But, in a word, universal power and 
 supremacy is ascribed to the glorified Jesus : " He 
 is Lord of all" (Ac 10 36 ). 
 
 Through Jesus, and through Him alone, comes 
 
134 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the gift of salvation : " In none other is there 
 salvation : for neither is there any other Name 
 under heaven, that is given among men, wherein 
 we must be saved" (Ac 4 12 ). And, as part of 
 this work of salvation, there is the means of 
 forgiveness. The effect of the exaltation of Jesus 
 is to make Him " a Saviour, for to give repentance 
 to Israel, and remission of sins " (Ac 5 31 ). And 
 so " through His Name every one that believeth on 
 Him shall receive remission of sins " (Ac 1 43 ). 
 
 But the gifts that flow from the exalted Jesus 
 are not merely negative. There is not merely 
 the cleansing from sin : there is also the endow- 
 ment of life. The special feature in the preaching 
 of the Apostles which aroused the anger of the 
 Sadducees was that they " proclaimed in Jesus 
 the resurrection of the dead" (Ac 4 2 ). And the 
 central characteristic of the faith in Jesus is the 
 bestowal of the gift of life. Its messages are 
 pre-eminently words of life (Ac 5 20 ), and the 
 acceptance of the faith through repentance is 
 the pathway to life (Ac ll 18 ). 
 
 But from the outset this involves allegiance 
 to Jesus. Admission to the privileges of the 
 faith is by baptism in His Name unto remission 
 of sins (Ac 2 38 ), which implies submission to His 
 authority. The act of Baptism is also viewed from 
 a slightly different point of view as an entry into 
 a sphere within which the claims of Jesus are 
 
EARLY PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES 135 
 
 recognised. Or it is an entry into a new relation 
 to Jesus, which gives the baptized a right to 
 participate in His blessings. The disciple is 
 baptized not merely in the Name (Ac 2 s8 ), but also 
 into the Name (Ac 8 16 ) of Jesus. 
 
 We shall be able to obtain a summary view of 
 the way in which at this time the Apostles con- 
 ceived of Jesus by noticing the titles which are 
 given to Him. Of these the title which perhaps 
 most strikes our attention as characteristic of this 
 period is that of " Servant " (irais). The ultimate 
 reference is to the Servant of Jehovah as depicted 
 by the second " Isaiah " ; and the use of the title 
 implies that Jesus is thought of as fulfilling this 
 group of prophecies (Ac 3 13 - 26 4 27 - 30 ). He is the 
 holy Servant of the Lord, who carries out God's 
 will and executes His purpose. 
 
 The next title, which is given as bearing upon 
 the faith that is taught, is the title of " Christ." 
 Jesus is the Christ of God, as having been charged 
 with a Divine Mission and anointed thereto by 
 God (Ac 3 18 ). Hence this fact is regarded as 
 central in the description of the Apostles' teaching : 
 "They ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus 
 as the Christ " (Ac 5 42 ). And the burden of St. 
 Philip's preaching at Samaria is similarly described : 
 " He proclaimed unto them the Christ " (Ac 8 s ). 
 
 Jesus is " the Holy and Eighteous One " (Ac 3 U ; 
 cf. 7 s2 ), " the Prince of Life " (Ac 3 15 ), and " the 
 
136 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Son of man " (Ac 7 B6 ). The title " Son of God " 
 occurs in a passage, that is probably interpolated, 
 in the account of the meeting of St. Philip and the 
 eunuch (Ac 8 37 ) ; but we also find it as giving the 
 subject of St. Paul's earliest preaching : " Straightway 
 in the synagogue he proclaimed Jesus, that He is 
 the Son of God " (Ac 9 20 ). 
 
 The title, which the Fourth and, possibly also, 
 St. Matthew's Gospel have already brought before 
 us as given to Jesus after the Eesurrection, is of 
 constant occurrence in the early preaching of the 
 Apostles. Not only have we the combination 
 " the Lord Jesus " (Ac l 21 4 33 7 69 8 16 ), but Jesus 
 is spoken of simply as " the Lord," the One who in 
 unique degree claims allegiance. This, of course, is 
 the ordinary Jewish designation of Jehovah ; and, 
 lest there should be any doubt as to the meaning, 
 Ananias in using the title of Jesus explains whom 
 he is referring to : " The Lord hath sent me, even 
 Jesus, who appeared unto thee in the way as thou 
 earnest " (Ac 9 17 ). St. Peter definitely connects 
 the title with the exaltation of Jesus at the 
 Eesurrection : " God hath made Him both Lord 
 and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified " (Ac 2 36 ). 
 Thus the title which by Jewish usage was ap- 
 propriated to Jehovah becomes the recognised 
 designation of the exalted Jesus. This is rendered 
 the more remarkable from the fact that in this 
 early preaching the two usages exist side by side, 
 
EARLY TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES 137 
 
 without any differentiation. We have quotations 
 from the Old Testament in which " the Lord " 
 stands for Jehovah (Ac 2 20 - 21 - 26 3 22 4 26 7 49 ), and 
 similarly allusions to the Old Testament, where 
 the same usage naturally occurs (Ac 7 31- 33 ). But 
 the Apostles continue this usage even where there 
 is no Old Testament connection to compel the use 
 of the title (Ac 2 39 3 19 ). It is therefore remark- 
 able that by the side of this appropriation of the 
 title to Jehovah there should be a free and un- 
 qualified appropriation of the same title to Jesus. 
 There are many passages in which this use is 
 undoubted (Ac 9 1 - 10£E - four times, as is proved by 
 
 9 17. 27. 35. 42 . U 21 fcwice; n 23. 24) ; an( J otherg in which 
 
 it is probable (Ac 5 14 8 25 9 31 ). There are other 
 passages in which it seems impossible to say 
 whether it is God or Jesus who is indicated by 
 the title (Ac 2 47 5 9 - 19 8 22 1 2 7 - «■ 17 - 23 ). Nothing 
 surely could be more significant of the honour paid 
 by the Apostles to Jesus and of the lofty conception 
 they had of His Mission. But their view is as yet 
 naive ; and their beliefs, though strongly held, are 
 uncorrelated the one with the other. They have 
 not yet realised what is implicit in the revelation 
 which has been given to them, and which they have 
 accepted with whole-hearted enthusiasm and with 
 conviction of its truth. 
 
CHAPTEE II 
 
 THE PERIOD COVERED BY THE FIRST AND 
 SECOND MISSIONARY JOURNEYS OF ST. 
 PAUL 
 
 In the first period of Apostolic preaching which we 
 have just passed in review, the principal figure was 
 that of St. Peter. In the succeeding period our 
 records relate chiefly to the teaching of St. Paul. 
 Our authorities for the period are a section of the 
 Acts of the Apostles, the two Epistles to the 
 Thessalonians, and the Epistle of St. James. 
 
 St. Paul's conception of the Person and Work of 
 Jesus follows that of St. Peter, in that the fact 
 of the Kesurrection is made the pivot on which it 
 turns. The subject of the Kesurrection is central 
 in his presentation of the gospel. At Athens it 
 is thus described : " He preached Jesus and the 
 Eesurrection " (Ac 17 18 ). Indeed, so close was the 
 association of idea, that to the minds of his Greek 
 hearers it seemed that he was speaking of twin 
 deities, male and female, such as were common in 
 pagan mythology, Jesus and Anastasis. 
 
 138 
 
MISSIONARY JOURNEYS OF ST. PAUL 139 
 
 That such an impression as this was conveyed 
 is very significant of the high dignity which he 
 must in fact have ascribed to the Person of Jesus. 
 Throughout his spoken instructions and his epistles 
 the reference is frequent to the fact that Jesus was 
 raised from the dead by the act of God (Ac 13 33 
 17 3 - 31 , 1 Th l 10 4 14 ). 
 
 In estimating the view held by St. Paul as to 
 the Person of Jesus, important evidence is to be 
 derived from the way in which he couples together 
 the names of God and of Jesus in parallel terms. 
 Here is his first greeting to the Thessalonians : 
 " Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy, unto the Church 
 of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the 
 Lord Jesus Christ : Grace to you and peace " 
 (1 Th l 1 ). And in the opening of the Second 
 Epistle the greeting is amplified : " Paul, and 
 Silvanus, and Timothy, unto the Church of the 
 Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus 
 Christ : Grace to you and peace from God the 
 Father and the Lord Jesus Christ" (2 Th 1"-)- 
 Such phrasing as this must imply an exaltation of 
 Jesus to the very level of the Godhead. 
 
 Jesus in heaven is the Son of God (1 Th l 10 ), 
 whose return from heaven is awaited by those who 
 have accepted Him. And the title, thus used, 
 certainly implies a unique relationship. But it is 
 not clear that an eternal relationship is yet con- 
 templated. The Sonship of Jesus is thought of in 
 
140 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 connection with His Mission, and the Adoptionist 
 theory is not yet excluded. Perhaps we may say 
 that the question as to an eternal relationship had 
 not yet emerged : the thought of the Apostles was 
 as yet fixed only upon the present position of 
 exalted dignity of Jesus. 
 
 But the present exaltation of Jesus, together 
 with its future consequences, bulks large in the 
 mind of St. Paul. Jesus is thought of, in 
 company with the Father, as the guide of the 
 Christian life ; and to Him, as such, prayer is offered : 
 " May our God and Father Himself, and our Lord 
 Jesus, direct our way unto you : and the Lord make 
 you to increase and abound in love one toward 
 another, and toward all men, even as we also do 
 toward you : to the end He may stablish your hearts 
 unblameable in holiness before our God and Father, 
 at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all His saints " 
 (1 Th 3 nff -)- When we remember that in this 
 passage " the Lord " without doubt means Jesus, 
 we shall recognise how wide and how transcendent 
 is the power which is here implied as belonging to 
 and exercised by the exalted Jesus. Clearly it is 
 a power that could only be wielded by One who 
 is on a level with God. Parallel to this are the 
 prayers in the Second Epistle : " Our Lord Jesus 
 Christ Himself, and God our Father which loved 
 us and gave us eternal comfort and good hope 
 through grace, comfort your hearts and stablish 
 
MISSIONARY JOURNEYS OF ST. PAUL 141 
 
 them in every good work and word " (2 Th 2 16 '-) ; 
 " The Lord direct your hearts into the love of God, 
 and into the patience of Christ " (2 Th 3 5 ). Thus 
 the work of the Father and the work of Jesus are 
 one, as also is the gift that emanates from both. 
 It is " the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus 
 Christ" (2 Th l 12 ; cf. 1 Th 5 28 , 2 Th 3 18 ). And 
 so, through the fulfilment of the Mission of Jesus, 
 God gives effect to His will. " The will of God in 
 Christ Jesus " finds expression in the true Christian 
 life, which is a life of joy and thanksgiving and 
 constant prayer (1 Th 5 16fl -). 
 
 St. Paul recognises to the full the present power of 
 the exalted Jesus, as exercised in the world. In the 
 name of Jesus Christ the spirit of the python is cast 
 out (Ac 1 6 18 ) ; and in an hour of difficulty St. Paul 
 recognises the presence of Jesus seen in vision, and 
 receives from Him the promise that he shall be 
 kept safe under His protection (Ac 18 9 ). And 
 accordingly the Christian life of faith and love and 
 hope is lived " in our Lord Jesus Christ before our 
 God and Father " (1 Th l 3 ) ; and the power that 
 guides, directs, and restrains is " the Spirit of Jesus " 
 (Ac 16'). 
 
 The power of Jesus is such that through Him 
 salvation is given to men; and this power is 
 emphasised by the contrast between the gospel and 
 the law. " Be it known unto you, brethren," says 
 St. Paul at the Pisidian Antioch, " that through this 
 
142 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Man is proclaimed unto you remission of sins ; and 
 by Him every one that believeth is justified from 
 all things, from which ye could not be justified by 
 the law of Moses " (Ac 13 38 '-). And St. Peter con- 
 firms the line taken by St. Paul in regard to the 
 admission of Gentiles to the Church, saying, " We 
 believe that we shall be saved through the grace of 
 the Lord Jesus, in like manner as they" (Ac 15 11 ). 
 To the jailor at Philippi, St. Paul gives the promise : 
 " Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be 
 saved " (Ac 1 6 31 ). The Thessalonians are reminded 
 of "Jesus, who delivereth us from the wrath to 
 come" (1 Th l 10 ). And the same truth is ad- 
 vanced to encourage them to fight their Christian 
 battle : " For God appointed us not to wrath, but 
 unto the obtaining of salvation through our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, who died for us, that, whether we wake 
 or sleep, we should live together with Him " (1 Th 
 5 9f -). This brings us back to the truth emphasised 
 in the Fourth Gospel, that the fundamental gift of 
 Jesus is the gift of life. The offer which the 
 blaspheming Jews of the Pisidian Antioch had re- 
 jected was that of " eternal life " (Ac 3 46 ). And, on 
 the other hand, it is said of the Gentiles that " as 
 many as were ordained to eternal life believed" 
 (Ac 13 48 ). 
 
 But the doctrine in regard to the exalted Jesus, 
 which at the period we are considering bulked 
 larger than any other in the mind of St. Paul, was 
 
MISSIONARY JOURNEYS OF ST. PAUL 143 
 
 that of His return as Judge. He tells the 
 Athenians that God "has appointed a day, in the 
 which He will judge the world in righteousness 
 by the Man whom He hath ordained " ; and he 
 adds that the commission thus given by God has 
 been authenticated by the Eesurrection of Jesus 
 from the dead (Ac 17 31 ). In the Epistles to the 
 Thessalonians this doctrine is elaborated with re- 
 markable detail. The coming of the Lord Jesus 
 is looked forward to as about to put the crown of 
 completion upon St. Paul's work (1 Th 2 19 ). What- 
 ever we may think of the apparently material and 
 scenic conception which St. Paul had at this time 
 of the final Eesurrection, it is at least clear that he 
 imputes an overwhelming majesty to the exalted 
 Jesus : " This we say unto you by the word of the 
 Lord, that we that are alive, that are left unto the 
 coming of the Lord, shall in no wise precede them 
 that are fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself shall 
 descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice 
 of the archangel, and with the trump of God : and 
 the dead in Christ shall rise first : then we that 
 are alive, that are left, shall together with them be 
 caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the 
 air : and so shall we ever be with the Lord " (1 Th 
 4 16fl -). The final Eesurrection is to issue in eternal 
 companionship with Jesus. The day of the Ee- 
 surrection is called "the day of the Lord" (1 Th 
 5 2 ) ; so that a phrase used in the Old Testament of 
 
144 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Jehovah is frankly transferred by St. Paul to the 
 exalted Jesus. And the description given of it 
 shows that St. Paul has in his mind the apocalyptic 
 discourses of Jesus, as recorded subsequently in the 
 Synoptic Gospels : " The day of the Lord so cometh 
 as a thief in the night" (1 Th 5 2 - 4 ; cf. Mt 24 43 , 
 Lk 1 2 39 ). This " coming " of Jesus is the goal to 
 which life and its purposes lead, and so the prepara- 
 tion for it is the subject of St. Paul's concluding 
 prayer : " May your spirit and soul and body be 
 preserved entire, without blame at the coming of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ " (1 Th 5 23 ). 
 
 The same thought is again enlarged upon in the 
 Second Epistle, and additional teaching is then 
 introduced. The revelation of the Lord Jesus from 
 heaven will be in flaming fire ; the sentence of 
 punishment will be passed upon the ignorant and 
 upon the disobedient : this punishment will consist 
 of "eternal destruction from the presence of the 
 Lord and from the glory of His might" (2 Th 
 l 7fl -). The Lord from whose presence the dis- 
 obedient are eternally excluded is the exalted Jesus. 
 Hence, just as the reward of the righteous is the 
 eternal enjoyment of the presence of Jesus (1 Th 
 4 17 ), so the punishment of the wicked is the eternal 
 exclusion from His presence (2 Th l 9 ). Thus 
 Jesus stands in the closest connection with the 
 eternal issues of life. 
 
 One other point must be added. St. Paul indi- 
 
MISSIONARY JOURNEYS OF ST. PAUL 145 
 
 cates the circumstances under which he expected 
 " the coming." When the restraining force of 
 Eoman law should be removed, then would arise 
 a condition of moral confusion, an orgy of licence, 
 the product of that " mystery of lawlessness " which 
 was already at work (2 Th 2 6 '-) : " And then 
 shall be revealed the lawless one, whom the Lord 
 Jesus shall slay with the breath of His mouth, and 
 bring to nought by the manifestation of His coming " 
 (2 Th 2 s ). Jesus at His coming is to overthrow 
 the fountain-head of evil. 
 
 How lofty must be the conception of the Person 
 of Jesus that can make tolerable such a doctrine as 
 this ! Eternal life is the enjoyment of His presence ; 
 exclusion from Him is eternal death : the de- 
 struction of the spiritual fountain-head of evil is 
 committed to Him. Such doctrine involves a 
 Christology which must inevitably soon become 
 explicit. 
 
 Let us turn now to the Epistle of St. James, 
 which almost certainly belongs to the period we are 
 considering and may well be earlier than the First 
 Epistle to the Thessalonians. 
 
 We find that St. James has a conception of the 
 exalted Jesus which corresponds remarkably with 
 that which we have derived from the early teaching 
 of St. Paul. He too couples together "God and 
 the Lord Jesus Christ " in such a way as to show 
 
 10 
 
146 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 that he regards Jesus as exalted to the very level 
 of the Godhead (Ja l 1 ). With him Jesus is " the 
 Lord of glory '' (Ja 2 1 ). He too looks forward to 
 His return, which is at hand (Ja 5 7- 8 ). And in the 
 meantime he is conscious of the present active 
 power of Jesus in the ministrations of the Church. 
 " Is any among you sick ? " he asks. " Let him 
 call for the elders of the Church ; and let them 
 pray over him, anointing him with oil in the Name 
 of the Lord : and the prayer of faith shall save him 
 that is sick, and the Lord shall raise him up ; and 
 if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him " 
 (Ja 5 uf -). With the same remarkable ease that we 
 have already found in St. Paul's writings at this 
 period, the title " the Lord " is used indifferently by 
 St. James both of Jesus (Ja 5 r - 8 - u - 16 ) and of God 
 (3 9 5 4 - u twice) ; while in other passages the 
 reference is uncertain (Ja l 7 4 10 - 16 ). When we 
 reflect how deeply imbued is St. James with the 
 spirit of the Old Testament, in which the title " the 
 Lord" stands for the ineffable Name, we shall 
 recognise how deep is the significance of this 
 transference of the title to the exalted Jesus. 
 There can be no doubt that in the view of St. 
 James Jesus was exalted to the level of the God- 
 head. Our examination of the succeeding period 
 in the life of the Church will show a growing 
 consciousness of the transcendent truth which this 
 conviction involved. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 THE LETTERS OF THE THIRD MISSIONARY 
 JOURNEY 
 
 Our examination of the early preaching and writing 
 of St. Paul has shown that from the very beginning 
 of his ministry his whole heart and soul were 
 possessed with a transcendent conception of the 
 glorified Jesus. It is this tremendous conviction 
 which supplies the motive for all that he does, and 
 drives him forward with such fervent energy upon 
 his work as an apostle. 
 
 We come now to the succeeding period, in which 
 once again St. Paul is the central figure. As we 
 pass in review the writings of this period, which 
 extends to the close of the Third Missionary Journey, 
 we shall watch the further unfolding of the faith 
 of the gospel. The development we shall witness 
 consists in a clearer realisation of what is involved 
 in the great doctrines which have been held from 
 the beginning. For St. Paul still bases his teach- 
 ing upon the tradition which he had received (1 Co 
 II 2 - 23 15 1 ), and insists that this tradition is to 
 
 147 
 
148 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 be followed. The pivot upon which his doctrine 
 turns is still the Eesurrection of Jesus from the 
 dead. This is the great outstanding fact, which 
 both authenticates and illuminates the doctrine and 
 claims of Jesus. Hence we find St. Paul elaborat- 
 ing for the Corinthians the evidence upon which he 
 and they knew that the Eesurrection was a fact 
 (1 Co 15"). 
 
 The doctrine of the exaltation of Jesus appears 
 now in a heightened form, with growing clearness. 
 Jesus is " the Lord of glory " (1 Co 2 8 ) ; and the 
 truth thus stated is one of spiritual significance 
 requiring for its perception spiritual capacity. 
 Therefore, " No man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in 
 the Holy Ghost" (1 Co 12 3 ). We are reminded 
 of what the Gospels more than hint : that recogni- 
 tion of the Eisen Jesus was only possible through 
 the exercise of a spiritual faculty. And hence 
 confession of the Eisen Lord carries with it a saving 
 power (Eo 10 9 ). 
 
 The Eesurrection has issued in a universal rule : 
 Jesus "must reign till He hath put all enemies 
 under His feet" (1 Co 15 25 ). He is the Lord both 
 of the dead and of the living ; and, once again, this 
 sovereignty belongs to Him in virtue of His Ee- 
 surrection (Eo 14 9 ). As risen from the dead, He 
 has power to communicate life to others, for "in 
 Christ shall all be made alive " (1 Co 15 22 ) ; and by 
 His victory over death " the last Adam became a 
 
THE THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY 149 
 
 life-giving spirit" (1 Co 15 45 ). He claims to 
 exercise supremacy over the human intellect ; for 
 the Christian warfare is to issue in " bringing 
 every thought into captivity to the obedience of 
 Christ" (2 Co 10 6 ). And St. Paul is conscious 
 that Jesus, thus exalted, is exercising His power 
 on earth : the " signs and wonders " which he him- 
 self is enabled to work are a witness to this fact 
 (Eo 15 18f -). 
 
 We have already, in the earliest group of Pauline 
 letters, found clear indications of a conception of 
 the Person of Jesus which involves the coupling 
 of His name with that of the Father, and places 
 Him on a level with the Godhead. There was 
 nothing tentative in such a mode of address : it 
 was the natural expression of fundamental and 
 old-established belief. The same trait continues to 
 mark the epistles of the second period. The 
 names of Jesus Christ and God the Father are 
 linked together and are bracketed on equal terms 
 (Gal l 1 - 3 , Eo l 7 , 1 Co l 3 , 2 Co l 2 ). And the 
 latest Epistle of the group closes with the three- 
 fold benediction : " The grace of the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of 
 the Holy Ghost, be with you all" (2 Co 13 u ). 
 Such a benediction as this can imply nothing less 
 than a Divine appeal in each one of its clauses. 
 Whatever may be the essential nature of the Son, 
 about which we have yet to speak, He is clearly 
 
150 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 thought of as exalted to the level of the Godhead. 
 The conception of a threefold Divine power shown 
 by this benediction has already been implied in the 
 baptismal formula which was enunciated as the 
 outcome of the risen life of Jesus. 
 
 The truth which is implicit in this formula is 
 also explicitly stated. For Christ Jesus, who was 
 raised from the dead, is now at the right hand of 
 God (Ro 8 34 ). To those who accept the faith He 
 is " the power of God and the wisdom of God " 
 (1 Co l 24 ). This means that Christ stands for 
 God's wisdom upon earth and exercises God's power 
 among men. And it will at once be felt that such 
 a view implies a very close relation with the God- 
 head. But it should also be noted that this is 
 still connected in St. Paul's mind with the Mission 
 that has been laid upon Jesus, rather than re- 
 garded as the outcome of His essential nature. 
 The life of the believer proceeds from God (e'£ aiiTov) 
 in Christ Jesus, " who was made unto us wisdom 
 from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and 
 redemption" (1 Co l 30 ). 
 
 Let us now examine the view which is taken of 
 the Sonship of Jesus in the epistles of this group. 
 Christianity is " the faith which is in the Son of 
 God " (Gal 2 20 ). It is " the Gospel of His Son " 
 (Ro l 9 ). We are " reconciled to God through the 
 death of His Son " (Ro 5 10 ). The subject of St. 
 Paul's preaching was "the Son of God, Jesus 
 
THE THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY 151 
 
 Christ" (2 Co l 19 ). "When the fulness of the 
 time came, God sent forth His Son " (Gal 4 4 ). So 
 too we have the complementary truth that God is 
 " the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ " (Eo 1 5 6 ). 
 To the Son belongs a universal kingdom, which, 
 however, will be merged finally in that of the 
 Father (1 Co 15 28 ). His Sonship is unique, 
 Jesus belongs to God as " His own Son " (Eo 8 32 , 
 o t'Sto? vlos:). And this Sonship stands in contrast 
 to the derived sonship of believers : " Ye are all 
 sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus " (Gal 
 3 26 ). Through the Son of God we have received 
 "the adoption of sons" (Gal 4 5 ). And thus the 
 Son of God is " the Firstborn among many 
 brethren" (Eo 8 29 ). The meaning here conveyed 
 by this expression, " the Firstborn," is that He 
 already existed as Son when others through Him 
 were raised to the position of sonship. The word 
 has Old Testament associations which determine its 
 force. It indicates the supreme dignity of the 
 Sonship in question (cf. Ps 89 27 , Ex 4 22 , Jer 31 9 ). 
 The use of the term does not necessitate an Adop- 
 tionist interpretation of the Sonship of Jesus in the 
 mind of St. Paul ; and we shall in fact find that 
 such an interpretation is excluded by passages 
 which we still have to examine. 
 
 We seem, indeed, to have passed beyond the 
 Adoptionist position when we find Jesus described 
 as " the image of God " (2 Co 4 4 , eUasv tov Beov). 
 
152 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 The idea is expanded in the words that follow : 
 "We preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus as 
 Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. 
 Seeing it is God, that said, Light shall shine out of 
 darkness, who shined in our hearts, to give the 
 light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the 
 face of Jesus Christ " (2 Co 4 5f -). It is interesting 
 to notice that the Logos is frequently described by 
 Philo as " the image of God." J We have to con- 
 sider what the term elicmv implies. In the first 
 place, there is the notion of resemblance. Christ 
 is in the likeness of God. Thus in the Book of 
 Genesis man is said to have been made " after 
 God's image" (Gn l 27 , kclt elicova Oeov). And in 
 St. Paul's teaching the goal of the believer is 
 growth into "the image of Christ" (2 Co 3 18 ). 
 But there is more expressed by the phrase, as used 
 of Christ, than the mere idea of resemblance. It 
 includes the thought of representation. Christ re- 
 presents God to man. Thus " God was in Christ 
 reconciling the world unto Himself" (2 Co 5 19 ). 
 Man looking upon the face of Jesus Christ sees 
 there the glory of God. Christ's character expresses 
 the character of God ; His actions are the actions 
 of God. This indeed might only be to say that 
 Christ perfectly fulfils the Mission that had been 
 laid upon Him by God. But we cannot regard 
 such an explanation as a completely adequate 
 1 See Lightfoot, Colossians, p. 142. 
 
THE THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY 153 
 
 interpretation of the metaphor. It is bound up 
 with His Nature and Personality ; so that in the 
 manifestation of Himself there is a manifestation 
 of God. This is the idea that St. John is ex- 
 pressing when he ascribes to Jesus the words : 
 "He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father" 
 (Jn 14 9 ). 
 
 St. Paul thinks of Jesus as existing in a 
 heavenly life of glory before His entry into the 
 world. Thus His Birth is described as a sending 
 forth, which implies pre-existence : " God sent 
 forth His Son, born of a woman" (Gal 4 4 ). The 
 peculiar turn of the phrase raises the question 
 whether St. Paul has in his mind here the doctrine 
 of the Virgin Birth of Jesus. It is, as we shall 
 see, very doubtful whether the facts of the Infancy 
 of Jesus were by this time generally current in the 
 Church. But they may have come to the ears of 
 St. Paul. And therefore such an explanation of 
 the Galatian phrase is possible. And moreover, 
 we may ask what point there would be in laying 
 stress upon the birth from a woman, unless there 
 were something singular about the woman's agency 
 in the case in point. Such a phrase would be 
 natural if there were no human father concerned 
 in the Birth of Jesus ; whereas, if the Birth were 
 in the course of nature, the words would appear to 
 be redundant. The phrase is not conclusive that 
 the Birth from a Virgin was in St. Paul's mind as 
 
154 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 he wrote it, but it is at least suggestive of the 
 possibility. 
 
 St. Paul's interpretation of the rabbinic tradi- 
 tion of the rock that followed the children of Israel 
 in the wilderness also shows that he thought of 
 Christ as pre-existent : " That rock was Christ " 
 (1 Co 10 4 ). Here certainly is mysticism. But 
 however difficult the thought may be, it is clearly 
 implied that Christ had a personal existence in the 
 days of the Wanderings. 
 
 And this existence was one of glory in heaven : 
 " Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He^ 
 became poor, that ye through His poverty might 
 become rich" (2 Co 8 9 ). Thus St. Paul teaches 
 the pre-existence of Christ, not as a new doctrine, 
 but as a matter of common knowledge. It is part 
 of the settled tradition of the Church, to which he 
 is able to make his appeal in support of his 
 argument. 
 
 We have advanced yet a step farther in the 
 apprehension of the doctrine of the Person of 
 Christ when we find attributed to Him a cosmic 
 significance : " To us there is one God, the Father, 
 of whom are all things, and we unto Him ; and one 
 Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and 
 we through Him" (1 Co 8 6 ). St. Paul is stating 
 the Christian doctrine of the Godhead in opposition 
 to the polytheism of the heathen. The Father is 
 
THE THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY 155 
 
 the Fountain of all being and its final Cause. Jesus 
 Christ is the Lord, the Bearer of a supreme sove- 
 reignty. He is the power by which all being is 
 supported and through which it fulfils its purpose. 
 Through Him we attain our goal. Thus He is the 
 Divine agency in the world through which the 
 purpose of the Father is carried out. He stands 
 for the providential work of God in creation : His 
 authority is supreme. In one word, He is Divine. 
 
 Such a conclusion as this must sooner or later 
 have been arrived at. It was rendered necessary 
 by an acceptance of the claims of Jesus, which had 
 been authenticated by the Eesurrection. Such a 
 claim, for instance, as that of the office of Universal 
 Judge could be based on no lower ground. And 
 this doctrine still occupies St. Paul's mind : " God 
 shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ " 
 (Eo 2 16 ). " We must all be made manifest before 
 the judgment-seat of Christ ; that each one may 
 receive the things done in the body, according to 
 what he hath done, whether it be good or bad" 
 (2 Co 5 10 ; cf. 1 Co l 7f -). 
 
 Accordingly, the predicate " God " is actually 
 applied to Christ, who " as concerning the flesh " 
 has sprung from Israel, but yet " is over all, God 
 blessed for ever " (Eo 9 5 ). Christ is here described 
 as 0eo5. This is the only natural interpretation of 
 the passage. St. Paul has already shown himself 
 familiar with the idea of Jesus being on a level 
 
156 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 with the Godhead : he has in view here His uni- 
 versal dominion, His sovereignty " over all." And 
 the explanation of it is flashed out : He is God ! 
 This interpretation, which best fits the grammar of 
 the sentence, is also required by the whole tone of 
 thought. 
 
 No stress can be laid upon a phrase which occurs 
 in St. Luke's report of St. Paul's address to the 
 elders of Ephesus. According to the received text, 
 St. Paul bids the elders to " feed the Church of God, 
 which He purchased with His own blood " (Ac 20 28 ). 
 The reading is uncertain. Some authorities read, 
 " the Church of the Lord." But if, as seems 
 probable, the words " the Church of God " are to 
 stand, the awkwardness of the sentence suggests 
 that there is a primitive error. 1 In any event, 
 " the Church of God " must mean " the Church of 
 the Father." The words, therefore, have no bearing 
 upon our present discussion. 
 
 To sum up, we have been led to the conclusion 
 that during the period which closes with St. Paul's 
 final visit to Jerusalem his apprehension of the 
 doctrine of the Person of Christ has been pro- 
 gressively deepening. He has advanced upon 
 lines which from the beginning were rendered 
 inevitable by his acceptance of the explicit claims 
 made by Christ and by his knowledge of the 
 Eesurrection. Though in the mind of St. Paul 
 
 1 Westoott and Hort suggest rod Idlov vlou for rod Idtov. 
 
THE THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY 157 
 
 the glory of Christ is still connected with the ful- 
 filment of His Mission, yet behind the doctrine of 
 the Mission lies the more fundamental doctrine of 
 His Person, which the transcendental character 
 of the Mission itself requires. And it is im- 
 portant to notice that St. Paul, as he unfolds 
 his teaching, implies throughout that he is ap- 
 pealing to the common knowledge of the Christian 
 communities, and is but emphasising a tradition 
 which they themselves possess. 
 
CHAPTEE IV 
 THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH 
 
 At this point in our investigation it becomes 
 necessary for us to ask how far the facts related 
 in the introductory matter in the First and Third 
 Gospels were current at the time now under con- 
 sideration, and what influence they had in moulding 
 the thought and teaching of the leaders of the 
 Church. 
 
 During the time of the earthly life of Jesus, He 
 was uniformly thought of, not only by the Jews 
 who opposed Him, but also by the Apostles them- 
 selves, as the son of Joseph and Mary. Philip 
 says to Nathanael, " We have found Him, of whom 
 Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus 
 of Nazareth, the son of Joseph" (Jn l 45 ). In the 
 great discourse at Capernaum upon the Bread of 
 Life, the Jews murmur that one whose parentage, 
 as they supposed, was known should make such 
 exalted claims. " Is not this Jesus, the son of 
 Joseph, whose father and mother we know ? how 
 doth He now say, I am come down out of heaven ? " 
 
 158 
 
KNOWLEDGE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH 159 
 
 (Jn 6 42 ). A similar question seems to have been 
 asked by the people in the synagogue at Nazareth. 
 It is true that in St. Mark (Mk 6 3 ) the best 
 attested reading runs, " Is not this the carpenter, 
 the son of Mary ? " But a variation, " the son of 
 the carpenter," is also supported. When we turn 
 to the parallel passage in St. Matthew, we read, 
 " Is not this the carpenter's son ? " (Mt 1 3 65 ), and 
 St. Luke records the question in the form, " Is not 
 this Joseph's son ? " (Lk 4 23 ). We cannot doubt 
 then the original underlying tradition contained an 
 appeal to Joseph's parentage. Further, St. Luke 
 in three instances uses the plural in speaking of 
 the parents of Jesus : " The parents brought in 
 the child Jesus " (Lk 2 27 ) ; " His parents went 
 every year to Jerusalem at the Feast of the Passover " 
 (Lk 2 41 ) ; " The boy Jesus tarried behind in Jeru- 
 salem ; and His parents knew it not " (Lk 2 43 ). And 
 explicitly He gives to Joseph the title of " father " : 
 " His father and His mother were marvelling at the 
 things which were spoken concerning Him " (Lk 2 33 ). 
 In addition to this, he ascribes similar language to 
 Mary, who is made to say, " Thy father and I sought 
 Thee sorrowing " (Lk 2 48 ). There can therefore be 
 no doubt that such language as this was uniformly 
 used during the earthly life of Jesus in speaking of 
 His parentage. The paternity of Joseph was taken 
 for granted. And no question was raised as to the 
 fact being other than this. 
 
160 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 And yet the First and Third Gospels, which 
 retain these expressions that imply the paternity of 
 Joseph, also insist strongly and clearly upon the 
 supernatural Birth of Jesus without the agency of 
 a human father. And in both Gospels this is not 
 only an integral part of the narrative of the Birth 
 and Infancy, but is of fundamental importance. 
 The entire narrative depends upon it. Thus St. 
 Matthew introduces his account with words which 
 show that his purpose is to relate not merely the 
 fact of the Birth, but its transcendent circum- 
 stances : " The Birth of Jesus Christ was on this 
 wise : When His mother Mary had been betrothed 
 to Joseph, before they came together she was found 
 with child of the Holy Ghost" (Mt 1 1S ). And 
 an angel announces to Joseph the divine origin of 
 the Conception : " Fear not to take unto thee 
 Mary thy wife : for that which is conceived 
 in her is of the Holy Ghost" (Mt l 20 ). St. 
 Matthew accordingly interprets in this sense 
 the prophecy of Isaiah, and finds a fulfilment 
 of it in the Virgin Birth of Jesus: "All this 
 is come to pass, that it might be fulfilled which 
 was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, 
 saying, 
 
 Behold, the "Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring 
 
 forth a Son, 
 And they shall call His name Immanuel" (Mt 1 22( ). 
 
KNOWLEDGE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH 161 
 
 St. Matthew then points out the meaning of the 
 name thus given : " God with us." It is perhaps 
 not possible to say what he understood as conveyed 
 by this interpretation of the name. He may have 
 meant merely that God was in a special degree 
 present in Jesus, who had thus come charged with 
 a Divine Mission. But it is at least possible that 
 he understood it as implying an essential Divinity 
 of nature. 
 
 Turn now to the Third Gospel. Here again 
 we find the same fundamental assertion of the 
 miraculous Birth from a Virgin. In this case the 
 annunciation is made to the Virgin herself : " The 
 angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary : for thou hast 
 found favour with God. And behold, thou shalt 
 conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a Son, and 
 shalt call His name Jesus. He shall be great, and 
 shall be called the Son of the Most High : and the 
 Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His 
 father David : and He shall reign over the house 
 of Jacob for ever ; and of His kingdom there shall 
 be no end. And Mary said unto the angel, How 
 shall this be, seeing I know not a man ? And the 
 angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost 
 shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most 
 High shall overshadow thee : wherefore also that 
 which is to be born shall be called holy, the Son of 
 God " (Lk l 30fl -). With this tallies the description 
 of Mary when she goes up to Bethlehem for the 
 n 
 
162 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 enrolment. Joseph went up "to enrol himself 
 with Mary, who was betrothed to him, being great 
 with child " (Lk 2 5 ). 
 
 We have now to consider what degree of ad- 
 vancing knowledge in the primitive communities 
 is implied by these phenomena in the Gospels. 
 During the earthly life of Jesus, as we have seen, 
 no question was raised as to His parentage. The 
 paternity of Joseph was taken for granted. It 
 would appear further that the same was the case 
 during the first period of the life of the Church. 
 Certainly the circumstances of the Birth and 
 Infancy of Jesus formed no part of the cycle of 
 primitive preaching. The history, which formed 
 the subject of Apostolic witness, began not with the 
 Birth of Jesus, but with the baptism of John 
 (Ac l 21f -). 
 
 This, indeed, is in accordance with what we 
 should expect. The mother of Jesus would ponder 
 in secret over the transcendent miracle that had 
 been worked by the overshadowing of God. But 
 naturally she would shrink from laying bare this 
 innermost secret of her heart. For a long time 
 Joseph and Mary would necessarily hold the great 
 secret alone. A truth so intimate and so holy 
 could not be spoken to be met with mockery or 
 incredulity. Not till a fuller knowledge of Jesus 
 had been made possible by the Eesurrection could 
 such a statement have been reverently and 
 
KNOWLEDGE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH 163 
 
 sympathetically received. And therefore, not till 
 then could the secret be divulged. So long as 
 there was any doubt as to how such a communica- 
 tion would be received, it would be impossible for 
 the mother to speak of it. 
 
 But there were in the company of Mary a band 
 of women with hearts filled with love and sym- 
 pathy. And as the Church grew, in the power of 
 the Kisen Lord and in the presence of the Holy 
 Spirit, there would at last come a moment when 
 the mother would be able to tell the great fact, 
 which harmonised so well with what was then 
 being realised as to the majesty and the claims of 
 Jesus. The truth would be first whispered to one 
 in that little circle of women. And then perhaps 
 another would be told. And so the knowledge 
 would be given to a little band in immediate associa- 
 tion with the mother. Then we may suppose that to 
 one or another of the Apostles the message might 
 be carried. But it is very doubtful whether in the 
 lifetime of the mother there could be any public 
 or general knowledge of the miraculous Birth of 
 Jesus. 
 
 There was therefore a period in the primitive 
 life of the Church, perhaps a considerable period, 
 in which, when any thought was given to the 
 Birth of Jesus, the paternity of Joseph was taken 
 for granted. To this period it is probable that the 
 genealogies of the First and Third Gospels belong ; 
 
164 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 for in each case the genealogy is that of Joseph. 
 That given by St. Matthew is highly artificial, and 
 is designed to represent Jesus as the Son of 
 David, the representative of David's line, and so 
 the true King of Israel. The underlying idea 
 is Judaic and Messianic. The only natural 
 explanation of it is that the compiler regarded 
 Joseph as the father of Jesus. And the same 
 must be said of the compiler of the genealogy 
 which St. Luke adopted and perhaps modified. 
 The two genealogies are quite independent ; but the 
 fact that both belong to Joseph seems to prove 
 that they must both be pushed back to the period 
 before the knowledge of the Virgin Birth had 
 attained publicity. The phrase eu? ivofii^ero of 
 Lk 3 28 , which comes in so awkwardly, is on this 
 supposition an insertion made by St. Luke. We 
 may suppose that the only genealogy he had been 
 able to discover was a genealogy of Joseph, and he 
 thus adapts it to his purpose, bringing it into 
 harmony with the deeper knowledge which was 
 now in his possession. 
 
 Probably, also, the discordant expressions which 
 we have already noticed are to be accounted for 
 by the hypothesis that St. Luke's narratives of the 
 Birth and Infancy were drawn from several distinct 
 written sources. The expressions implying the 
 parentage of Joseph occur in the narratives of 
 the Presentation in the Temple and of the visit 
 
KNOWLEDGE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH 165 
 
 of the child Jesus to Jerusalem for the Feast of 
 the Passover (Lk 2 27- 33 4 1 - 3 - 8 ). These narratives 
 were probably derived from a written source 
 belonging to the early period in which no question 
 was raised as to the Birth of Jesus. St. Luke 
 incorporated them without removing the language 
 which the fuller knowledge showed to be misleading, 
 or at least to incur a danger of misinterpretation. 
 
 Now the actual writing of the Third Gospel is 
 probably to be dated shortly after the year 7 A.D. ; 
 but the sources used, whether documentary or 
 oral, carry us back well behind that date. The 
 preface to the Gospel shows how careful St. Luke 
 was to examine his sources. He has traced the 
 course of all things accurately from the first ; he 
 has been in personal contact with eye-witnesses, 
 from whom he has derived information ; and as a 
 result of his investigations he composed his Gospel 
 (Lk l lff- ). We may be sure, therefore, that he 
 satisfied himself as to the trustworthiness of the 
 sources upon which he drew. 
 
 Now the narratives of the Birth and Infancy 
 of Jesus have a distinct Palestinian colouring, and 
 are certainly products of early Judaic Christianity ; 
 though, as we have seen, there appear to have 
 been several sources for these narratives, belonging 
 to different, though early, dates. It is reasonable 
 to suppose that St. Luke collected much of his 
 material, including this prefatory matter, in 
 
166 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Palestine, and we may infer that it came into his 
 hands at some period during St. Paul's imprison- 
 ment at Caesarea. For the narrative of the Acts 
 seems to indicate clearly, by the continuity of the 
 " we " sections, that St. Luke spent this time in 
 Palestine or Syria. During this period, from about 
 56 a.d. to 58 A.D., he would have opportunities 
 of intercourse with various Christian communities. 
 Possibly he may have had opportunities of meeting 
 the women who had been intimately acquainted 
 with the mother of Jesus. Possibly he found the 
 Infancy narratives current in small private circles, 
 where there was a tie of special closeness with the 
 women friends of Mary. Probably the narratives 
 connected with the Infancy, as distinct from those 
 relating to the Birth of Jesus, were more widely 
 current, as there would be nothing to hinder their 
 free circulation ; and their diction points to an 
 earlier date of composition. For they seem to 
 have been composed in circles where the paternity 
 of Joseph was still taken for granted. The 
 beautiful canticles in which the thanksgivings of 
 Mary, Simeon, and Zacharias have been rendered 
 into Hebrew poetry, must belong to a very early 
 date in the primitive Palestinian Church. And 
 they presuppose a tradition, already well-established, 
 at the time when some archaic Christian poet com- 
 posed them. Thus, although St. Luke may not 
 have collected the documents which gave him his 
 
KNOWLEDGE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH 167 
 
 introductory matter till shortly before 60 A.D., 
 the form which these documents took proves that 
 they already had a long history behind them. The 
 information they contained formed no part of the 
 earliest Apostolic preaching, but it had been 
 current for long, at least in certain private circles. 
 There is, however, no positive evidence to show that 
 St. Paul had any information of the miraculous 
 Birth of Jesus during the period covered by his 
 third Missionary Journey. As we have already 
 seen, the expression in Gal 4 4 may possibly point to 
 such knowledge. But, in the absence of evidence, 
 this must remain doubtful. 
 
 Our investigation of the currency of the sources 
 upon which St. Luke drew for his introductory 
 matter will, however, make it probable that a 
 knowledge of the miraculous Birth of Jesus and 
 its attendant circumstances came to St. Paul during 
 his long imprisonment at Caesarea. During this 
 period he would have had opportunities of con- 
 versing with St. Luke, and hearing from him the 
 results of the careful investigations upon which we 
 may fairly presume that he was then engaged. 
 
 We have so far said little about the introductory 
 matter in St. Matthew's Gospel. In the First 
 Gospel we are on no such sure historical ground 
 as we are able to occupy in the Third. The actual 
 composition of the present Gospel probably took place 
 indeed somewhat earlier than did that of St. Luke ; 
 
168 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 for it shows an outlook which would be natural 
 shortly before the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., 
 whereas St. Luke's Gospel is probably to be placed 
 somewhat after that epoch-making event. But 
 whereas in the case of St. Luke we found so much 
 to throw light upon the character and history of 
 the sources which he drew upon, in the case of St. 
 Matthew we are left very much in the dark. All 
 we can say is that St. Matthew embodies traditions 
 which had at least some currency in the early 
 Palestinian Church. The traditions which he uses 
 are quite distinct from those employed by St. Luke. 
 But the two Evangelists agree emphatically in the 
 fundamental fact of the miraculous Birth. It has 
 been remarked that while St. Luke's sources tell 
 the story from the side of Mary, the First Gospel, 
 on the other hand, gives the narrative from the 
 point of view of Joseph. This divergence is quite 
 in accordance with what we might have expected ; 
 for when a narrative is handed on in private con- 
 fidence, and under such restrictions as were 
 necessarily imposed by the nature of the case, a dif- 
 ference in the point of view would be accentuated. 
 When a story is told in public, the various narrators 
 can compare notes, and are able to check one 
 another ; and the story is then more likely to take 
 a consistent shape, as in the account of the public 
 Ministry of Jesus. But a story whispered here 
 in one private circle and there in another would 
 
KNOWLEDGE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH 169 
 
 naturally be told in different places from different 
 points of view, and would be treasured up in various 
 forms. It is therefore not surprising to find that 
 St. Matthew, in tapping a different stream of 
 tradition from St. Luke, records the story in quite 
 a different shape. The significance of the fact that, 
 in spite of this, they are in fundamental agreement, 
 is all the greater. 
 
 The conclusion to which we seem to be led by 
 our investigation is that by the year 6 a.d. there was 
 as yet no general knowledge of the transcendent fact 
 of the Virgin Birth. But the tradition had been 
 handed down in private circles. It was accessible 
 to investigators who like St. Luke could win the 
 confidence of those who treasured the knowledge 
 of it, but who as yet could not bring themselves 
 to speak of it openly, though it was already set 
 down in written form. During the following 
 decade, perhaps after the death of the Virgin, the 
 knowledge must have spread more widely. Tor 
 the written documents would pass into at least 
 some limited circulation. And in the eighth 
 decade our existing Gospels gave the great revela- 
 tion to the Church at large. 
 
CHAPTEE V 
 
 THE DECADE PRECEDING THE FALL OF 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 We have now arrived at a date at which it is 
 reasonable to suppose that a knowledge of the nar- 
 ratives of the Annunciation and of the Birth and 
 Infancy of Jesus was obtaining a general currency 
 in the Church. The facts thus revealed would be 
 recognised upon reflection as being deeply congruent 
 with what was already known as to the Life and 
 Work of Jesus. They would throw light upon His 
 transcendent claims. It would be felt how com- 
 pletely they harmonised with the stupendous victory 
 of the Eesurrection and the supreme exaltation of 
 Jesus to the right hand of God. 
 
 But, beyond this, we may suppose that this 
 wondrous revelation, which had now become the 
 common property of the Church at large, would 
 seem to give the key to much that had appeared to 
 present an insoluble problem. For the problem that 
 awaited solution was this : How was it possible 
 that so transcendent a Mission could have been laid 
 
 170 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 171 
 
 upon Jesus ? How could such infinite functions 
 belong to Him as those which He had claimed ? 
 In searching for the answer to these tremen- 
 dous questions, the Church was being gradually 
 led to look behind the giving of the Mission 
 and beyond the fact of the Exaltation of Jesus, 
 and to ask, Who is this who bears this stu- 
 pendous Mission ? Who is this that has been 
 exalted by the Eesurrection to the very level of the 
 Godhead itself ? Behind the Mission is the Person 
 of Him upon whom the Mission is charged. Who 
 is He? 
 
 The Church was now able to ponder over the 
 words of the Angel of the Annunciation : " The Holy 
 Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the 
 Most High shall overshadow thee : wherefore also 
 that which is to be born shall be called holy, the 
 Son of God " (Lk l 85 ). The message told of One 
 who was indeed to enter into human nature, but 
 whose conception, effected without the interposition 
 of human father, spoke of a Being derived from God 
 Himself. Thus a hint was given which led to the 
 recognition of the great central truth of the Person 
 of Jesus, the truth which drew together and unified 
 all the scattered claims which Jesus had made and 
 all the varied fragments of Self -revelation which He 
 had given. 
 
 We shall therefore expect to find in the writings 
 of this succeeding period a clearer recognition of 
 
172 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the transcendent Personality of Christ. And we 
 shall not be disappointed. Two writers stand out 
 conspicuously at this time as having entered with 
 deep spiritual insight into the meaning of the revela- 
 tion of God in Christ. They are St. Paul and the 
 nameless writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 The letters of St. Paul with which we are now con- 
 cerned are those which belong to the first Koinan 
 captivity. 
 
 Before we examine the distinctive Christology of 
 the writings of this period, we shall do well to 
 notice how the teaching with which the earlier 
 documents have made us familiar reappears with 
 deeper emphasis and fuller expression. As an 
 example of this, we may note the language used by 
 St. Paul of the exaltation of Jesus to the right hand 
 of God as the outcome of the fulfilment of His 
 Mission. It was on account of His humiliation 
 even unto death that " God highly exalted Him, 
 and gave unto Him the name that is above every 
 name ; that in the name of Jesus every knee 
 should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth 
 and things under the earth, and that every tongue 
 should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the 
 glory of God the Father" (Ph 2 9ff -)- This does 
 but add further emphasis to the teaching that we 
 have traced from the very first days of the Gospel. 
 It lays stress upon the complete fulfilment of the 
 Mission with which Jesus had been charged by the 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 173 
 
 Father. Then, having completed His work on 
 earth, Jesus was exalted to a position of absolute 
 supremacy on a level no lower than that of the 
 Godhead itself. As Lord, He claims the fullest 
 allegiance and homage of mankind. This exaltation 
 is for the glory of the Father, inasmuch as it is the 
 outcome of the perfect fulfilment of the Mission 
 which the Father had given to Him. There is 
 nothing in this with which we have not already 
 been made familiar. 
 
 The same emphasis upon the exaltation of Jesus 
 marks the Epistle to the Ephesians. God " raised 
 Him from the dead, and made Him to sit at His right 
 hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule, and 
 authority, and power, and dominion, and every name 
 that is named, not only in this world, but also in 
 that which is to come : and He put all things 
 in subjection under His feet, and gave Him to be 
 head over all things to the Church, which is His 
 Body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all" 
 (Eph l 20fl -). It is in this Epistle that the conception 
 of the Church universal first clearly emerges ; and 
 thus occasion is given for a further definition of 
 what the supremacy of the exalted Jesus involves. 
 He is the head of the Church ; for the Church is 
 His Body, the organ of His Self-manifestation in the 
 world. But the Church as the organ of the Self- 
 manifestation of Jesus is only a particular illus- 
 tration of a yet more fundamental truth. All 
 
174 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 things are filled with Christ : all things are ex- 
 pressions of His energising power. According to 
 their capacity, the several parts of created being are 
 expressions, each in their degree, of the personal 
 activity of Christ. Such expressions are partial 
 and fragmentary. But in the Church, the whole 
 being of Christ finds embodiment and expression : 
 it is His TrXtfpw/jLa, the adequate expression of His 
 full Personality in His Self-manifestation to man- 
 kind. 
 
 Here, then, we have a clear statement of the 
 cosmic functions of Jesus. He stands in a personal 
 relation to the whole of created being. We had 
 already found a hint of this doctrine in the earlier 
 group of writings. It now occupies a more 
 prominent place in St. Paul's thought. It is 
 stated again in connection with the Ascension: 
 " He ascended far above all the heavens, that He 
 might fill all things " (Eph 4 10 ). 
 
 The work of Christ is in fulfilment of the 
 eternal purpose of God. Looking back into the 
 eternity before creation, St. Paul sees there the 
 pre-existent Christ, in whom, according to God's 
 purpose, was contained all the promise of the 
 future for the human race. God "chose us in 
 Him before the foundation of the world" (Eph l 4 ). 
 And again, looking forward to the eternity that is 
 to come, St. Paul finds in Christ the goal of all 
 Created being. In Him all scattered aims are 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 175 
 
 unified, all partial ideals are completed, and the 
 riddle of life is solved. It is the purpose of God 
 " to sum up all things in Christ " (Eph l 10 ). All 
 this, of course, is deeply mystical ; but the broad 
 fact emerges that the claims which Jesus had 
 made, and which His Eesurrection had at once 
 authenticated and illuminated, were now seen 
 more clearly than before to involve a transcendent 
 view of His Person and Nature. With this intro- 
 duction we may pass now to a detailed examina- 
 tion of the great Christological passages of these 
 epistles. 
 
 The earliest letter of the group with which we 
 are now concerned is the Epistle to the Philippians. 
 Here the Divine Nature of Jesus is taken for 
 granted, and is made the premiss of an argument : 
 " Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ 
 Jesus : who, being in the form of God, counted it 
 not a prize to be on an equality with God, but 
 emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, 
 being made in the likeness of men ; and being 
 found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, 
 becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death 
 of the cross" (Ph 2 5ff -)- Eirst let us note that 
 here the p're-existence of Christ is taken for granted 
 (vwdpywv) ; next, it is stated, as something already 
 received and known, that the pre-existent Christ 
 was " in the form of God." Now popfyr) connotes 
 that which is essential to a thing and makes it 
 
176 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 what it is. Hence ptop<f>r) deov is that which 
 characterises God, that which is distinctive of 
 Godhead. It had been long recognised that the 
 exalted Christ is on a level with the Godhead. 
 By this time the necessary deduction from this 
 doctrine was clearly seen. None could be on a 
 level with the Godhead unless there belonged to 
 Him by right the essential attributes and qualities 
 of Godhead itself. Such a one must necessarily 
 be ev pop(f>7J deov : there must be inherent in Him 
 all that is proper to true Divinity. Hence St. 
 Paul is able to state this as a premiss of his 
 argument: there belonged to the pre-existent 
 Christ a nature properly Divine; He was within 
 the Being of the Godhead, and so possessed in 
 His own right and by nature an essential equality 
 with God. This equality was not something that 
 needed to be eagerly snatched at or vehemently 
 asserted. It was His acknowledged possession. 
 And yet "He emptied Himself," He surrendered 
 what was His by right in order to take " the form 
 of a slave." The two phrases stand side by side 
 in completest contrast — p-opcpr) deov and p^op^rj 
 8ov\ov. In each case popcpi] expresses essential 
 nature, the totality of the qualities which make 
 up the idea in question. The Philippians are re- 
 minded that He who, as they knew, possessed all 
 that belongs to Godhead, so emptied Himself as 
 to take upon Himself all that belongs to slavery. 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 177 
 
 His Godhead was an original possession (inrdpxwv) ; 
 the slavery was assumed (kafitov). St. Paul's 
 primary object here was not to convey doctrinal 
 teaching, but to give a supreme illustration of 
 humility and self-effacement. For this purpose 
 he quotes the Self-emptying of Christ. But in- 
 cidentally the passage shows very clearly what 
 St. Paul's thought now was as to the Being of 
 Christ. Not only do the attributes of God belong 
 to Him, but the essential nature of the Godhead is 
 His eternal possession. 
 
 We now turn to the Christological passages in 
 the Epistle to the Colossians. St. Paul refers to 
 the Divine Sonship in an expression which shows 
 that he has in his mind an essential relation and 
 not merely an Adoptionist position. The Father, 
 he tells us, " translated us into the kingdom of the 
 Son of His love" (Col l 13 ). It is only part of 
 the truth to say that the relationship so described 
 is a unique relationship. Love is the essential 
 characteristic of the Father's being. The Son of 
 His love is one who partakes of that very essence ; 
 the Sonship is His by nature and not merely by 
 adoption. In the formalised language of a later 
 day, He is of one substance with the Father. 
 
 This appears further in the words that follow. 
 The vocabulary of the passage recalls that of the 
 Alexandrian philosophy of the Logos. Of this 
 philosophy Philo was the principal exponent ; and 
 
 12 
 
178 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the same special terms are used here as are character- 
 istic of Philo and of his school. This is far from 
 implying that the ideas conveyed by St. Paul are 
 those of Philo, or that the content of the words is 
 the same in the two writers. The knowledge and 
 insight of St. Paul find for these terms a far 
 deeper significance than they could ever have had 
 in the Alexandrian school. It is especially note- 
 worthy that while St. Paul uses the leading terms 
 which are technical of various ideas in the Alex- 
 andrian doctrines, not always consistent, of the 
 Logos, yet the central term itself is entirely absent 
 from his writings. We may suppose that he felt 
 that it could not be used without an introduction 
 of the misleading notions that had gathered 
 around it. 
 
 Christ is "the image of the invisible God" 
 (Col l 15 ). The term eliccbv 8eov is one with which 
 we have already met in the earlier group of Epistles 
 (2 Co 4*). It is frequently used by Philo in 
 connection with the Logos. Its use by St. Paul 
 means that Christ perfectly represents God, and 
 that in Christ God is manifested. The force of 
 the epithet a6paTo<s, therefore, is clear. God Him- 
 self is invisible, withdrawn from the perception of 
 sight, whether physical or spiritual. But yet He 
 is seen in Christ, by whom He is made known 
 (cf. Jn l 18 ). 
 
 While the phrase we have just been considering 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 179 
 
 has in view the Person of Christ in relation to 
 God, the next clause defines His position in regard 
 to the created universe. He is " the Firstborn of 
 all creation " (Col l 15 ). Now the term TrparoTOKO'}, 
 like elicmv Oeoii, belongs to the vocabulary of 
 Alexandrian philosophy. But it also possesses 
 Old Testament associations. Thus Jehovah says 
 of the Davidic king — 
 
 " I will make him My firstborn, 
 The highest of the kings of the earth" (Ps 89"). 
 
 This psalm received a Messianic interpretation, 
 and consequently the term wpwroToicos was con- 
 nected with the Jewish Messianic hope. It is 
 probable that the full meaning which St. Paul has 
 in his mind as he uses this word contains elements 
 drawn from both of these associations. 
 
 But the question arises, what St. Paul means to 
 imply by the idea of primogeniture in relation to 
 created being. Christ, he says, is TrpwroToicos irda^ 
 «Tio-eo)9. Now the words, even when taken by 
 themselves, do not necessarily require that Christ 
 is regarded as a created being. The use of the 
 genitive does not involve the interpretation that He 
 is thought of as belonging to the «Ticrt?, in relation 
 to which He stands as Firstborn. We may interpret 
 the phrase as meaning that He is the Firstborn 
 absolutely, not comparatively ; and that as the 
 Firstborn He stands in the relation of sovereign 
 
180 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Lord to all creation. The usage of the term 
 7r/JtoTOTo/co? shows that the prominent idea in the 
 word is that of the rights and privileges which 
 belong to the heir (cf. He l 2 , bv edqicev tcXripo- 
 vofiov TrdvTcov). 
 
 Such an interpretation of the phrase is there- 
 fore possible in this case. And the context shows 
 that this interpretation is not only possible but 
 necessary. No other meaning is admissible. For 
 the context, which explains the phrase, represents 
 Christ as standing above all creation, distinct from 
 it as well as prior to it : " In Him were all things 
 created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things 
 visible and things invisible, whether thrones or 
 dominions or principalities or powers ; all things 
 have been created through Him, and unto Him; 
 and He is before all things, and in Him all things 
 consist " (Col l 16f -). The eternal Person who 
 became Man is the source of all created being. 
 Clearly we here have to do with no philosophical 
 abstraction like the Alexandrian Logos, but with a 
 Person active and energising, and that Person Divine. 
 
 All things were created " in Him " : He is the 
 source of the life and energy of all created being. 
 All things were created " through Him " : He is 
 the instrument through whom the creative power 
 of the Father passes into action. All things were 
 created " unto Him " : He is the goal towards 
 which all creation moves (cf. Eph l 10 ). 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 181 
 
 The pre-existence of Christ is absolute, uncondi- 
 tioned, and timeless. Simply, " He is,'' avro? eanv 
 irpo trdvrwv (Col l 17 ). Before all creation He 
 exists in eternal being (cf. Jn 8 58 ). And when 
 creation came into being " in Him," " through Him," 
 and " unto Him," then it found in Him its central- 
 ising and unifying principles. It is He who gives 
 a meaning to the created universe, and makes it 
 intelligible, purposeful, and coherent. "In Him 
 all things consist " (Col l 17 , ra iravra iv axnw 
 (rvviaTijKev). 
 
 And further, Christ stands in the same relation 
 to the new spiritual creation, the Church. Just as 
 He is Head of the universe in virtue of His eternal 
 Being, so He is Head of the Church in virtue of His 
 exalted humanity. For He is " the Firstborn from 
 the dead " (Col l 18 ). And thus, in the entire realm 
 of created and new-created existence, " He has the 
 pre-eminence" (Col l 18 ). 
 
 The ground of this supreme sovereignty is found 
 in the will of G-od : " It was the good pleasure of 
 the Father that in Him should all the fulness 
 dwell" (Col l 19 ). And this phrase is further 
 explained below : " In Him dwelleth all the fulness 
 of the Godhead bodily " (Col 2 9 ). 
 
 Here, then, we have a recurrence of the term 
 which we have already seen to be reminiscent of 
 the Philonic philosophy. "The fulness of the 
 Godhead " (to ir\ypo)/i,a ttJs OeorTyroi) stands for the 
 
182 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 totality of the Divine powers and attributes. All 
 that belongs to the Godhead is found in Christ. 
 It resides in Him as in a permanent dwelling- 
 place (KaTotKrjaai, not irapoiKelv). The essential 
 characteristics of Deity in all their completeness are 
 in Christ. 1 
 
 And, further, the Divine essence belonging to the 
 Eternal Person of Christ dwelt within a bodily 
 form (a-co/AaTiicaJs) in virtue of the Incarnation. In 
 Christ's human Body it found an adequate instru- 
 ment of manifestation. 
 
 Thus St. Paul summarises the conception, which 
 he has gradually realised, of the Eternal Divine 
 Person and the earthly manifestation of Christ. 
 And accordingly he is led to say, that " in Him are 
 all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden " 
 (Col 2 s ), and that " He is the head of all princi- 
 pality and power " (Col 2 10 ). 
 
 We now pass over an interval of a few years, 
 and we come to another important witness. The 
 Epistle to the Hebrews must be dated on the eve 
 of the outbreak of the Jewish war, and is therefore 
 to be placed shortly before the year 67 a.d. Its 
 anonymous writer is clearly familiar with St. Paul, 
 but he preserves an independent mind and has a 
 different point of view. He is therefore an inde- 
 
 1 The word used is 8e6rijs, which describes the essence of Deity, 
 as opposed to 0o.6tijs, which would not imply more than a 
 participation in the qualities of Divinity. 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 183 
 
 pendent witness to the growth of apprehension by 
 the Church of the Person and "Work of Jesus. 
 
 At the opening of his treatise he plunges at once 
 into the heart of his theme. His object is to 
 depict the overwhelming value and majesty of the 
 Christian Faith as proceeding from the transcendent 
 Personality of the Eternal Son of God. The unique 
 Sonship of Him through whom the Christian 
 revelation is given is contrasted with the lower 
 office of those through whom, in many parts and 
 in many ways, the earlier dispensation had been 
 received (He l lf -). We then have a detailed 
 statement of what is implied by this Divine 
 Sonship. The Son is heir of the universe : all 
 created things came into being by His agency and 
 constitute His inheritance (He l 2 ). It is to be 
 noticed that this inheritance is in virtue of God's 
 decree (eOrjicev). But this is not a decree in time ; 
 it is an eternal decree. It lies in the eternal 
 purpose of God. The context makes it abundantly 
 clear that there is no suggestion of Adoptionism. 
 The decree has no reference to the Mission of the 
 Son, but belongs to the Son's essential Being. For 
 it goes back into timeless eternity, before the 
 making of the worlds (He l 2 ). 
 
 What, then, is the nature of the Son in the 
 view of the writer to the Hebrews ? He is the 
 effulgence of the glory of God (airavyaafia t^? 
 So^?). As the rays of light proceed from their 
 
184 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 source and make that source visible, so the Son is 
 the manifestation of the Divine attributes. In 
 Him the Father is seen. But also He is " the very 
 image of His substance " (y^apaKTrjp rr}? u7ro<n-acre<»? 
 avrov) : He possesses the Divine essence. And 
 hence He upholds all things by the word of His 
 power (He I s , <f>ipiov ra iravra ; cf. Col l 17 ), bearing 
 them forward to their goal. He is the underlying 
 force in the universe, which secures that the eternal 
 purpose of God in creation shall not fail of fulfil- 
 ment. The universe is instinct with His presence, 
 and is directed by His power. 
 
 Such is the writer's view of the essential Being 
 of the Son (&v, not yevojievo*;, v. 3 ). And then 
 follows the description of the fulfilment of the 
 Mission laid by the Father upon this Eternal Being. 
 He made purification of sins, and then sat down on 
 the right hand of the Majesty on high (v. 3 ). Thus, 
 by the triumphant issue of His Mission, He wins 
 a new honour, " having become (yevofievos) by so 
 much better than the angels, as He hath inherited 
 a more excellent Name than they" (v. 4 ). This 
 Name is that of Son, as is shown by the quotation 
 that follows : " For unto which of the angels said 
 He at any time, 
 
 Thou art My Son, 
 
 This day have I begotten Thee?" (v. 6 ). 
 
 The meaning is that He who essentially is the Son 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 185 
 
 was for a time made lower than the angels by the 
 taking of human flesh (He 2 9 ), and then as a result 
 of the Eesurrection and Ascension was raised again 
 to that position of majesty which was His by 
 right. Thus the writer brings out clearly the 
 continuity of person. The historic Christ is one 
 and the same with Him who from all eternity was 
 in the glory of the Godhead and sovereign Lord of 
 the universe; one and the same, too, with Him 
 who is now exalted at the right hand of God. He 
 is "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday and to-day, 
 yea and for ever " (He 1 3 s ). 
 
 This, then, is the transcendent doctrine which our 
 writer holds upon the subject of the Person of 
 Christ. The agreement with St. Paul is remark- 
 able. Though the metaphors and the vocabulary 
 are different, the teaching conveyed coincides com- 
 pletely. There is the same view of the Eternal 
 Person. The true Divine Nature, the Incarnation, 
 the Exaltation and cosmic functions of the Son 
 of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, are all clearly 
 enunciated. 
 
 At this point, indeed, our author, writing as he 
 does to Hebrew Christians, adds a further trait in 
 the revelation of the Son. He regards this revela- 
 tion as already set forth in all its fulness in the 
 Old Testament Scriptures. He is the " Firstborn " 
 to whom worship is due : " When He again bringeth 
 in the Firstborn into the world He saith, And let 
 
186 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 all the angels of God worship Him " (He l 6 ). The 
 title of "Firstborn" is interpreted as expressing 
 the relation of the Son to all created being. He 
 stands above and apart from creation : He is the 
 Heir of all. 
 
 We now come to a remarkable interpretation of 
 the 45th Psalm : " Of the Son He saith : 
 
 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever ; 
 
 And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of Thy 
 
 kingdom. 
 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity ; 
 Therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee 
 With the oil of gladness above Thy fellows " (He l 8t ). 
 
 Now, whatever may be the true interpretation 
 of the original Hebrew of this psalm and of the 
 Septuagint Version, it seems clear that the writer 
 of the Epistle here gives the title " God " (o deos) 
 to Christ. We must not, however, lay stress upon 
 this, for it is grammatically possible to translate the 
 verse, as Bishop Westcott prefers to do, 
 
 "God is Thy throne for ever and ever." 
 
 But in any case the quotation is designed to 
 show the unique dignity of Christ, and, apart from 
 all question of its meaning, the opening words of 
 the chapter show quite clearly that the writer 
 regards the Nature of this transcendent Person as 
 being essentially Divine. 
 
 The series of quotations in this chapter, as 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 187 
 
 interpreted by the writer of the Epistle, are evi- 
 dently designed to cover practically the whole of 
 the ground taken in the opening verses. Accord- 
 ingly, we next have a quotation which is adduced 
 to justify the assertion of the creative power of 
 the Son. Words spoken originally of Jehovah are 
 transferred to the Son : 
 
 "Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of 
 the earth, 
 And the heavens are the works of Thy hands : 
 They shall perish ; but Thou continuest : 
 And they all shall wax old as doth a garment ; 
 And as a mantle shalt Thou roll them up, 
 As a garment, and they shall be changed : 
 But Thou art the same, 
 And Thy years shall not fail " (He l 10ff ). 
 
 We need not perhaps discuss the validity of the 
 argument which is based upon this interpretation 
 of the Old Testament. For our investigation has 
 shown that the position which is here defended 
 was not arrived at by the Christian Church by 
 such arguments as are here used to support it. 
 The belief in the Godhead of the Son and in His 
 cosmic functions was the outcome of a meditation 
 upon His earthly life, and upon the claims which 
 He then made, and which He established by His 
 Eesurrection. The reference to the Scriptures of 
 the Old Testament is an afterthought. Their value 
 for us lies in the witness they bear to the exalted 
 belief held by the writer upon the subject of the 
 
188 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Eternal Person of the Son of God, who was mani- 
 fested in the world. 
 
 The distinctive point of view from which the 
 writer of this Epistle regards the work of the Son 
 of God is that of its priestly character. Jesus is 
 invested with a High Priesthood ; and this High 
 Priesthood derives its special character from the 
 fact that He who bears it is an Eternal Person. 
 We have "a great High Priest,- who hath passed 
 through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God" (He 
 4 14 ). He has " become a High Priest for ever after 
 the order of Melchizedek " (He 6 20 ). Melchizedek, 
 His prototype, is " without father, without mother, 
 without genealogy, having neither beginning of 
 days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son 
 of God " (He 7 3 ). Thus a mystic interpretation is 
 given of the silence of Scripture upon the subject 
 of the parentage of Melchizedek. It is inter- 
 preted as hinting at an eternity of being which 
 belongs to Him whom Melchizedek prefigured, 
 the Son of God. In contrast to the priests 
 after the order of Aaron, Jesus, " because He 
 abideth for ever, hath His priesthood unchange- 
 able " (He 7 24 ), He is "a Son, perfected for 
 evermore" (He 7 28 ). 
 
 For a moment we may return to St. Paul. On 
 the assumption of the authenticity of the Pastoral 
 Epistles, they belong to the closing years of his life. 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 189 
 
 They show that to the end he held the same 
 exalted view of the Person and the Work of Jesus. 
 His doctrine is based on the mystery of the Incar- 
 nation : " Without controversy great is the mystery 
 of godliness : He who was manifested in the flesh, 
 justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached 
 among the nations, believed on in the world, re- 
 ceived up in glory " (1 Ti 3 16 ). And what is " the 
 Childbearing " through which women are to be 
 saved ? Is it not the Childbearing of Mary, the 
 mother of Jesus ? Eve, the first mother, by her 
 sin brought death (1 Ti 2 14 ) ; Mary, the mother of 
 the Son of God, has brought life. This is " the 
 Childbearing" by means of which women shall be 
 saved, " if they continue in faith and love and 
 sanctification with sobriety " (1 Ti 2 15 ). 
 
 To Jesus belongs an eternal pre-existence. The 
 grace of God, by which He has called us to salva- 
 tion, " was given us in Christ Jesus before times 
 eternal, but hath now been manifested by the 
 appearing of our Saviour Christ Jesus, who abolished 
 death, and brought life and incorruption to light 
 through the gospel" (2 Ti l 9f '). The coming of 
 Jesus was the manifestation of One whose Being 
 was from before times eternal. 
 
 And He who was thus manifested, and will 
 one day appear in glory, is Himself God. He 
 is "our great God and Saviour." The faithful 
 are " looking for the blessed hope and appearing 
 
190 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ" 
 (Tit 2 13 ). 1 
 
 To this same decade belongs the genuine Epistle 
 of St. Peter. What was St. Peter's view, at this 
 time, of the Person and Nature of Jesus Christ ? 
 In the first place, he regards Him as eternally pre- 
 existent. Christ " was foreknown before the founda- 
 tion of the world, but was manifested at the end 
 of the times for your sake, who through Him are 
 believers in God, which raised Him from the dead, 
 and gave Him glory" (IP 1 2M >). Thus the pre- 
 existence of Christ leads on to His manifestation 
 in time and then to His Exaltation. He " is on 
 the right hand of God, having gone into heaven ; 
 angels and authorities and powers being made 
 subject unto Him " (1 P 3 22 ). And His is " the 
 glory and the dominion for ever and ever" (IP 
 4 U ). To Him, therefore, our allegiance is due. 
 We are to sanctify in our hearts " Christ as Lord " 
 (1 P 3 15 ). 
 
 St. Peter, therefore, regards Jesus Christ as 
 existing in heaven before all creation, and exalted 
 above all created being. It is surely reasonable to 
 suppose that He, like St. Paul and the anonymous 
 writer to the Hebrews, recognised what this tremen- 
 dous doctrine involved. Though his short letter 
 
 1 irpoadexi^voi tV iiaxaplav iXwlda Kai iiri<t>ive\.av ti)s d&Zrjs tow 
 ftcy6.\ov $eov Kal troiTTJpos ^/ifi» Xpurrov 'Iija-ov. The construction 
 of the phrase seems to require the interpretation given above. 
 
DECADE BEFORE JERUSALEM'S FALL 191 
 
 contains no formal expression of the doctrine of 
 the Divine Nature of Christ, we need not doubt 
 that he too had come to realise its truth. In no 
 other way could such language as he uses be 
 justified. 
 
 But, on the other hand, it may well have been 
 that his mind had not the logical acuteness shown 
 by the two great writers whom we have just been 
 considering. There were different levels of spiritual 
 insight among the members of the Apostolic circle. 
 Some saw farther than others into the deep things 
 of God. Some were quicker than others to per- 
 ceive what the Self-revelation of Jesus implied. 
 But all would have been eager to say from the 
 heart, though with varying fulness of meaning — 
 
 " Thou art the King of glory, O Christ. 
 Thou art the everlasting Son of the Father." 
 
CHAPTEE VI 
 THE CLOSING DECADE OF THE CENTURY 
 
 We now pass over a considerable interval of time, 
 and come to the closing decade of the first century. 
 By this time the latest of the Synoptic Gospels 
 had probably been written twenty years, and all 
 three must have already obtained a wide currency 
 throughout the Christian Church. The life of 
 the Church was already taking a more settled 
 and permanent form, especially in the older centres 
 of Christianity. A new element, derived from 
 the teaching of history, was now taking its place 
 in reflecting minds. For the sixty years of 
 Christianity provided a striking lesson. They 
 proved in a wonderful manner the continued 
 presence of the living Christ. Christ exalted in 
 heaven was still with His Church on earth. He 
 was still its inspiring power and its sovereign 
 Lord. The experience, therefore, of history was 
 an aid to the further interpretation of the Self- 
 revelation of Jesus. 
 
 We are concerned throughout the present 
 
 192 
 
CLOSING DECADE OF THE CENTURY 193 
 
 chapter with an important and ancient centre of 
 Christianity, the churches of pro-consular Asia. 
 One figure dominates the scene, that of the 
 Apostle St. John. A strong and practically un- 
 varying tradition ascribes to St. John a long 
 residence at Ephesus during the closing years of 
 his life, and we may feel sure that his unique 
 influence and personality moulded the thought of 
 the churches of Asia at this time. We adopt here 
 the position that the Fourth Gospel is essentially 
 his Gospel. How far the actual writing is his, 
 and how far it owes its literary shape to the work 
 of a disciple, it is difficult to determine. But we 
 believe that the heart of the Gospel and the 
 picture it draws come to us from St. John him- 
 self. 
 
 The other great document which belongs to this 
 period is the Apocalypse. This too is the work of 
 one whose name was John. We accept the date 
 of the Apocalypse which the earliest tradition 
 assigns to it, and place it in the closing years of 
 the reign of Domitian, in the first half of the last 
 decade of the century. 1 In point of date, therefore, 
 it is not widely separated from the Fourth Gospel ; 
 and we find it impossible to believe that both 
 Gospel and Apocalypse can have proceeded from 
 the same author. If St. John the Apostle is the 
 author of the Fourth Gospel, he surely cannot 
 1 Swete, The Apocalypse. 
 J 3 
 
194 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 have written the Apocalypse. Even if we adopt 
 the position that the actual shape of the Fourth 
 Gospel is due to an unknown disciple, but that 
 St. John himself stands close behind this disciple, 
 we still feel that there is a literary gulf between 
 the two writings which makes us say that one who 
 was closely connected with the production of the 
 Fourth Gospel could not have composed the 
 Apocalypse. We believe, therefore, that another 
 John must have been the author of the 
 Apocalypse. 
 
 But none the less there is an occurrence of 
 certain great ideas and words and phrases in the 
 Apocalypse which we feel to be an echo of the 
 teaching of St. John the Apostle. The explanation 
 is probably to be found in the fact that for some 
 time during the last quarter of the century the 
 dominant influence in the churches of Asia was 
 that of St. John the Apostle. His namesake, the 
 writer of the Apocalypse, reflects his teaching, as it 
 is natural a disciple should do. But his mind is 
 an independent one ; his point of view is that of a 
 Christian prophet. 
 
 The importance for our purpose of the Ephesian 
 witness is due to the fact that it belongs to a 
 different branch of Apostolic tradition from those 
 which we have just been considering. For the 
 theology of St. Paul and of the writer to the 
 Hebrews are the outcome of a line of tradition 
 
CLOSING DECADE OF THE CENTURY 195 
 
 which stands apart from that leading to the 
 Johannine writings. It is therefore very significant 
 to find that the Johannine school arrives at an 
 interpretation of the Nature and Person of Jesus 
 essentially the same as that to which the 
 other principal writers of the New Testament are 
 led. 
 
 We will first examine the Christology of the 
 Apocalypse. The book opens with a description 
 of a vision of the glorified Christ. The majesty 
 of His appearance is so overpowering that the Seer 
 falls at His feet as one dead (Eev l 17 ). He 
 appears in form " like unto a son of man " — that is, 
 in human nature (v. 13 ) ; but His glory is such as to 
 suggest that this does not exhaust the whole truth 
 as to His transcendent Personality : " His head 
 and His hair were white as white wool, white as 
 snow ; and His eyes were as a flame of fire ; and 
 His feet like unto burnished brass, as if it had 
 been refined in a furnace ; and His voice as the 
 voice of many waters. And He had in His right 
 hand seven stars : and out of His mouth proceeded 
 a sharp two-edged sword : and His countenance 
 was as the sun shineth in his strength " (vv. 14£E -). 
 He is supreme over the issues of life, for He holds 
 the keys of death and of Hades (v. 18 ). He is 
 sovereign Lord of the Church, for the seven stars 
 that He holds in His hand represent seven typical 
 qhurches, 
 
196 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Next let us consider His position in relation to 
 
 the Father. He is exalted to the level of the 
 
 Godhead, for He is enthroned in heaven with the 
 
 Father : " I also overcame, and sat down with My 
 
 Father in His throne" (Rev 3 21 ). The throne 
 
 of heaven is therefore " the throne of God and of 
 
 the Lamb" (Eev 22 1 - 3 ). And the characteristic 
 
 description of Him is " the Lamb which is in the 
 
 midst of the throne " (Eev 7 17 ). In accordance 
 
 with this, the names of God and of Christ are 
 
 frequently coupled together on co-equal terms. 
 
 After the war in heaven, a great voice cries, "Now 
 
 is come the salvation, and the power, and the 
 
 kingdom of our God, and the authority of His 
 
 Christ" (Eev 12 10 ). But usually in such passages 
 
 Jesus appears as " the Lamb,' - in which case He is 
 
 thought of in His mediatorial capacity. Thus the 
 
 wicked will desire to escape "from Him that 
 
 sitteth upon the throne and from the wrath of 
 
 the Lamb" (Eev 6 16 ). The multitude of the 
 
 redeemed stand " before the throne and before the 
 
 Lamb " (Eev 7 9 ). They cry, " Salvation unto our 
 
 God and unto the Lamb " (v. 10 ). The redeemed on 
 
 the Mount Zion are " the firstfruits unto God and 
 
 unto the Lamb" (Eev 14 4 ). In the heavenly 
 
 Jerusalem, "the Lord God Almighty and the 
 
 Lamb" are its temple (Eev 21 22 ). And again, 
 
 " the lamp thereof is the Lamb " (v. 23 ). Accordingly, 
 
 the Lamb is associated with God in the ascription 
 
CLOSING DECADE OF THE CENTURY 197 
 
 of worship by all creation : " Unto Him that 
 sitteth on the throne, and unto the Lamb, be 
 the blessing, and the honour, and the glory, and 
 the dominion, for ever and ever " (Eev 5 13 ). And, 
 once again, He shares with God a universal 
 sovereignty : " The kingdom of the world is 
 become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His 
 Christ : and He shall reign for ever and ever " 
 (Eev ll 16 ). 
 
 Next let us examine the powers and attributes 
 that are ascribed to the exalted Christ : He has 
 power to read the innermost thoughts of men : " I 
 am He that searcheth the reins and hearts " 
 (Eev 2 23 ). And consequently, the execution of all 
 judgment is committed to Him : " I will give unto 
 each one of you according to your works " (ib.). 
 He has power to blot out of the Book of Life the 
 names of the impenitent ; but those who overcome 
 He will confess before His Father and before the 
 angels (Kev 3 5 ). His is the final decision that 
 determines the destiny of men : there is no appeal 
 from Him. For it is He " that hath the key of 
 David, He that openeth, and none shall shut, and 
 that shutteth, and none openeth " (Eev 3 7 ). So 
 those who worship the beast shall be tormented 
 "in the presence of the Lamb" (Eev 14 10 ). And 
 only they " which are written in the Lamb's Book 
 of Life " shall be admitted to the heavenly Jerusalem 
 (Eev 21 37 ). Such attributes as these point to no 
 
198 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 lower condition than Godhead in Him to whom 
 they belong. 
 
 But if there were any doubt as to the position 
 which Jesus occupies in the mind of the Seer, all 
 such doubt would be removed by a consideration of 
 the remarkable series of titles which He receives 
 in this book. Not only is He " the Amen, the 
 faithful and true witness " (Eev 3 U ; cf. 1 9 11 ), " the 
 root and offspring of David," and " the bright and 
 morning star" (Eev 22 16 ), but also He is "the 
 Living One" (Rev l 17 ): His essential possession 
 is life. And this life is eternal ; for He is " the 
 first and the last " (Eev l 17 ), and " the beginning 
 of the creation of God " (Eev 3 14 ). And even the 
 great title " the Alpha and the Omega " is at the 
 last great climax of the book claimed by Christ 
 Himself : " Behold, I come quickly ; and My reward 
 is with Me, to render to each man according as his 
 work is. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the 
 first and the last, the beginning and the end" 
 (Eev 22 12f -). This is the title which is exclusively 
 Divine and is given to the Eternal God (Eev l 8 
 21 6 ). Thus the proof is clear that the Seer regards 
 Jesus as partaking of the Godhead in all its fulness. 
 He shares with the Father the eternity that is 
 before all time : through Him all things had their 
 beginning ; in Him all things have their goal. His 
 sovereignty is absolute : the powers of evil " shall 
 war against the Lamb, and the Lamb shall over- 
 
CLOSING DECADE OF THE CENTURY 199 
 
 come them, for He is Lord of lords, and King of 
 kings "(Rev 17"). 
 
 One title remains for consideration. The Seer 
 portrays the vision of the mighty Warrior upon 
 the white horse. His eyes are as a flame of fire, 
 and upon His head are many diadems, expressive 
 of universal sovereignty. Out of His mouth 
 proceeds a sharp sword, that with it He should 
 smite the nations. And His name is called " the 
 Word of God " (Eev 19 llfl -). 
 
 Here for the first time in the Apostolic inter- 
 pretation of the Self-revelation of Jesus we find 
 the idea of a personal Logos. The idea was con- 
 spicuously absent from the Epistle to the Colossians, 
 where we might have expected to find it. For 
 though the Christological passages in that epistle 
 make free use of a series of terms which Alexandrian 
 philosophy associated with the docrine of the Logos, 
 yet the central term itself of that philosophy 
 never appeared. It almost seemed as though it 
 was deliberately excluded, owing to a fear that, if 
 it were employed, it might appear to carry with it 
 a false conception. 
 
 In this passage of the Apocalypse, however, 
 though we have not yet reached the absolute use 
 of the title o X070?, we find the term used re- 
 latively to God. The glorified Jesus is 6 X070? tov 
 6eov. 
 
 We must examine shortly the history of the 
 
200 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 phrase. In the Old Testament it is used to express 
 a message from God spoken through a prophet 
 (1 S 9 27 , 1 K 12 22 , 1 Ch 17 3 , Pr 30 5 , Is 40 8 ). 
 In the New Testament it is used sometimes 
 with the same meaning (Mk 7 13 , Jn 10 35 ), and 
 sometimes also to express the teaching of the 
 Gospel. This latter use is frequent, but Professor 
 Swete points out that it is confined to St. Luke and 
 St. Paul. 1 
 
 In the Book of Wisdom, which emanates from 
 Alexandria and marks a stage in the AlexandriaD 
 philosophy anterior to that of Philo, " the Word of 
 God" is already personified. Its action is de- 
 scribed in a passage which has features presenting 
 a strong affinity to the Apocalyptic description of 
 the Warrior on the white horse, who wears the 
 royal diadems and comes forth with His sharp sword 
 dealing death to His enemies. 
 
 " Thine all-powerful Word leaped from heaven out of the 
 
 royal throne, 
 A stern Warrior, into the midst of the doomed land, 
 Bearing as a sharp sword Thy unfeigned commandment; 
 And standing it filled all things with death ; 
 And while it touched the heaven it trode upon the 
 
 earth" (Wis 18 15t ). 
 
 In each case the thought is of the execution 
 
 of judgment. It is difficult to believe that this 
 
 passage from the Book of Wisdom was not present 
 
 to the mind of the Seer as he penned his descrip- 
 
 1 Swete, Apocalypse, ad loc. 
 
CLOSING DECADE OF THE CENTURY 201 
 
 tion of the vision. At all events, the Word of 
 God, the revelation of God to man, is personified 
 in Jesus. In Him God is perfectly revealed. 
 
 But a deep mystery is involved in the Person- 
 ality of the central Figure of the vision. A paradox 
 in the Seer's words shows the presence of mystery. 
 For though, on the one hand, " His Name is called 
 The Word of God," yet, on the other, the Name 
 written is one " which no one knoweth but He 
 Himself" (Kev 19 12 '-). The "Name," according to 
 Hebrew usage, expresses the revelation of the 
 Person; but here we are faced by a Personality 
 which eludes our every effort to probe the fulness 
 of its meaning. For it is infinite in respect of its 
 essence : and though we may know in part, and 
 though the title given may convey to our appre- 
 hension some fragment of the truth, yet the infinite 
 unknown must always lie beyond our ken. Thus 
 the Seer hints at the Divine Nature of Him who, 
 according to our capacity to receive the revelation, 
 manifests God to us. He is the Word of God. 
 And in proportion as He is known, in that pro- 
 portion God is revealed to man. 
 
 The vision closes with a fresh assertion of the 
 claim to supreme Sovereignty : " He hath on His 
 garment and on His thigh a name written, king 
 
 OF KINGS AND LOKD OF LOEDS " (Eev 19 16 ; 
 
 cf. 17"). 
 
 Thus the Apocalypse unhesitatingly ascribes to 
 
202 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Jesus the full prerogatives of Deity. The Seer 
 does not attempt to show how the picture he draws 
 of the exalted Jesus is consistent with the mono- 
 theism which he strongly maintains. It is no 
 part of his scheme to deliver a philosophical treatise. 
 He is carried out of himself by the grandeur of his 
 conceptions and by the surpassing wonder of the 
 revelation that is vouchsafed to him. He wrestles 
 with ideas that are too great for words. The very 
 grammar of the Apocalypse is shattered in the 
 attempt to make it express the transcendent 
 thoughts that fill his soul, but which human 
 language, anthropomorphic as it is, cannot convey. 
 So he presents to us the great Figure of the Word 
 of God in the changing phantasmagoria of glorious 
 and terrific vision. To this Divine Person the 
 whole heart and soul of the Seer go out in adora- 
 tion and wonder and awe. 
 
 Who, then, is this whose Personality is so 
 tremendous, transcending thought and knowledge, 
 and who in human life has revealed God to man ? 
 St. John shall tell us this in the prologue to the 
 Fourth Gospel : 
 
 " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word 
 was with God, and the Word was God. The same 
 was in the beginning with God. All things were 
 made by Him ; and without Him was not anything 
 made that hath been made. In Him was life ; and 
 the life was the light of men. And the light shineth 
 
CLOSING DECADE OF THE CENTURY 203 
 
 in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended 
 itnot"(Jn l lfl -). 
 
 " And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among 
 us (and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only 
 begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth " 
 (Jn l u ). 
 
 Here, then, is the coping-stone set to the building 
 upon which through sixty years the Church had 
 been at work. Its task had been to unravel the 
 meaning of the Self-revelation of Jesus. The first 
 generation of Christians might live upon the 
 enthusiastic recollection of the wonderful life and 
 the gracious Figure of Jesus ; but for the per- 
 manent life of the Church it was necessary that 
 there should be an intellectual apprehension of the 
 gospel, and in particular that a clear answer should 
 be given to the question, Who is this that claims 
 the entire allegiance of man ? 
 
 Let us see what is contained in this final answer 
 that is given by St. John. Apart from the new 
 terminology, almost every element in the prologue 
 has already found explicit statement. A new 
 vehicle of expression is found in the adoption of 
 the central term of Alexandrian philosophy, though 
 in connection with a range of ideas very widely 
 distinct from the fluctuating and fanciful notions 
 that are characteristic of Philo. 
 
 Already in the Apocalypse we have found the 
 title " the Word of God " given to the exalted 
 
204 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Jesus. Here the title is absolute, " the Word." 
 It expresses the perfect manifestation of the un- 
 seen and infinite God. It is His complete revela- 
 tion. It includes the totality of God's action, 
 the full exercise of His Personality, the expression 
 of His Will. St. John's doctrine is that an infinite 
 Personal Being thus expresses God. This Personal 
 Being is eternal : He has no beginning of days. 
 His eternal Being is with God. And He Him- 
 self is God : He partakes of the Divine Nature 
 in all its fulness. He has His Being within the 
 unity of the Godhead. Since He is the mani- 
 festation of God's activity, it follows that He is 
 the agent in creation. And He holds in being 
 that which He created ; for in Him is life. As 
 the Word, who reveals God, He is the light of 
 men ; for He gives to men the true light of the 
 knowledge of God. 
 
 It was this same Eternal Word who in time 
 entered into human nature, and so gave to man 
 the supreme and final revelation of God. 
 
 This is the doctrine of St. John's prologue ; and 
 we recognise at once that it harmonises completely 
 with the doctrine to which St. Paul and the writer 
 to the Hebrews had been independently led. It 
 is, moreover, a philosophical statement of a doctrine 
 which the Apocalypse absolutely requires. Its 
 distinctiveness lies in the new terminology and in 
 its clear-cut statements. Moreover, we recognise 
 
CLOSING DECADE OF THE CENTURY 205 
 
 how wonderfully it expresses, so far as human 
 language can, the transcendental truth which alone 
 could make intelligible the claims of Jesus. The 
 Church had come to recognise that the claims 
 which Jesus had made and established required 
 that He should be thought of as Divine. Our 
 task has been to show the progressive apprehension 
 of this great truth. We have witnessed the search 
 of the great writers of the New Testament for 
 language in which to express the knowledge to 
 which at any period they had attained. And 
 finally, we have seen the adoption by St. John 
 of a term taken from a current system of philo- 
 sophy and his employment of it to express a far 
 more majestic truth than that philosophy could 
 ever have imagined. 
 
CHAPTEE VII 
 THE TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH 
 
 We have watched the gradual development to near 
 the close of the first century of the doctrine of 
 the Person of our Lord. It is now necessary to 
 look back from the conclusion which has been 
 reached, and ask whether the Catholic doctrine 
 of the Person of our Lord is justified by the 
 premisses from which it is derived. We have 
 noticed how, throughout the whole process of 
 evolution of the doctrine, appeal is always made to 
 the primitive tradition. There is at no time the 
 smallest consciousness of the enunciation of any- 
 thing new. The one aim of all the writers of 
 the New Testament is the elucidation of the faith 
 once delivered to the Apostles. 
 
 Now that we have examined the conclusion to 
 which the Church was led, let us look back to the 
 narrative of the Gospels, and ask whether the 
 claims of Jesus, as illustrated and enforced by His 
 Life and Eesurrection, require such an interpreta- 
 tion of His Person. 
 
TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH 207 
 
 First let us summarise the claims of Jesus as 
 set forth in the Synoptic Gospels. We have seen 
 that remarkable reticence characterised the whole 
 of the early period of the Ministry. Jesus during 
 this time was preparing the ground in the hearts 
 of His disciples for the reception of His spiritual 
 teaching. Hence He carefully abstained from 
 making any Messianic claim, since in doing so He 
 would have aroused expectations which were quite 
 contradictory to the spirit of His Mission. But 
 throughout this time He laid stress upon the 
 spiritual character of His Mission, and He em- 
 phasised the sacredness of this Mission, as having 
 been laid upon Him by God Himself. 
 
 In virtue of His Mission He laid claim to a 
 high authority. He claimed the right to set 
 aside the Mosaic legislation, now that its tem- 
 porary purpose was fulfilled, and to replace it by 
 a permanent code of ethics of His own. When 
 at last He accepted the title of " the Christ," 
 He insisted upon its spiritual significance. His 
 Messianic office was one which proceeded from 
 His Father in heaven, and which only a spiritual 
 faculty could enable men to apprehend. 
 
 Jesus selected as the title under which He 
 might best prepare His disciples to receive His 
 Self-revelation that of the "Son of man." We 
 have seen how, under this title, He expressed the 
 ideal and representative character of His human. 
 
208 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 nature. His is the perfection of manhood. He 
 stands for all that man should be ; and He has 
 therefore a right to speak and act with authority. 
 
 But in association with this title, though going 
 far beyond what the title in itself would convey, 
 Jesus made a series of transcendent claims con- 
 nected with the final destiny of the human race. 
 We have already analysed His eschatological dis- 
 courses. They lead up to His central and 
 tremendous claim to be the Universal Judge of 
 mankind. His office of Judge is one that will 
 be invested with the utmost glory and majesty. 
 Our examination of the authority of these sayings 
 of Jesus makes it quite clear that they belong to 
 the original tradition. We need have no hesita- 
 tion in maintaining that these claims were actually 
 made by Jesus Himself. 
 
 Now what does the office of Universal Judge 
 imply ? Let us remember that the verdict of the 
 Judge determines the eternal destiny of mankind. 
 Our most firmly held convictions make us certain 
 that the judgment must be just ; for perfect 
 justice must, we are certain, characterise God's rule 
 of the universe. But perfect justice in judgment 
 requires infinite knowledge. The Judge, who 
 passes eternal judgment upon all mankind, must 
 have perfect knowledge of the innermost secrets 
 of all those who stand at the bar to be judged. 
 Must we not say that no mind lower than the 
 
TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH 209 
 
 infinite Mind of God could possibly possess the 
 capacity required for such a work as this ? The 
 universal Judge of mankind must have His Being 
 within the Godhead. The eschatological discourses 
 of Jesus inevitably lead to the conclusion that He 
 who makes such transcendent assertions is in effect 
 claiming to be God. It is clear that these dis- 
 courses made a deep impression upon the disciples, 
 and filled a large place in the early thought of 
 the Church. It is not surprising, therefore, that 
 when the Apostles sought to analyse the meaning 
 of the wonderful Personality which had been in 
 their midst, they should have interpreted the Nature 
 of Jesus in the way they did. 
 
 Let us now approach the question from another 
 point of view, that of the Divine Sonship. We 
 have seen that certainly from the time of His 
 Baptism Jesus was conscious of standing in a 
 unique relation of Sonship to God. In the later 
 days of the Ministry, after the minds of the 
 Apostles had been sufficiently trained in spiritual 
 things to enable them to accept such teaching, this 
 doctrine of the Divine Sonship occupied an in- 
 creasingly important place in the teaching of 
 Jesus. It is abundantly clear that the relation 
 of the Son to the Father is interpreted in such a 
 way as to postulate a Nature far above mere 
 humanity. Not only does the name of the Son 
 appear in an ascending sequence — the angels, the 
 14 
 
210 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 Son, the Father — which places Him in rank above 
 the angels, but also in the central Synoptic passage 
 the Son is spoken of in such a way as can only 
 be reasonably explained on the ground of a com- 
 munity of nature with the Father.. 
 
 We have, indeed, seen reason to believe that 
 Jesus did not actually during the Ministry make 
 any explicit claim to be Divine. But the point 
 we wish now to emphasise is that only on the 
 supposition that His Being is eternal and within 
 the Godhead, can any adequate meaning be given 
 to His words. If it were impossible to accept a 
 belief in the Godhead of Jesus, it would be necessary 
 for us to explain away much that He said. But, 
 on the other hand, this great belief, which is 
 indicated by so many lines of thought and was 
 accepted by those who knew Him in His earthly 
 manifestation, draws everything together and makes 
 His entire Work and Teaching fall into a consistent 
 whole. 
 
 Those who have accepted the standpoint of 
 Catholic Christianity will attach immense weight 
 and value to the Fourth Gospel. They will feel 
 how wonderfully true it is to the innermost spirit 
 of their faith. Begarding the Gospel as an inter- 
 pretation of history, they will recognise that the 
 interpretation is true. St. John, looking back 
 over the vista of the years, has seen the glory of 
 God in the face of Jesus Christ. He has seen it 
 
TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH 211 
 
 because it is there. Though to outward eyes the 
 glory of the Eternal Son was veiled in the taking 
 of human flesh, yet to the spiritual insight of 
 St. John the life of Jesus was the manifestation 
 of the Word, the Eevelation of the Father. 
 
 Such is the value of the Fourth Gospel to those 
 who have already learnt to accept the Catholic 
 faith. But it has also an evidential value for 
 those who are inquiring whether the Catholic 
 interpretation of the Person of Jesus is warranted 
 by the evidence. For in a very real sense the 
 Fourth Gospel is an historical document, and, as 
 such, it will provide us with additional material 
 for arriving at the answer to the question whether 
 the Apostles were in fact justified in coming to 
 their conclusion as to the Deity of Jesus. The 
 precise weight to be attached to the Fourth Gospel 
 from this point of view is difficult to determine, 
 and different minds will allow very varying 
 degrees of weight to it. The question is how far 
 the Gospel is historical in the literal sense of the 
 word. What allowance must we make for the 
 subjective element ? How far has interpretation 
 of the words of Jesus gone beyond what the 
 words themselves would justify ? 
 
 The view we have taken is that the Gospel is 
 substantially the work of the Apostle St. John, 
 who was the companion of Jesus throughout the 
 Ministry, and who was admitted more closely than 
 
212 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 the others to the innermost heart of his Master. 
 It will follow from this that the Teaching of 
 Jesus as given in this Gospel must be very largely 
 true to fact. More than this we do not postulate. 
 But in broad outline the claims represented in 
 the Gospel must be those which Jesus actually 
 made. Take, for instance, the recurring claim of 
 Jesus to be the source of life : the gift of eternal 
 life is from Him ; a living union with Him and 
 an active participation in His inmost Being is 
 necessary for spiritual life. 
 
 This teaching is fundamental in the Fourth 
 Gospel. It is inexplicable except on the supposi- 
 tion that Jesus partakes of the Godhead. It was 
 inevitable that sooner or later such teaching 
 would be recognised as involving the transcendent 
 claim acknowledged in the Catholic faith. And 
 our present point is that, however strong we may 
 think the subjective element in the Fourth Gospel, 
 we yet cannot reject the broad fact that claims 
 such as these were actually made by Jesus in 
 the Ministry. Jesus indeed made no explicit 
 statement to the effect that He is Divine, but 
 He did make assertions such as these which we 
 have quoted. And when reflection had had time 
 to work upon these sayings of Jesus, the Church 
 came unanimously to the conclusion that they 
 involved the belief that He is God. We regard 
 the Fourth Gospel, therefore, as corroborating our 
 
TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH 213 
 
 contention that Jesus left the disciples in possession 
 of a body of teaching which made necessary the 
 Catholic interpretation of His Nature and Person. 
 
 But such an interpretation was not even guessed 
 at before the Eesurrection. This tremendous event 
 lifted the thoughts of the disciples to a new plane. 
 They recognised it as a spiritual fact with a 
 spiritual message. They felt that Jesus was 
 raised now into a new sphere of being. They 
 beheld Him transfigured, spiritualised, glorified. 
 And, above all, their whole subsequent attitude 
 to the Eesurrection shows that they regarded it 
 as a vindication of the claims of Jesus. It had 
 the double effect of helping them to see more 
 clearly what those claims involved and also of 
 assuring them that the claims were true. 
 
 Throughout the years that followed the 
 Ascension, the Person of the exalted and 
 glorified Jesus occupied always the central place 
 in the thoughts of the Apostles. It was their 
 deepest conviction that He who had companied 
 with them during His earthly life was now 
 exalted to the right hand of God. This con- 
 viction was based on the certainty of personal 
 experience; for they had seen Him in the glory 
 of His Eisen Life. 
 
 The important point is that these men, who 
 first preached the Exaltation of Jesus, were those 
 very men who had known Him under the con- 
 
214 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 ditions of earthly life. The whole range of 
 experience in respeGt of the Humiliation and 
 Exaltation of Jesus belonged to one and the same 
 set of men. 
 
 Such were the witnesses who were able to hand 
 on to the great theologians of the Apostolic band, 
 like St. Paul and the writer to the Hebrews, the 
 complete data upon which the Church had to 
 work in estimating the significance of the Person 
 and Nature of Jesus. It is of great evidential 
 importance that the complete data were originally 
 derived from the personal and first-hand knowledge 
 of one set of minds : that the men who witnessed 
 the Eisen Life, and who claimed to experience the 
 presence of the glorified Jesus, were the same 
 men as they who had witnessed the earthly life of 
 the Master and listened to the discourses in which 
 He set forth His claims. 
 
 St. Paul indeed himself states that he had seen 
 the Lord, who appeared to him in vision. But 
 the validity of St. Paul's witness does not depend 
 upon this vision. It is based upon the concrete 
 fact that the data upon which he worked had 
 been handed down to him by the Apostles them- 
 selves out of the fulness of their own personal 
 experience and knowledge at a time when no 
 false accretion of tradition could have come in. 
 The Apostles drew for St. Paul their picture of 
 Jesus, and he gradually learnt to recognise its 
 
TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH 215 
 
 significance. Then at last he was able to write 
 beneath the portrait that had been handed down 
 to him its title : " The Image of the Invisible 
 God." 
 
 But it was not only by pupils of the eye- 
 witnesses of the Ministry and Eisen Life of Jesus 
 that the meaning of the data was worked out. 
 One at least of the Apostles was himself a 
 theologian. We have accepted the belief that 
 the Fourth Gospel is substantially the work of 
 St. John. On this supposition it gives us the 
 interpretation of the Person of Jesus at which, 
 after long years of profound meditation, an 
 Apostle had arrived. The same data were before 
 him as were present to the minds of the other 
 Apostles. He had witnessed the mighty works 
 of the Ministry ; he had listened to the sayings of 
 Jesus ; he had seen the grave-clothes lying in the 
 untenanted grave ; he had witnessed the un- 
 exampled manifestations of the Eisen Life ; he 
 had been present at the Ascension into heaven. 
 Now he had brought to bear upon this tremendous 
 experience all the power of his deeply spiritual 
 nature. And he too had arrived at an interpreta- 
 tion of its meaning. He whom their hands had 
 handled was the Word made flesh. And the 
 Word was God. 
 
 With one consent the great Christian teachers 
 of the Apostolic age arrive at one and the same 
 
216 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 conclusion. They express themselves indeed in 
 different language. They employ different meta- 
 phors to convey the transcendental doctrine that 
 fills their minds. They do not all see equally 
 clearly the logical outcome of the truths they 
 teach. Some penetrate more deeply than others 
 into the profound truths of the revelation that 
 is in Jesus. But all alike present a doctrine 
 which implicitly or explicitly teaches that Jesus 
 Christ is God. 
 
 Now, in asking whether the Apostolic teachers 
 were justified upon the data in arriving at this 
 conclusion, we must remember that there is pre- 
 sented to us only a small portion of the data that 
 were in their possession. The Apostles saw the Life 
 of Jesus : we only read about it. Our Gospels are 
 fragments; the earliest Gospel, as we have it, is 
 not even complete. The Fourth Gospel, again, is 
 not simple history, but history interpreted. As 
 we read it we cannot say at once, " These were 
 the data upon which the Apostolic band proceeded 
 in arriving at their conclusion as to the Person of 
 Christ." What we can say as to the Fourth Gospel 
 is this : " This is the interpretation of the data at 
 which a deeply spiritual eye-witness arrived after 
 long and sympathetic thought. Is it not likely that 
 his interpretation is true ? " 
 
 We shall not do justice to the strength of the 
 Christian position if we admit that the evidence 
 
TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH 217 
 
 presented to us by even the fragmentary records 
 that have come down to us of the Lord's Life and 
 Kesurrection is insufficient to warrant the Catholic 
 interpretation of His Person. But even if this 
 were so, we should still have the decisive fact that 
 the Apostolic band, with the full data before them 
 fresh in their minds, and grounded on eye-witnesses, 
 with one consent arrived at the doctrine of the 
 Divinity of Jesus. 
 
 Our argument, moreover, will have shown that 
 we decline to admit that the fragmentary data 
 handed down to us, and based on assured historical 
 certainty, are insufficient to support the Catholic 
 conclusion. On the contrary, we maintain that the 
 claims of Jesus, which historically are undoubted, 
 positively demand this interpretation of His Person. 
 These claims are unintelligible and impossible unless 
 Jesus Christ is God. 
 
 The conclusion we have come to has been based 
 upon a strict historical examination of the facts 
 underlying the New Testament narrative. And for 
 an inquirer who stands outside the Christian faith, 
 the evidence he has to consider will be such as we 
 have indicated. The Christian believer, however, 
 will at once feel that we have covered but a small 
 part of the ground. He has yet other reasons for 
 his faith, which to the world must be unintelligible. 
 We have said nothing, for instance, as to the work 
 of the Holy Spirit, whose Mission it is to guide men 
 
218 SELF-REVELATION OF OUR LORD 
 
 into all the truth. The Christian believer knows 
 with the certainty of personal experience that the 
 Holy Spirit does indeed so work. He recognises 
 the providential guidance of the Holy Spirit through 
 all the long centuries of the history of the Church. 
 And in particular, he is certain that the Apostles 
 were not mistaken when they believed that the 
 Pentecostal gift had given them a permanent en- 
 dowment, and that the Holy Spirit of God was 
 guiding and inspiring them in their presentation 
 of the gospel. 
 
 Through nineteen centuries it has been the 
 constant belief of Christendom that the Eisen and 
 Glorified Christ has been present in His Church. 
 In the power of this faith, a new type of character 
 has grown up, showing a spirit of love and self- 
 sacrifice which, wherever its influence has been 
 felt, has transformed mankind. It is a power 
 which is not of this world, and it is based upon 
 sanctions which the world does not recognise. But 
 multitudes of men and women in all ages of the 
 Church's existence have lived lives of complete 
 self-denial and joyful endurance of suffering in the 
 power of their faith, and have laid down their lives 
 in glad readiness for the sake of the Master in 
 whom they have believed. This indeed may give, 
 even to those who stand outside the faith of 
 Christendom, food for thought. But to those who 
 have learnt to believe in Jesus, it will be the 
 
TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH 219 
 
 perpetual corroboration of their most holy faith. 
 They will feel that it is incredible that the saints 
 and heroes of Christendom, men and women who 
 are the very salt of the earth, should have been 
 one and all the deluded victims of a dream. To 
 them the exalted Christ was a present reality. 
 His power over their hearts and lives was to them 
 the surest proof of the verity of the faith. 
 
 Such considerations as these, however, need not 
 now be elaborated, for they lie outside the field 
 of our present study. Our aim has been to examine 
 the Self-revelation of Jesus in His historic mani- 
 festation in the flesh, so far as our records enable 
 us to reproduce it, and then to trace the process 
 by which the Apostolic band gradually unravelled 
 His meaning. We have seen how they were led 
 to ask who this was who made so vast a claim 
 upon their hearts and understanding and lives. 
 We have examined the claims He made, we have 
 seen how by His Eesurrection He vindicated the 
 truth of His words ; and as the outcome of our 
 study we maintain that in no other way could the 
 great central question as to the Nature and Person 
 of Jesus have been answered than by the confession 
 that is enshrined in the Catholic faith. 
 
INDEX 
 
 Adam, the last, Jesus as, 149. 
 Adoptionism, not inconsistent 
 
 with the first preaching, 140 ; 
 
 excluded hy subsequent teach- 
 ing, 151, 177, 183. 
 Alpha and Omega, the, as title 
 
 of Christ, 198. 
 Apocalypse, the, date and 
 
 authorship of, 193 f. ; Christ- 
 
 ology of, 195. 
 Apostles, the, limitation of 
 
 apprehension of, 119 ; early 
 
 preaching of, 129 ff. 
 Asia, proconsular, churches of, 
 
 193. 
 Atonement, the, inference drawn 
 
 from, 59. 
 Authority, claim of, by Jesus, 
 
 31, 207. 
 
 Baptism, meaning of, 134 ; of 
 Jesus, 4, 61 ; formula of, 118, 
 150. 
 
 Canticles, the, in the Third 
 Gospel, 166. 
 
 Catholic interpretation of Per- 
 son of Christ, justification of 
 the, 217. 
 
 Christ, the ; significance of the 
 title, 135. 
 
 Christology, in earliest days of 
 the Church, 132 ; in Epistle 
 to the Philippians, 175 f. ; in 
 Epistle to the Colossians, 177 ; 
 in Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 184 ; in the Apocalypse, 195 ; 
 in the Fourth Gospel, 202. 
 
 Chronology, in the Synoptic 
 Gospels, 23 f. 
 
 Church, the, authority of, 41 f. ; 
 Divine commission given to, 
 123 ; the universality of, 173 ; 
 in relation to Christ, 173, 181. 
 
 Colossians, Epistle to the, 177ff. 
 
 Coming of the Son of man, sign 
 of the, 54. 
 
 Commission, Divine, claimed 
 by Jesus, 50. 
 
 Confession of Jesus, by the 
 demoniacs, 28 ; by St. Peter, 
 37, 81 ; by St. Thomas, 124. 
 
 Corinthians, Epistleto the, 147 ff. 
 
 Cosmic significance of the Per- 
 son of Christ, 154, 174, 184 f. 
 
 Creation, Christ in relation to, 
 179 f. 
 
 Daniel, Book of, eschatological 
 significance of, 52. 
 
 David, Son of, as title of Mes- 
 siah ; in Old Testament, 44 
 in Psalms of Solomon, 45 ff. 
 as accorded to Jesus, 48 f. 
 inadequacy of the title, 49 
 use of the title antedated by 
 St. Matthew, 35. 
 
 Day of the Lord, the, 144. 
 
 Dedication, the Feast of, teach- 
 ing at, 102. 
 
 Demoniacs, testimony of, to 
 Jesus, 28. 
 
 hIk&v 9eo0, meaning of, 152, 178. 
 Enoch, Book of, 15. 
 Ephesians, Epistle to the, 
 
 173 ff. 
 Ephesus, address to the Elders 
 
 of, 156. 
 Eschatology, 25, 29, 51, 143 f., 
 
 209. 
 Exaltation of Jesus to the level 
 
 of the Godhead, 139, 145, 
 
 149, 172 f. 
 Ezekiel, Book of, 12. 
 
 9e6s, Christ described as, 155, 
 186, 189. 
 
 .";■ i 
 
222 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Fatherhood of God, in relation 
 to the Son, 29, 51, 61 f., 
 65 ff., 71, 85, 101, 107, 139, 
 151, 177, 183 ff., 209. 
 
 First Gospel, the, character of 
 narratives of the Infancy in, 
 168. 
 
 Firstborn, Christasthe, 179,185. 
 
 Forgiveness of sins, power of, 
 claimed by Jesus, 21, 142, 
 146 ; committed to the 
 Church, 123. 
 
 Fourth Gospel, the ; character 
 of, 77 ; early testimony to 
 Jesus in, 82 ; narrative of, 
 compared with the Synop- 
 tists, 82 ; place of St. Peter's 
 confession in the narrative of, 
 81 ; essential truth of, 79, 
 210 ; loss of historical per- 
 spective in, 79, 96 ; sub- 
 jective element in, 110, 211 ; 
 Christology of, 215. 
 
 Galatians, Epistle to the, 
 149 ff. 
 
 Genealogies, the, in the Gos- 
 pels, 164. 
 
 Godhead of Jesus ; in the 
 Epistle to the Romans, 155 ; 
 in Epistle to Philippians, 
 176 ; in Epistle to the Colos- 
 sians, 177 ; in Epistle to the 
 Hebrews, 184 ; in the Pas- 
 toral Epistles, 189 ; in the 
 Apocalypse, 195 ; in the Pro- 
 logue of the Fourth Gospel, 
 204 ; the doctrine of, how 
 arrived at, 187 ; required by 
 the teaching of Jesus in the 
 Fourth Gospel, 212 ; justified 
 by the available evidence, 
 217 ; by the witness of the 
 Church, 218 ; meaning of the 
 exclamation of St. Thomas, 
 124. 
 
 Hebrews, Epistle to the, 182 f. 
 Historical perspective, lack of, 
 in the Fourth Gospel, 6, 96. 
 
 Holy Spirit, the, blasphemy 
 against, 57 ; the Mission of, 
 108, 217. 
 
 Image of God, Jesus as the, 
 152. 
 
 Immanuel, significance of the 
 title, 161. 
 
 Incarnation, the, doctrine of, 
 in the Pastoral Epistles, 189. 
 
 Infancy, the, narratives of, 160, 
 167 ; source of the narra- 
 tives, 165. 
 
 James, St. , Epistle of, 145 f. 
 
 Jerusalem, fall of, 53. 
 
 John, St., influence of, 193 ff. 
 
 John, St., the Baptist, testi- 
 mony of, 3 ; his view of the 
 work of the Messiah, 8 ; his 
 recognition of Jesus, 8. 
 
 Jonah, the sign of, 23. 
 
 Judaism, Jesus in relation to, 
 64. 
 
 Judge, supreme ; Jesus as, 53 ff. , 
 64, 74, 132, 143, 155, 197, 
 208 ; inference drawn from 
 the position of Jesus as, 59. 
 
 King, Jesus as, 41, 64, 148, 
 
 181, 195, 201. 
 Kingdom of God, the, spiritual 
 
 character of, 64. 
 
 Lamb, Christ as the, 195. 
 Law, the, in relation to Jesus, 
 
 31. 
 Lazarus, the raising of, 104. 
 Life, inherent in the Son, 90 ; 
 
 bestowed by the Son, 92, 
 
 103 f., 142. 
 Limitations marking the 
 
 earthly life of Jesus, 75. 
 Logos doctrine, the, of Philo, 
 
 152, 177 ; of the Fourth 
 
 Gospel, 202 ff. 
 Lord, the, Jesus as, 33, 125, 
 
 136, 140, 146, 148. 
 Luke, St., sources of informa- 
 tion open to, 166. 
 
INDEX 
 
 223 
 
 Mark, St., lost ending of Gospel 
 of, 114. 
 
 Melchisedek, mystical interpre- 
 tation of, 188. 
 
 Messiah, the ; Jesus recognised 
 as, by St. John the Baptist, 
 8 ; the disciples' view of, 9 ; 
 office of, not at first claimed 
 by Jesus, 16, 35 ; St. Peter's 
 recognition of Jesus as, 37 ; 
 regarded as the Son of David, 
 44 ; general view in regard 
 to, 47 ; kingship of, 50 ; 
 office of, ascribed to Jesus at 
 opening of the Fourth Gospel, 
 83 ; Jesus announcing Him- 
 self as, to woman of Samaria, 
 87. 
 
 Mission of the Apostles, 117. 
 
 Mission of Jesus, the, concep- 
 tion of, 18, 43, 103, 105 ff., 
 112, 132 ; vindicated by the 
 Eesurrection, 126. 
 
 popcp-fi, meaning of, 175. 
 
 Nameof Jesus, powerof the, 133. 
 
 Nature, essential, of Jesus, re- 
 serve as to, 59, 75, 91, 97, 
 108, 111, 127 ; revealed by 
 the Resurrection, 93 ; recog- 
 nised as Divine, 155, 177. 
 
 Nicodemus, teaching given to, 
 84. 
 
 Paraclete, mission of the, 108, 
 217. 
 
 Parentage of Jesus, view of, in 
 the Ministry, 159, 162. 
 
 Pastoral Epistles, the, Christ- 
 ology of, 188 f. 
 
 Personality of Jesus, effect of, 
 36 ; eschatological signifi- 
 cance of, 51 ; as revealed in 
 the Ministry, 74 ; as revealed 
 by the Annunciation, 171 ; 
 as finally interpreted, 155, 
 176 f., 184, 189, 195, 204. 
 
 Peter, St., confession of, 36 f., 
 81 ; his early testimony to 
 Jesus, 132 ; Epistle of, 190. 
 
 Philippians, Epistle to the, 
 
 172 ff. 
 Philo, Logos doctrine of, 152, 
 
 177 ; philosophy of, 181. 
 Pre-existence of Jesus, 85, 99 f., 
 
 109, 153 f., 174, 181, 189, 
 
 190. 
 Priesthood of Jesus, 188. 
 Primogeniture, idea of, 179. 
 Prologue of Fourth Gospel, 
 
 202 ff. 
 Prophecy, fulfilment of, in Jesus, 
 
 7, 18, 32, 40. 
 TrptirrdroKos, interpretation of, 
 
 179. 
 Psalms, the Christological in- 
 terpretation of, 188 f. 
 
 Reserve of Jesus in teaching, 
 43, 61, 207, 210. 
 
 Resurrection, the, of Jesus, 
 character of, 114 ff. ; as 
 authenticating His claims, 
 116, 213 ; prominent in the 
 preaching of the Apostles, 
 130 ; in the teaching of St. 
 Paul, 138. 
 
 Resurrection, the final, Jesus in 
 relation to, 143. 
 
 Rock, the, Rabbinic interpreta- 
 tion of, 154. 
 
 Romans, Epistle to the, 149 ff. 
 
 Sabbath, attitude of Jesus to- 
 wards the, 19, 88. 
 
 Salvation, Jesus the source of, 
 141. 
 
 Samaria, woman of, teaching 
 given to, 87. 
 
 Self-consciousness of Jesus, 60. 
 
 Self-emptying of Jesus, 176. 
 
 Servant of God, the, Jesus as, 
 132, 135. 
 
 Sins, forgiveness of, power of, 
 claimed by Jesus, 21, 142, 
 146 ; committed to the 
 Church, 123. 
 
 Solomon, Psalms of, 45 ff. 
 
 Sonof David, as title of Messiah ; 
 in Old Testament, 44 ; in 
 
224 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Psalms of Solomon, 45 ff. ; as 
 accorded to Jesus, 48 f. ; in- 
 adequacy of the title, 49 ; use 
 of the title antedated by St. 
 Matthew, 35. 
 
 Son of God ; title not used of 
 Jesus in early period of the 
 Ministry, 26 ; in the narra- 
 tive of the Temptation, 27, 
 61 ; as used by demoniacs, 
 28 ; as used in moment of 
 fear, 30 ; usage of Old Testa- 
 ment, 40 ; as used by St. 
 Peter, 41 ; as used at the 
 Baptism of Jesus, 61 ; as 
 used in the Passion, 72 ; as 
 interpreted by Jesus, 102 ; 
 as used in the Acts, 136, 139. 
 
 Son of man ; meaning of the 
 title, 14, 26 ; the title not 
 Messianic, 16, 24 ; chosen by 
 Jesus, 10, 207 ; theory dis- 
 missed that the title was 
 never used by Jesus, 13 ; the 
 title associated with a claim 
 to authority, 19 ff.; eschato- 
 logical significance of the 
 title, 24, 51, 53 ff. ; sin 
 against the, 57 ; usage of 
 the term in the Psalms, 11; 
 in Ezekiel, 12 ; in Daniel, 
 52 ; in Enoch, 14. 
 
 Sonship, Divine, of Jesus ; not 
 taught in first period of the 
 Ministry, 31; asserted in the 
 second period of the Ministry, 
 51, 61 f. ; in parables, 67 ; at 
 the Transfiguration, 68 ; in 
 Gethsemane, 65 ; on the Cross, 
 66 ; at the Trial, 71 ; in the 
 central Synoptic passage, 
 68 ff. ; in the Fourth Gospel, 
 85, 101, 107 ; guarantees 
 answers to prayer, 63 ; im- 
 plies a unique relationship, 
 63, 139, 151, 209 ; the ground 
 of the commission of the 
 
 Apostles, 118; St. Paul's 
 
 conception of, 150 ff., 177; 
 
 conception of, in Epistle to 
 
 the Hebrews, 183 ff. 
 Sovereignty of Jesus, 41, 64, 
 
 148, 181, 195, 201. 
 Spirit of Jesus, the, presence of, 
 
 141. 
 
 Tabernacles, Feast of, teaching 
 
 at the, 99. 
 Tares, Parable of the, 24. 
 Temple, the cleansing of the, 
 
 claim made by Jesus at, 84. 
 Temptation, the, of Jesus, 27, 61. 
 Thessalonians, Epistles to the, 
 
 139 ff'. 
 Titles ascribed to Jesus, 33 ff., 
 
 135 ff. 
 Tomb, the empty, lessons of, 
 
 121. 
 Tradition, St. Paul's appeal to, 
 
 157. 
 Twelve, the, the charge to, 25 ; 
 
 Matthsean additions to, 25. 
 
 Unction, use of, 146. 
 
 Vine, allegory of the, 104. 
 
 Virgin birth of Jesus, the, 
 assertion of, 160 f. ; secrecy 
 in regard to, 162 ; growing 
 knowledge of, 163 ; St. Paul's 
 knowledge of, 153, 167 ; 
 general knowledge of, 169 ; 
 unifying effect of the doc- 
 trine of, 171. 
 
 Virgins, the Ten, Parable of, 54. 
 
 Word of God, the, title of the 
 exalted Jesus in the Apoca- 
 lypse, 199 ; history of the 
 phrase, 200. 
 
 Word, the ; title in the Prologue 
 of the Fourth Gospel, 202. 
 
 Work of Jesus, the, character 
 of, 17. 
 
 Printed by Morrison & Gibb Limited, Edinburgh 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 Crown quarto, 1008 Pages, with Four Maps, price 20s. net; 
 or in Half-Leather Binding, 25s. net. 
 
 DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE. 
 
 COMPLETE IN ONE VOLUME. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 JAMES HASTINGS, D.D. 
 
 This Dictionary is not based on any other, but is a wholly 
 new and original Work. 
 
 Every Article is signed by the Author. This is the first time 
 that all the Articles in a single-volume Dictionary of the Bible 
 have been committed to Specialists and bear their signatures, as 
 in the largest Dictionaries. 
 
 Prospectus, with Specimen Page and List of Authors, 
 post free on application. 
 
 SOME PRESS NOTICES. 
 
 ' A very fine achievement, worthy to stand beside his larger Dictionaries, and by far 
 the most scholarly yet produced in one volum e in English-speaking countries, perhaps 
 it may be said in the world.' — Christian World. 
 
 ' The names of the editor and assistants alone are guarantees for the thoroughness 
 with which everything that belongs to the production of a dictionary is attended to, 
 and nothing could surpass the care, clearness, and accuracy which characterise the 
 work from beginning to end.' — Churchman. 
 
 ' To produce in a single volume a Dictionary of the Bible sufficiently ample in its 
 scope and plan, abreast of present scholarship, not too elementary to be of use to 
 students and ministers, and not too technical and scholastic in its method for an 
 ordinary reader is, as will be readily understood, an extremely difficult undertaking. 
 So far as our examination of it has gone, it has been admirably accomplished. — 
 Methodist Recorder. 
 
 'An exceedingly valuable and comprehensive work.'— Record. 
 
 ' The work is able, scholarly, and of a thoroughly trustworthy kind. The editor has 
 been able to enlist the foremost scholars of our time. We must call attention to the 
 careful and masterly sub-editing. It is as near perfection as is possible for man to 
 attain.' — Aberdeen Free Press. 
 
 'Thoroughly abreast of present-day knowledge. For presentation and library pur- 
 poses the look outstrips all its rivals, and its closely packed pages are a perfect mine 
 for teachers and ministers.'— Sunday School Chronicle. 
 
 •No pains have been spared to make the book thoroughly reliable and up to date.'— 
 Scotsman. 
 
 *5 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 'THE SCHOLAR AS PREACHER' SERIES. 
 
 In Post 8vo, price 4s. 6d. net each. 
 
 FAITH AND KNOWLEDGE. 
 
 By Prof. W. E. INGE, D.D., Cambridge. 
 
 ' A really notable volume of sermons by a true thinker. ' — Examiner. 
 ' Contains a great deal that is of real interest and value, and is likely to be especially 
 helpful to preachers, as giving them fresh materials for thought.' — Guardian. 
 
 CHRISTUS IN ECCLESIA. 
 
 By Eev. HASTINGS RASHDALL, D.C.L., Oxford. 
 
 ■ Dr. Rashdall has never published anything more characteristic to himself, or more 
 likely to please his large audience than this book. It contains twenty-five sermons. 
 They may be called essays — essays with texts. For though the text is often d eliberately 
 and strikingly expounded, it is still always the introduction to the topic. ... It need 
 not be said that on all these topics Dr. Bashdall is outspoken, and it need not be 
 said that he is thoughtful and earnest.'— Expository Times. 
 
 BREAD AND SALT FROM THE WORD 
 OF GOD. 
 
 By Prop. THEODOE ZAHN, Erlangen. 
 
 ' One of the most inspiring and illuminative books we have read for many a day. The 
 style is simple, but the themes are great. The Professor's intimate acquaintance with 
 the New Testament is revealed on every page. But Prof. Zahn is more than a professor, 
 he is a clamant voice crying to the people to forsake their sins and walk righteously. 
 He fearlessly denounces the corruptions of the age. The passion for personal and 
 national uprightness burns out in these pages. The demand for sincerity and thorough- 
 ness in dealings between man and man is of the most emphatic character.'— Daily 
 News. 
 
 THE EYE FOR SPIRITUAL THINGS. 
 
 By Prop. H. M. GWATKIN, D.D., Cambridge. 
 
 'Prof. Owatkin's name is a guarantee of careful and lofty thought, of terae and 
 luminous expression, of fairness to foe and inspiration to friend. All these qualities 
 are present in this volume. No Preacher should overlook it."— Methodist Times. 
 
 JESUS CHRIST THE SON OF GOD. 
 
 By W. M. MACGEEGOE, D.D., Edinburgh. 
 
 ' Dr. Macgregor'a book we have read with great delight. It is rich, ripe, full, wise, 
 and thoughtful. ... We doubt whether any first book of sermons published during 
 the last ten years wiil receive a greater welcome than this mellow, meditative, and yet 
 inspiring record of devout and faithful thought.'— British Weekly. 
 
T. and T. Clarh's Publications. 
 
 WORKS BY REV. W. L WALKER. 
 
 Third Edition, Revised. 8vo, 9s. 
 
 THE SPIRIT AND THE INCARNATION, in the 
 
 Light of Scripture, Science, and Practical Need. 
 
 In a leading article, headed ( A GREAT BOOK/ in the British Weekly, 
 Principal Marcos Dods wrote : ' It may be questioned whether in recent years 
 there has appeared, at home or abroad, any theological work more deserving 
 of careful study. He who intelligently reads it once will inevitably read it 
 again and again. ' 
 
 8vo, 9s. 
 
 THE CROSS AND THE KINGDOM, as Viewed 
 
 by Christ Himself and in the Light of Evolution. 
 
 ' We desire to speak with admiration of the good work done in this book. 
 It is worthy to stand beside his former treatise. Taking both together, they 
 form a magnificent contribution to the theological literature of the age.' — 
 Principal Iverach in the Expository Times. 
 
 Second Edition. 8vo f 9s. 
 
 CHRISTIAN THEISM AND A SPIRITUAL 
 
 MONISM. God, Freedom, and Immortality, in 
 View of Monistic Evolution. 
 
 *A very valuable book, full of wide knowledge and clear thinking. We 
 heartily commend this work.'— Methodist Times. 
 
 Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 2s. 6d. net. 
 
 WHAT ABOUT THE NEW THEOLOGY? 
 
 *Mr. Walker's critique is able, searching, and thorough, though never 
 unkindly. Whoever desires to read a close and thorough examination of the 
 scope and bearing of Mr. Campbell's doctrine will find a very complete one in 
 this carefully written volume.' — London Quarterly Review. 
 
 New Edition, Revised and Reset. Crown 8vo, 2s. 6d. net. 
 
 THE TEACHING OF JESUS in its Present 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 ' Mr. Walker makes here a further valuable, if unpretentious, contribution 
 to New Testament study. The work altogether should form an excellent 
 handbook on its subject for teachers and preachers.'— Christian World. 
 
 Demy 8vo, Ss. 
 
 THE GOSPEL OF RECONCILIATION OR 
 AT-ONE-MENT. 
 
 ' One of the most helpful, illuminating, and spiritual expositions of this most 
 fascinating of all subjects of Christian Theology.'— Review of Theology and 
 Philosophy. 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 HANDBOOKS FOR BIBLE CLASSES AND 
 PRIVATE STUDENTS. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 Principal A. WHYTE, D.D., and JOHN KELMAN, D.D. 
 
 'I name specially the admirable Handbooks for Bible Classes issued by 
 T. & T. Clark of Edinburgh. They are very cheap, and among them are 
 some books unsurpassed in their kind.'— Sir. W. Robertson Nicoll in 
 
 The British Weekly. 
 
 ^ COMMENTARIES- 
 
 Principal T. M. Lindsay, D.D. St. Luke- 
 2 Vols. 3s. 3d. (Vol. I., 2s. ; Vol. II. ■ 
 Is. 3d.) 
 George Reith, D.D. St. Joan. 2 Vols. 
 
 2s. each. 
 Principal T. M. Lindsay, D.D. Acts. 2 
 
 Vols. Is. 6d. each. 
 Principal Brown, D.D. Romans. 2s. 
 James Macoreqor, D.D. Galatians. 
 
 Is. 6d. 
 Professor J. S. Candltsh, D.D. Ephesians. 
 
 Is. 6d. 
 Professor A. B. Davidson, D.D. Hebrews. 
 
 2s. 6d. 
 Rev. J. P. Lilley, D.D. The Pastoral 
 Epistles. 2s. 6d. 
 
 T'rmcipalMARCusDODS.D.D. Genesis. 2s. 
 James Macgbeoor, D.D. Exodus. 2 
 
 Vols. 2s. each. 
 Principal Dodolas, D.D. Joshua. Is. 6d. 
 
 Judges. Is. 3d. 
 Professor J. G. Murphy, LL.D. Chron- 
 icles. Is. 6d. 
 Rev. James Aitken, M.A. The Book of 
 
 Job. Is. Cd. 
 Principal Marcus Dods, D.D. Haggai, 
 
 Zechariah, Malachi. 2s. 
 Principal Douglas, D.D. Obadlah to 
 
 Zephanlah. Is. 6d. 
 Rev. Edward E. Anderson, M.A. St. 
 
 Matthew's Gospel. 2s. 6d. 
 Principal T. M. Lindsay, D.D. Mark. 
 
 2s. 6d. 
 
 GENERAL 
 Professor James Stalker, D.D. 
 
 The Life of Christ. Is. 6d. 
 
 The Life of St. Paul. Is. 6d. 
 
 (Large-type Editions, 3s. 6d. each.) 
 Alexander Whyte, D.D. 
 
 The Shorter Catechism. 2s. 6d. 
 Professor J. S. Candlish, D.D. 
 
 The Christian Sacraments. Is. 6d. 
 
 The Christian Doctrine of God. 
 Is. 6d. 
 
 The Work of the Holy Spirit, is. 6d. 
 
 The Biblical Doctrine of Sin. Is. 6d. 
 Norman L. Walker, D.D. 
 
 Scottish Church History, is. 6d. 
 Rev. W. D. Thomson, M.A. 
 
 The Christian Miracles and the Con- 
 clusions of Science. 2s. 
 Georoe Smith, LL.D., F.R.G.S., CLE. 
 
 History of Christian Missions. 
 2s. 6d. 
 Archibald Henderson, D.D. 
 
 Palestine : Its Historical Geography. 
 With Maps. 2s. 6d. 
 Principal T. M. Lindsay, D.D. 
 
 The Reformation. 2». 
 Rev. John Macpherson, M.A. 
 
 The Sum of Saving Knowledge. 
 Is. 6d. 
 
 The Confession of Faith. 
 
 Presbyterlanlsm. Is. 6d. 
 Professor Binnie, D.D. 
 
 The Church. Is. 6d. 
 
 SUBJECTS- 
 Professor T. B. Kilpatrick, D.D. 
 
 Butler's Three Sermons on Human 
 Nature. Is. (id. 
 President Hamilton, D.D. 
 
 History of the Irish Presbyterian 
 Church. 2s. 
 Rev. W. Scrymoeour, M.A. 
 
 Lessons on the Life of Christ. 2s. 6d. 
 A. Taylor Innes, M.A., Advocate. 
 
 Church and State. 3s. 
 Rev. J. Feather. 
 
 The Last of the Prophets— John the 
 Baptist. 2s. 
 Rev. W. Fairweather, M.A. 
 
 From the Exile to the Advent. 2s. 
 Professor J. Laidlaw, D.D. 
 
 Foundation Truths of Scripture as 
 to Sin and Salvation. Is. Cd. 
 Rev. L. A. Muirhead, D.D. 
 
 The Times of Christ. 2s. 
 Rev. J. P. Lilley, D.D. 
 
 The Principles of Protestantism. 
 2s. 6d. 
 Rev. J. Strachan, M.A. 
 
 Hebrew Ideals. 2 Vols. 2s. each (or 
 the 2 Vols, bound in One, 8s. net). 
 Rev. D. M. Ross, D.D. 
 
 The Teaching of Jesus. 2s. 
 Prof. J. Dick Fleming, B.D. 
 
 Israel's Golden Age. is. 6d. 
 Rev. W. Beveridoe, M.A. 
 
 Makers of the Scottish Church. 2s.