LIBRARY OF PRINCETON Itheological seminary BS2420 .S213 Sanday, W. (William), 1843-1920. Outline of the life of Christ. OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST ir.r^ OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST y BY y W. SANDAY, D.D., LL.D., Litt.D. LADY MARGARET PROFESSOR AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD HON. FELLOW OF EXETER COLLEGE FELLOW OF THE BRITISH ACADEMY CHAPLAIN-IN-ORDINARY TO THE KING NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER^S SONS 1905 Copyright, 1899, 1905, by CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS Published, February, 1905. PREFATORY NOTE. The Publishers are of opinion that the time has now come when it would be right to accede to a wish that has been expressed in various quarters for a separate issue of the article Jesus Christ in vol. ii. of Dr. Hast- ings' Dictionary of the Bible. This volume appeared in 1899 ; and it has been thought best to reprint the article much as it stood, with such amount of change as is neces- sary to carry out the principle of mutatis mutandis^ and to convert it into a book. The writer is engaged upon a larger work on the same subject, which is not likely to appear for some years ; and he thinks it better not to attempt to bring his first experiment more strictly up to date, but rather to leave it as an expression of his own mind and of such a view as he was able to form of the general position at the time when it was written, i.e. in the years preceding 1899. The principal addition to the present issue is the map, which has been carefully pre- pared by Messrs. W. & A. K. Johnston, on the basis mainly of the map in the writer's Sacred Sites of the Gospels (Oxford, 1903), with improvements and with some additions suggested by the map to illustrate the article VI PREFATORY NOTE Roads and Travel, by Professors Buhl and W. M. Ram- say, in the Extra Volume of the Dictionary ; and also by the map accompanying an article on the * Onomasticon ' of Eusebius published in the Zeitschrift d. Deiitschen Pal'dstina-Vereins, vol. xxvi. part 4 (Leipzig, 1903). The map further embodies the writer's changed opinion as to the site of Capernaum, explained in the Journal of Theological Studies for October 1903. It will be under- stood that the purpose was to illustrate the state of Palestine in or near the time of our Lord, and in part to connect it with the Palestine of the present day. For this reason a few crusading or modern sites are given where there are still notable ruins. The free use that has been made of the map in Sacred Sites is with the kind permission of the Delegates of the Clarendon Press. Oxford, December 1904. N.B. — The abbreviations in this book are those adopted in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible (New York : Charles Scribner's Sons). CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. Introductory PAGE I CHAPTER n. Survey of Conditions 7 CHAPTER HI. The Early Ministry 3^ CHAPTER IV. Teaching and Miracles 65 CHAPTER V. The Later Ministry ^'9 CHAPTER VI. The Messunic Crisis *39 CHAPTER VII. Supplemental Matter: The Nativity and Infancy . .191 CHAPTER VIII. The Verdict of History . . . • • • .211 vii OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. § 1. Method. — What method is fittest for a Christian writer to use in approaching the Life of Christ ? There is a tendency at the present moment, on the Continent perhaps rather than in England, to approach it from the side of the consciousness of Jesus as the Messiah. A conspicuous instance of this would be Baldensperger's Das Selbstbetvusstsein Jesu (Strassburg, 1888 ; 2nd ed. 1892), a work which attracted considerable attention when it first appeared. No doubt such a method has its advantages. It places the inquirer at once at the centre of the position, and enables him to look down the various roads by which he will have to travel. The advantage, however, is more apparent than real. It would hold good only if we could be sure of obtain- ing a far more adequate grasp of the consciousness I I 2 INTRODUCTORY to be investigated than on any hypothesis is likely to be obtained. On the Christian hypothesis, frankly held, any such grasp would seem to be excluded, and the attempt to reach it could hardly be made without irrever- ence. It is on all grounds a safer and sounder, as well as a more promising method, to adopt a course which is the opposite of this — not to work from within outwards, but from without inwards ; to begin with that aspect of the Life which is most external, and only when we have realized this as well as we may to seek to penetrate deeper, allowing the facts to suggest their own inner meaning. We may then take in certain sidelights which our documents also afford us, which, because they come, as it were, from the side, are not therefore less valuable. And we may finally strengthen our con- clusions by following the history some little way into its sequel. In other words, we shall begin by placing our- selves at the standpoint of an observer, one of those who saw the public ministry of Jesus in its early stages, in its development, and to its close. When that has been fully unrolled before us, we can draw upon other data which are not of this public character ; and we may further seek to argue backwards from effects to causes. By pursuing this method we shall have the advantage of taking the facts in no imaginary order, but in the order of the history itself. We shall have them dis- closed to us in the same sort of sequence in which they were disclosed to the first generations of Christians — a method always advisable where it can be had, and in this instance pecuUarly advisable, because both the TRUSTWORTHINESS OF THE MATERIALS 3 origins and the immediate sequel to the origins are of extreme interest and importance. We shall also have the incidental advantage of fol- lowing, not only the historical order, but the critical order suggested by the documents. It was natural that what was transacted in public should have the fullest and the earliest attestation : it lay in the nature of the case that some of the details which were most significant, just because of their private and intimate character, should become known only by degrees. This state of things is reflected in the Gospels as we have them. The common matter of the Synoptic Gospels is also the most public matter. It by no means follows that what is peculiar to a single Gospel is by that fact stamped as less historical : no one would think (e.g.) of afifirming this of some of the parables peculiar to St. Luke ; but it is fair to suppose that in the first instance it was less widely diffused. To this class would belong the narratives of the Nativity and of the Infancy. It will be in some ways a gain not to begin with these, but to let them enter into the story as they entered into it with the first Christians. More than one point which might otherwise perplex us will in this way suggest its own explanation. § 2. Limits of space do not allow us to go elaborately into the question as to the trustworthiness of our materials. It may suffice to point to one undoubted fact which furnishes at least a considerable presumption in their favour. The apostolic age produced some strongly marked personalities, with well defined types of thought and phraseology. Now, broadly speaking, 4 INTRODUCTORY these types have left but little trace upon the Gospels. The special type characteristic of the Gospels them- selves stands out conspicuously over against them. We need hardly do more than refer to such very sig- nificant facts as that the Gospels alone contain specimens of teaching by parables ; that the idea of the * kingdom of heaven ' (or ' of God '), which is quite central in the Gospels, recedes into the background in the writings of the apostles ; that the same holds good of that most significant title ' Son of Man ' ; that, on the other hand, such a term as ' justify ' is rare and hardly technical, while 'justification,' ' sanctification,' 'reconciliation' (or ' atonement '), and a number of others, are wholly absent. It may be said that the Fourth Gospel is an exception, that there we have a suspicious resemblance to the style and diction of the Epp. of St. John. Some resemblance there is, and we would not entirely reject the inference drawn from it. But even here the ex- ception is but partial. It has often been noticed that the evangelist scrupulously confines his doctrine of the Logos to the prologue. The writer of this may be allowed once more to express the conviction,* which he believes that con- tinued investigation will confirm, that the great mass of the Synoptic Gospels had assumed its permanent shape not later than the decade 60-70 a.d., and that the changes which it underwent after the great catastrophe of the fall of Jerusalem were but small, and can with- out difficulty be recognized. But the task on which we are at present engaged must in the main supply its own vindication. The * See the Bampion Lectures for 1893, P- 286 ff. DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT J picture which it is here attempted to draw will com- mend itself so far as it is consistent and coherent, and no further. No one, indeed, expects in these days the formal and external consistency aimed at in the older Harmonies ; but the writer himself believes that in their inner essence the Gospels are consistent and coherent, and if he fails to convey the impression of this, the failure will be his own. He is conscious of something tentative in the way in which he has sought to work in data derived from the Fourth Gospel with those derived from the other three. But here, again, he is giving expression to the best opinion he can form, and the value of that opinion must be judged by the result. Where he is not satisfied with his own success, he has not hesitated to say so. § 3. To what has been said above it should be added, that if we assume the standpoint of a spectator, a brief preface will be needed to explain what that standpoint is. In other words, we shall have at the outset to take a rapid survey of the conditions under which the Life of Christ was lived, so that we may see to what His teach- ing had to attach itself, and what served for it as a foil, by way of contrast and antagonism. The main divisions of our subject will thus be — I. Survey of Conditions. II. The Public Ministry of Jesus, preceded by that of the Baptist. III. Supplemental Matter, not included in the Public Min- istry, and derived from special sources. IV. The Verdict of History. CHAPTER II. SURVEY OF CONDITIONS. § 4. The picture which we form for ourselves of Palestine in the time of our Lord is apt to be want- ing in play and variety. A few strong and simple colours are all that are used ; we do not allow enough for their blending, or for the finer and subtler tones which mingle with them. We see the worldly ambition of the Sadducees, the self-seeking and for- malism of the Pharisees ; over both, the rough stern rule of the Roman ; and under both, the chafing tide of popular passion, working itself up to its out- burst of fury in the Great War. Perhaps we throw in somewhere in a corner the cloistered communities of the Essenes; but if so, it is rather as standing apart by themselves than as entering into the general life. It is not so much that this picture is wrong as that it needs to be supplemented, and it needs a little toning down of the light and shade. This is the case especially with the internal conditions, the state of thought and of the religious life. 7 8 SURVEY OF CONDITIONS A. External Conditions : Government, Sects, AND Parties. § 5. The external conditions are so comparatively- simple and so well known that a rapid glance at them will suffice. At the time of our Lord's public ministry, Judsea and Samaria were directly subject to the Romans, and were governed by a procurator (Pontius Pilate, a.d. 26-36), who was to some extent subordinate to the legatus of Syria. Pilate had a character for cruelty (cf. Lk 13^). "TSid the Roman rule was no doubt as a whole harsh and unfeeling : we read of wholesale executions, which took the horrible form of crucifixion. But the people whom Rome had to govern were turbulent in the extreme ; and so far as the Roman authorities come before us in NT, we cannot refuse them the credit of a desire to do a sort of rough justice. The odious duty of collecting tolls and taxes for the Romans led to the employment of a class of underlings (TreAwvai, publicani), who were regarded almost as out- casts by their Jewish countrymen. The north and east of Palestine were still in the hands of sons of Herod. Antipas (4 b.c. to 39 a.d.) held Galilee and Peroea ; and his brother Philip (4 B.C. to 34 A.D.), Ituraea and Trachonitis. The name given to the former, 'that fox' (Lk 13''-), will sufficiently describe him ; he was living in open sin with Herodias, the wife of another brother, but was not wholly unvisited by re- morse, and had at least curiosity in matters of religion (Mk 6^11, Lk 23^). His capital was at Tiberias, on the Sea of Galilee, and he also held possession of the strong SECTS AND PARTIES 9 fortress of Machaerus * E. of the Dead Sea. Herod Philip governed his dominions quietly, and was the best and most popular of his father's sons. § 6. The Sad ducees (Zadokite priests) consisted mainly of certain aristocratic priestly families (Ac 4") who held almost a monopoly of the high priesthood, and who played an influential and active part in the Sanhedrin, which under the Romans wielded consider- able power. They were typical opportunists, and were bent above all things on keeping their own rights and privileges. Hence they were sensitive on the subject of popular disorder, which was likely to serve as an excuse to the Romans for displacing them (Jn 11^). It was a coalition of Pharisees and Sadducees which procured the death of our Lord, but in the period of the Acts the Sadducees were the more active persecutors. Religion with them was secondary, but they differed somewhat both in doctrine and in practice from the Pharisees (Ac 23* ; cf. Edersheim, Life and Times, i. 314-321, etc.). They did not encumber themselves with the Pharisaic traditions, but took their stand upon the Pentateuch. They were notorious for strictness in judgment. As contrasted with the Sadducees, the Pharisees (lit. Separatists or Purists) were essentially the religious party. They numbered more than 6000 {Atit. xvii. ii. 4), and were pledged to a high standard of life and scrupu- * In Ant. xviii. v. 2 Machterus is in the possession of Antipas, in the previous § it belongs to Aretas ; but the reading of this latter passage is questionable (cf. Schiirer, NTZG i. 362 n. 365 n. IHJP I. ii. 23, 25]). lO SURVEY OF CONDITIONS lous performance of religious duties (Mt 23^). Un- fortunately, the high standard was outward rather than inward. The elaborate casuistry to which the Pharisees had recourse was used as a means of evading moral obligations (Mk f-^^ i2'^\\, Mt 23 ^'^^), and resulted in a spirit hard, narrow, and self-righteous. Not exactly coextensive with the Pharisees, though largely to be identified with them (we read of ' scribes 0/ the Pharisees,' Mk 2'^^ RV ; i.e. ' scribes who belonged to the party of the Pharisees'), were the Scribes (ypa/A/Aaras, vojxikol, vo/xoBLBdaKaXot), or professed Students of the law, who supplied the Pharisees with their principles. They had to a large extent taken the place of the priests as the preachers and teachers of Judaism. Their chief fields of action were the syna- gogues and the Rabbinical schools. The most highly respected of the scribes were the great religious authori- ties of the day. It was their successors who built up the Talmud. There were differences of opinion within the body (e.g. the rival schools of Hillel and Shammai, contemporaries of Herod the Great), but, without, their dicfa were unquestioned. This veneration was, as a rule, only requited with contempt. While the Pharisees at this date for the most part (though not entirely) held aloof from politics, on the ground that religion as they conceived it could be practised indifferently under any domination, and their own experiences under the national line, represented by Alexander Jannaius, had been the reverse of happy, the mass of the people were burning to throw off the yoke of the stranger. The party of action, which was prepared to go all lengths, was known as the Zealots. SECTS AND PARTIES II One member of this party was numbered among the apostles (Mt Io^ Mk 3^^ Lk 6'^ Ac i^^. In the siege of Jerusalem they took the lead, and were distinguished at once by heroic courage and by horrible crimes. The dynasty of the Herods had from the first claimed alliance with Hellenic culture. The founder of the dynasty had mixed with advantage to himself in the haute politique of his day ; and he had signalized his reign by buildings in the Greek style, but on a scale of barbaric magnificence. The courts of the Herods must always have had a tincture of Hellenism about them. But the reaction against this was strong, and its influ- ence probably did not extend very far, though it inspired the historians Nicolaus of Damascus, Justus of Tiberias, and Josephus. More likely to affect the lower and middle strata of the population would be the ' Greek cities ' founded by the Syrian kings before the Macca- baean rising, such as the cluster known as Decapolis, for the most part east of the Jordan, with later founda- tions like the flourishing port of Csesarea. But more important still would be the influence of the Jews of the Diaspora, constantly coming and going to the great feasts at Jerusalem, and with synagogues for their special use permanently established there (Ac 6^). The greatest of the centres with which the Jews were thus brought in contact were Alexandria and Antioch. And there is reason to think that the amount of intellectual intercourse and interchange was by no means incon- siderable. There must have been other foreign influences at work, but rather by what might be called underground channels. The connexion of Palestine with Babylonia 12 SURVEY OF CONDITIONS and the East, which goes back to immemorial antiquity, had been revived and deepened by the Captivity. It was kept up by intercourse with the Jews who remained in those regions. But whether or not they had come precisely in this way, there can be no doubt that Oriental, and indeed specifically Persian influences were present in the sect of the Essenes. The ceremonial washings, and the reverence paid to the sun, can hardly have had any other origin. The asceticism and community of goods have a Pythagorean cast, and may have come from Greece by way of Egypt, while the rejection of sacrifice and what we know of the specu- lative tendencies of the Essenes may well be native to the soil of Palestine. The Essene settlements were congregated near the Dead Sea. B. Internal Conditions : the State of Religious Thought and Life. § 7. General Condiiio?is. — To describe justly the state of Judaism in the time of Christ is a difficult and delicate thing. It is too apt to seem like an indictment of the Judaism of nineteen centuries, which not only on general grounds, but specially in view of the attitude of some Jewish apologists of the present day, a Christian theologian will be loth to bring. He will desire to make all the allowances that can rightly be made, and to state all the evidence (so far as he knows it) for as well as against. But at the same time he must not gloss over real faults and defects, without a statement of which Christianity itself can be but imper- fectly understood. RELIGIOUS THOUGHT AND LIFE 1 3 Truth does not, as a rule, lie in compromises. And ts interests will be perhaps best served if we set down without reserve both the darker and the brighter sides, only asking the reader to remember while he has the one before him, that the other is also there. That we attempt this difficult task at all is due to no wanton assumption of a right to judge, but to the unavoidable necessity that what is so intimately bound up with history should be seen in the full light which history throws upon it. (a) The Darker Side of the Contemporary Judaism. — As we look broadly at the religious condition of Pales- tine in the time of our Lord, there can be little doubt that it^jwas in need of a drastic reformation. This is the impression inevitably conveyed by the Gospels, and by the searching criticisms of St. Paul. Nor is it belied by the witness of Josephus, and in particular by the outbreak of untamed passion, with the horrors to which it gave rise, in the Jewish War. And although it may be easy to make a selection from the Talmud of sayings of a different character, it can hardly be ques- tioned that the same source supplies proof enough that the denunciations of the Gospels were not without foundation. There is too evident a connexion between the inherent principles of Judaism and the defects charged against it to permit us to regard these as devoid of truth. (i.) The idea of God was perhaps the strongest side of Judaism, but it was too exclusively_transcendent. It had no adequate means of spanning the gulf between God and man. The faults of Judaism were those of Deism. It had one tender place, the love of Jehovah for 14 SURVEY OF CONDITIONS Israel. But this fell some way short of the Christian idea of the Father in heaven, the God who not only loves a single people, but whose essence is love. Judaism also largely wanted the mystical element which has played such an important part in Christi- anity. The Johannean allegory of the Vine and the Branches, which agrees so closely with the teaching of St. Paul, the whole conception of immanent divine forces circulating through the organism, has no true analogy in it.* (ii.) But the most disastrous feature of Rabbinical Judaism was its identification of morality with obedience to written law. ' Duty, goodness, piety, ^^ all these are to the Jew equivalent terms. They are mere synonyms for the same conception — the fulfilment of the law. A man therefore is good who knows the law and obeys it ; a man is wicked who is ignorant of it and transgresses it ' (Montefiore, Hibbert Lectures, p. 479). This identification of morality with law led to a number of serious evils, (iii.) Law can deal only with overt action. Hence there was an Inevitable tendency to restrict the field of morals to overt action. Motive was comparatively disregarded. It is doubtless true that the Rabbis frequently insist on rightness of motive. A religion which in its Sacred Books included the Prophets as well as the Law could not do otherwise. But the legal conception was too deeply ingrained not to tell its tale. If it had not been so, there would have been no need for the Sermon on the Mount ; and the address, ' Scribes and Pharisees, * The comparison of Israel to a vine is not unknown to Judaism, but in a wholly different application (see Wiinsche, Erldui. d. Evang. on Jn 15^). RELIGIOUS THOUGHT AND LIFE 1 5 hypocrites,' would have had no point, (iv.) Another consequence of the stress laid on overt acts was the development of an elaborate doctrine of salvation. -by- works. We neednSot suppose that this doctrine was universally held and always consciously acted upon ; but it cannot be denied that there was in Judaism a widespread opinion that might be expressed in the terms, ' so much keeping of the law, so much merit ' ; and .the idea of si 'treasure of merit,' which each man stores up for himself, is constantly met with, (v.) In one sense the keeping of the law was very hard. The labours of the scribes had added to the original and primary laws an immense mass of inferential law, which was placed on the same footing of authority. This portentous accumulation of precepts was a burden 'grievous to be borne.' (vi.) Not only so, but a great part of this additional law was bad law. It was law inferred by a faulty system • of exegesis. Even where the exegesis was ^ofid fide^ it was in a large proportion of cases unreal and artificial. But there was a great temptation to dishonesty, for which the way was left open by the exaggerated stress laid on acts, and the comparative ignoring of motive. In the dead level of written law the relative degrees of obliga- tion were disregarded. Hence there were a number of precepts which were positively immoral {e.g. Corban, Mk 7"-^||). (vii.) A further defect in the .legal con- ception of religion was its intellectualism. The Talmud bears" witness to what is little less than an idolatry of learning, and that, we must remember, Rabbinical learning. With religion converted into science, and the science in great part no science, we may well say, ^ 1 6 SURVEY OF CONDITIONS ' If the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is the darkness ! ' The Scholasticism of the Middle Ages had no such unchallenged supremacy; it was not the one all-pervading ideal, (viii.) For the mass of the population the double law, traditional as well as original, could not but be a burden. The accumula- tion of precepts not possessed of moral value is always a thing to be deprecated. And however much we may allow for the fact that the observance of all these precepts was not expected of every one, there still remained enough to be a real incubus. And yet, on the other hand, the performance of the full Pharisaic standard was not so very difficult for persons of leisure, who deliberately made up their minds to it. It did not mean, or at least it might be understood as not meaning, more than a Hfe mechanically regulated. But then it is easy to see that the existence of this class, consciously setting itself above its neighbours, and able, without any excessive strain, to make good its pretentions, must have inevitably engendered a feeling of self-righteousness or spiritual pride. The parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (Lk 18""^'') must needs have been typical, (ix.) What the Pharisee was to the ordinary Jew, that the Jew was to the rest of mankind. However politically inferior, the Jew never lost his_^ride of race, and with him this pride of race was a pride of religious privilege. The Zealot sought to translate this into political domination, but the Pharisee was content to retire into the fortress of his inner consciousness, from which he could look with equanimity at the rise and fall of secular powers. (x.) This particular form of pride had a tendency to \^ RELIGIOUS THOUGHT AND LIFE I'J aggravate itself as time went on. ' To make a fence round the law ' was a fundamental principle of Judaism. And in a like spirit the privileged people was tempted to make a fence round itself, and to dwell apart among the nations. Institutions which had had for their object to keep the nation clear of idolatry, were ex- tended when the dangers of idolatry were past, until it required a revolution to say with St. Paul, ' There is neither Jew nor Greek.' (xi.) Worst and most dis- astrous of all was the tendency to fall back upon national privilege as a substitute for real reformation of life. We can see alike from the Gospels and from St. Paul how constantly the Jews had upon their lips, ' We have Abraham to our father ' (Lk 3^, Jn 8^- ^^, Ro 2^^'^"). It is admitted that ' the Jews were some- what too confident of their assured participation in the blessedness of eternal life ; all Israelites, except very exceptional and determined sinners, were believed to have their share in it ' (Montefiore, Hibb. Led. p. 482). (/5) The Brighter Side of the Contemporaiy Juda- ism. — The above is a long and a serious catalogue of charges, partly resting upon the logic of the creed, but also too much borne out by positive testimony. It seems conclusively to prove that not only reformation, but a thoroughgoing reformation, was needed. And yet there is another side which the Christian teacher ought to emphasize more fully than it has been the custom to do. (i.) In the first place, we have to remember that Judaism is professedly the religion of the OT. It is based upon a Book which includes the Prophets and the Psalms (to use the familiar description a potiori 1 8 SURVEY OF CONDITIONS parte) as well as the Law, And however much Judaism proper gave precedence to the Law, it could not forget the other parts of the volume, or run wholly counter to their spirit. It is not too much to say that even in the Talmud we can see at every turn how the spirit of legalism was corrected by an influence which is ultimately derived from what are rightly called the evangelical portions of OT. We shall see to what an extent Christianity itself is a direct development of these. (ii.) The evidence of NT, severe as it is upon the 2. whole, yet is not all of one tenor. Its pages are sprinkled over with Jewish characters, who are men- tioned in terms of praise : Zacharias and ElisabetH, Simeon and Anna, Nathanael, Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathaea, the young ruler, and the scribe who was pronounced to be ' not far from the kingdom of God ' (Mk \2^). We must not forget that there are parts of NT itself which in recent years have been claimed by Christian scholars as thinly veneered products of Judaism (Ep. of James, Apoc). Whatever we may think of these particular instances, there are others (such as Didache and the Testaments of the Tiaelve Patriarchs) in which it is highly probable that a Jewish original has been adapted to Christian purposes. And our present investigation will bring before us many examples in which, while Christianity corrects Jewish teaching, it nevertheless takes its start from it, and that not only from the purer original, but in its con- temporary form. -,, (iii.) The panegyrists of the Talmud have at least right on their side to this extent, that single sayings RELIGIOUS THOUGHT AND LIFE 1 9 can frequently be quoted from it in disproof of the sweeping allegations brought against it by its assailants. There are grains of fine wheat among its chaff. Some of these are referred, on what seems to be good autho- rity, to a time anterior to the coming of Christ. The * golden rule ' is attributed to Hillel. The story is that when Shammai drove away an inquirer who desired to be taught the whole Torah while he stood on one foot, the man went to Hillel, who said : ' What is hateful to thyself do not to thy fellow ; this is the whole To- rah, and the rest is commentary ' (Taylor, Pirqe Aboth, p. 37), Another great saying is ascribed to Antigonus of Soko : ' Be not as slaves that minister to the lord with a view to receive recompense ; but be as slaves that minister to the lord without a view to receive recom- pense ; and let the fear of Heaven be upon you ' {ib. p. 27). There is a fair number of such sayings. If we take the treatise from which the last is directly quoted we shall see in it what is probably not an unfair repre- sentation of the better Judaism in the time of Christ, with its weaknesses sufficiently indicated, but with something also of its strength. (iv.) It is right also to bear in mind that the Jjidaism of this date had no lack of enthusiasts and martyrs. Akiba in particular, though a Jew of the Jews, cannot but command our admiration (see Taylor, iit sup. p. 67 ff.). And in a different category his fortitude is matched by the mitis sapientia of Hillel, of whom it was said that his gentleness brought men 'nigh under the wings of the Shekinah ' (jb, p. 37). (v.) A favourable impression on the whole is given by the numerous pseudepigraphic works, which belong U 20 SURVEY OF CONDITIONS in the main to the two centuries on each side of the Christian era. The oldest parts of the Book of Enoch may possibly be earlier, just as some outlying members of the Baruch literature are probably later. The most typical writings are the Book of Enoch and the Psalms of Solomon (which can be dated with tolerable cer- tainty B.C. 70-40), the Book of Jubilees and the As- sumption of Moses (which may be taken as roughly contemporary with the founding of Christianity), and the Fourth Book of Ezra (2 Es) and the Apoc. of Baruch, both after the fall of Jerusalem in a.d. 70. These writings show in varying degrees most of the characteristic infirmities of Judaism, but they also show its nobler features in a way which sometimes, and especially in the two latest works, throws the infirmities into the shade.* It is a moot point how far the pseudepigrapha can be taken as representative of the main currents of Judaism. Montefiore, writing in 1892, says, 'It must be remembered that the apocalyptic writings lie for the most part outside the line of the purest Jewish development, and often present but the fringe or excrescence, and not the real substance of the dominating religious thought ' (^Hibb. Led. p. 467). On the other hand, Charles has no difficulty in assigning the different portions to recognized party divisions in Judaism. Schiirer in like manner describes their standpoint as that of ' correct Judaism,' adding, however, that they are ' not products of the school, but of free religious individuality ' (////" ni. ii. 49). Similarly, Baldensperger speaks of 4 Ezra and Baruch as free from the spirit of casuistry, and not ' absorbed in the Halachic rules' (p. 35, ed. i). This verdict would apply in some * For a closer and more exact but still tentative analysis and dating, the reader may be referred to the editions by R. H. Charles of Enoch (1893), Sec7-ets of Enoch and Apoc. of Baruch (1S96), Assumption of Moses (1897) ; or for a judicious representation of average opinion, to Schiirer, HfP II. iii. 54 ff . RELIGIOUS THOUGHT AND LIFE 21 degree to this class of literature generally. It is perhaps in the main of provincial origin, or at least somewhat outside the beaten tracks of Jewish teaching. The Pss. of Solomon and Bk. of Jubilees would be nearest to these. It is very probable that 4 Ezr and Apoc. Bar were directly affected by the ferment of thought caused by the birth of Christianity. When we endeavour to put together the impressions which we derive from these various sources, we may perhaps say that the outcome of them is that Judaism at the Christian era had all the outer framework of a sound religion if only the filling in had been different. The Jew knew better than any of his contemporaries in Greece or Rome or in the East what religion was. He had a truer conception of God, and of the duty of man towards God ; but on the first head he had much still to learn, and on the second he had many faults to be corrected in the working out of detail. The Jew had at least a profound seriousness on the subject of religion. Where this was wanting, the man was no true Jew. And, even allowing for all the ex- ternal influences which told against this, there was among the Jews probably less of professed atheism, indifference, levity, than there has ever been in any other society, ancient or modern. The Jew had also an intense feeling of loyalty to this society. His love of what we should call his Church rose to a passion. It is this which makes the apocalypses which followed the fall of Jerusalem so pathetic. The faith of men has probably seldom received a shock so severe. The au- thors of these apocalypses feel the shock to the uttermost. They grope about anxiously to find the meaning of God's mysterious dealings ; but their faith in Him is unshaken. They are divided between 22 SURVEY OF CONDITIONS passionate grief and resignation : ' Two things vehe- mently constrain me : for I cannot resist thee, and my soul, moreover, cannot behold the evils of my mother ' (Apoc. Bar 3^). § 8. The Special Seed-plot of Christianity. — In general terms it may be said that when we seek for affinities to Christianity we find more of them the farther we recede from the centre of official Judaism. The one thing to which Christianity is most opposed is the hard, dry, casuistic legalism of the Pharisee. If we are right in thinking of the apocalyptic literature as in the main provincial, we shall not be surprised to find the points of contact with it become more numerous. Wherever there are traces of a fresher and deeper study of the Psalms and Prophets, there we have a natural kinship for the Christian spirit. Now there is one class among whom this continuity with Psalms and Prophets is specially marked. It has been observed * that there is a group of Psalms (of which perhaps 9. 10. 22. 25. 35. 40. 69. 109 are the most prominent) in which the words translated in EV 'poor,' 'needy,' 'humble,' 'meek' are of specially frequent occurrence. It appears that these words have acquired a moral meaning. From meaning originally those who are ' afflicted ' or ' oppressed ' (by men), they have come to mean those who in their oppression have drawn nearer to God and leave their cause in His hands. They are the pious Israelites who suffer from the tyranny of the heathen or of their worldly countrymen, * See esp. Rahlfs, *u' und My in deti Psalmen, Goiimgcn, 1892 ; and Driver, Parallel Psalter, Oxf. 1898, Glossary, s.v. 'poor.' THE SPECIAL SEED-PLOT OF CHRISTIANITY 23 and who refuse to assert themselves, but accept in a humble spirit the chastening sent by God. As there were many such in every period of the history of Israel, they might be said to form a class. Now there is other evidence that this class still existed at the Christian era. They are the ma?isueti et quiescentes of 4 Ezr (2 Es) 11*^. They are just the class indicated in Ps-Sol 5^^- ' Who is the hope of the needy and the poor beside thee, O Lord ? And thou wilt hearken : for who is gracious and gentle but thou? Thou makest glad the heart of the humble by opening thine hand in mercy.' (Com- pare also the reff. in Ryle and James, p. 48, and Index, s.v. TrTa);(ds). The special NT designation is irrtM-^^oi T Ji^ T^'"'? cf. i'''"^). But their suspicions were soon aroused. It was evident that the teaching and manner of the life of Jesus conflicted greatly with their own. There was a freedom and largeness of view about it which was foreign to their whole habits of thought. id) In such matters as fasting, the practice of Jesus and His disciples was different (Mk 2^'^*^-, Mt (y"^^- etc.). Worse than this, Jesus appealed expressly to those classes which they scrupulously avoided (Mk 2'^''|| etc.). (U) Not only did Jesus direct His ministry especially to those whom they regarded as outcast and irreclaimable, but He made some direct attacks upon themselves. At first these attacks may have been slightly disguised (as in INIt 6'"^, where the Pharisees FIRST ACTIVE PERIOD 6 1 are not mentioned by name), but they constantly increased in directness and severity, {c) One of the first topics on which they came into coUision was in regard to the keeping of the Sabbath. Mark has collected a little group of incidents bearing upon this (Mk 2-^-3''), the first of which, from the mention of the ripe corn, appears, as we have seen, to belong to the second year of the ministry, but belongs to an early phase in the conflict. To the same effect is the incident related in Jn 5^**^-, and Luke contributes another (Lk 13""^'^). {d) The Pharisees were also honestly shocked at seeing Jesus adopt a tone and assume prerogatives which seemed to them to encroach upon the honour of God (Mk 2^" II). It is interesting, and throws a favourable light on the documents, to note how carefully the distinction is marked between (a) the local scribes and Pharisees such as were to be found scattered throughout Galilee (Mk 26-|| le-H 18-24 3611^ Lk 736); {b) the scribes who came down from Jerusalem (Mk 3^^), apparently emissaries from the hierarchy, like the deputation of Jn i^^; and (c) the Herodians (Mk 3^), the dynastic party of the Herods, who with quite different motives acted in alliance with the Pharisees. The Herodians are mentioned again in Mk la^^y. The name is otherwise almost unknown to history, though the party is known to have existed. Josephus has 01 to. 'HpwSou (ppovovvres, but not 'HpuSiavol. This is a pure reflexion of the facts of the time — facts which soon passed away, and which fiction would never have recovered. See, further, DB, art. Herodians. § 24. T/ie Self-ReveIatio7i of Jesus. — Although Jesus assumed these high prerogatives, and although, as we have seen. He both spoke and acted with an authority which permitted no question, He showed a singular reticence in putting forward Messianic or Divine claims. It is remarkable that from the first those possessed 62 THE EARLY MINISTRY with demons publicly confessed Him for what He was ; but it is no less remarkable that He checked these confessions : ' He suffered not the demons to speak, because they knew him' (Mk i^|| 3^- [Mt 12^"]). He imposed a like injunction of silence on one healed of leprosy (Mk i^||). The farthest point to which Jesus went in the way of self-revelation at this early period was by taking to Himself the special title ' Son of Man.' There was probably some precedent for the identification of this title with ' Messiah,' but it was at least not in common use, and therefore served well to cover a claim which was made but in no way obtruded. A fuller discussion of the title will be found below (p. 91 ff.). This marked reticence of Jesus in regard to His own Person is clearly part of a deliberate plan. One of its motives was to prevent the rash and reckless violence which one who appealed to the Messianic expectation was sure to excite (Jn 6^^). But it was in full keeping with the whole of His demeanour and with the special character which He gave to His mission. The first evangelist rightly sees in this a fulfilment (which we believe here as elsewhere to have been conscious and deliberate) of the prophecy Is 42^"^ ' My servant . . . shall not strive, nor cry aloud ; neither shall any one hear his voice in the streets,' etc. It is impossible for us to think of the Jesus portrayed in the Gospels as forcing His claims upon the attention of the world. He rather let them sink gently into the minds of His disciples until they won an assent which was not only free and spontaneous, but also more intelligent than it could have been if enforced simply by FIRST ACTIVE PERIOD 63 authority. But, apart from this, it was essential to the development of His mission that the teaching of the Kingdom should precede, and precede by a sufficient interval, the public self-manifestation and ofifer of the King. The first thing to be done was to change the character and revolutionize the moral conceptions of men. This was to be the work of quiet teaching. The hour for the Leader to come forward was the hour when teaching was to give place to action. Hence it was well that at first and for some time to come the King should remain, as it were, in the background, until the preparation for His assuming His kingship was complete. CHAPTER IV. TEACHING AND MIRACLES. THE TEACHING OF JESUS. a. General Characteristics of the Teaching. § 25. (i) Its Relation to the Teaching of the Baptist a^id to that of the Sci'ibes. — We have seen that Jesus began by taking up not only the announcement of the Baptist that the Kingdom of God was at hand, but also his call to reformation of life and the rite of baptism by which that call was impressed upon the conscience. We are also expressly told that the call to repentance was part of the apostolic commission (Mk 6'^). And we find it no less insisted upon after the resurrection (Lk 24^'', Ac 2^ 3^^ 5^^ jji8 173020212520^^ This is clear proof of the continuity which bound to- gether the teaching of Jesus with that of the Baptist. The starting-point of both was the same. And yet this starting- point was very soon left behind. The heads of the Baptist's teaching are soon told ; the teaching of Jesus expands and ramifies in a thousand directions. It is like passing from the narrow cleft of the Jordan to a Pisgah- view over the whole Land of Promise. 5 65 ^ TEACHING AND MIRACLES Although it was permitted to the Baptist to prepare the way for the teaching of Jesus, so far as even to enunciate its opening lesson, the place of the Baptist is quietly- assigned to him ; and it is a place outside the threshold of the Kingdom : ' He that is but little in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he ' (Mt ii" ||). If Christ thus drew a line between His own teaching and that of John, still more marked was the difference between it and other contemporary teaching. John was at least a prophet, and spoke with the full authority of a prophet (Mt n^- ^^). The scribes had no original authority at all ; they did but interpret a law which they had not made. Jesus spoke with an authority not only above that of the scribes (Mk i- ||), but higher still than that of John. He is the legislator of a new law (Mt 5~ etc.), the founder of that Kingdom which John did not enter. § 26. (2) Its Unive7-sal Range. — With this command- ing character of the teaching of Jesus there goes a corre- sponding width of outlook. We began with a rapid survey of the state of parties and opinions in Palestine at the time of Christ. But the object of this survey was not to explain the teaching of Jesus by affiliating it to any existing school. It was remarked of Him that He had had no regular training (Jn 7^^). He Avas not a Pharisee, not a Sadducee, not an Essene, not an Apocalyptist. The direct affinities of the teaching of Jesus were with nothing so transitory and local, but rather with that which was most central in OT. We might call it the distilled essence of OT : that essence first clarified and then greatly enlarged, the drop became a crystal sphere. THE TEACHING OF JESUS 6^ We are speaking, of course, of the substance, and of the main part of the substance, of the teaching of Jesus. The mere fact that it was conditioned by time and space involved that it should be addressed to a given generation in a language which it understood. Nor was it wholly without definite and particular applications — sidelights, so to speak, upon that space in history within which it falls. But history itself has shown that in the main it transcends all these condi- tions, and is as fresh at the end of eighteen centuries as when first it was delivered. § 27. (3) Its Method. — This wonderful adaptability in the teaching of Jesus is accounted for in part by its extreme simplicity. If it had been a doctrine of the schools, something of the fashion of the schools would have adhered to it. But, as it was, it was addressed chiefly to the common people — sometimes to congrega- tions in synagogues, sometimes to the chance company collected in private houses, more often still to casual gatherings in the open air. And the language in which the teaching was couched X' was such as to appeal most directly to audiences like these. As a rule it takes hold of the simplest elements in our common humanity, ' das allgemein Menschliche.' The trivial incidents of everyday life are made to yield their lessons : the sower scattering his seed, the house- wife baking her cakes or sweeping the house to find a lost piece of money, the shepherd collecting his sheep, the fishermen drawing in their net. Sometimes the story which forms the vehicle for the teaching takes a higher flight : it deals with landed proprietors, and ^ 68 TEACHING AND MIRACLES banquets, and kings with their subjects. But even then there seems to be a certain dehberate simpHfica- tion. The kings, for instance, are those of the popular tale rather than as the courtier would paint them. § 28. (4) The Parables. — We have been naturally drawn into describing that which is most characteristic in the outward form of the teaching of Jesus — His parables. The Greek word irapafioXri is used in the NT in a wider sense than that in which we are in the habit of using it. In Lk 4-^ it = 'proverb.' In Mt 15^^ (comp. with vv."" ^^-") it = ' maxim,' a con- densed moral truth, whether couched in figurative language or not. It covers as well brief aphoristic sayings {e.g. Mk 3^ 13-^ || , Lk 5^'' 6'^^) as longer dis- courses in which there is a real ' comparison.' But these latter are the ' parables ' in our modern accepta- tion of the term : they are scenes or short stories taken from nature or from common life, which present in a picturesque and vivid way some leading thought or principle which is capable of being transferred to the higher spiritual life of man. The ' parable ' in a some- what similar sense to this had been employed in OT and by the Rabbis, but it had never before been employed with so high a purpose, on so large a scale, or with such varied application and unfailing perfection of form. We may say that the parables of Jesus are of two kinds. In some the element of ' comparison ' is more prominent. In these the parable moves as it were in two planes — one that of the scene or story which is made the vehicle for the lesson, and the other that THE TEACHING OF JESUS 69 of the higher truth which it is sought to convey; the essence of the parable lies in the parallelism. In the other kind there is no parallelism, but the scene or the story is just a typical example of the broader principle which it is intended to illustrate. The parables in Mt 13, Mk 4 all belong to the one class, several of those in the later chapters of St. Luke (the Good Samaritan, the Rich Fool, the Rich Man and Lazarus, the Pharisee and the Publican) belong rather to the other. There is a group of sayings in the Fourth Gospel to which is given the name napoifjiLa rather than irapajBoX-q (Jn 10*^, cf. 16^^-"), though the latter term would not have been inappropriate, in which Jesus uses the method of comparison to bring out leading features in His own character and person. In this way He speaks of Himself as the Good Shepherd, the Door of the sheep, the Vine, the Light of the World. These sayings form a class by themselves, and from the peculiar way in which they are worked out — the metaphor and the object explained by the metaphor being not kept apart but blended and fused together — are commonly classed under the head of ' allegory ' rather than ' parable.' This is another instance in which we draw distinctions where the Greek of the NT would not have drawn them. § 29. (5) Interpretation of the Parables. — To this day there is some difference of opinion as to the inter- pretation of the parables. The Patristic writers as a rule (though with some exceptions) allow them- selves great latitude of interpretation. Any point of 70 TEACHING AND MIRACLES resemblance to any detail of the parable, however subordinate, justifies in their eyes a direct application of that detail. A familiar instance is the identification ■^ ^ of the 'two pence,' which the Good Samaritan gives to the host, with the two Sacraments. An opposite modern school would restrict the application to the leading idea which the parable expresses. It is, how- ever, fair to remember that the parables are meant to illustrate the laws of God's dealings with men ; and as the same law is capable of many particular applications, all such applications may be said with equal right to be included in the parable. For instance, the parable of the Two Sons may be as true for individuals or for classes as it is for nations or groups of nations. The parable of the Great Banquet to which the invited guests do not come, and which is then thrown open to others who were not invited, no doubt points directly to the first reception of the gospel, but it is equally appropriate to every case where religious privilege is found to give no advantage, and the absence of religious privilege proves no insuperable hindrance. Any such range of application is legitimate and interesting ; nor does the aptness of the lesson to one set of incidents make it any less apt to others where a like principle is at work. Every parable has its central idea, and whatever can be related to that idea may be fairly brought within its scope. To press mere coincidences with the picturesque accessories of a parable may be permissible as rhetoric, but can have no higher value. § 30. (6) The Purpose of Teaching by Parables. — If THE TEACHING OF JESUS 7 1 we had before us only the fact of parabolic teaching, with the parables as they have come down to us and the actual psychological effect which they are seen to exercise, we should probably not hesitate as to the reason which we assigned for them. The parabolic form is, as it were, a barb to the arrow which carries home truth to the mind. The extreme beauty of this mode of teaching, handled as it is, has been universally acknowledged. If simplicity is an element in beauty, we have it here to perfection. But when simplicity is united to profundity, and to a profundity which comes from the touching of elemental chords of human feeling, — a touching so delicate, so sure, and so self- restrained, which reminds us of the finest Greek art with an added spiritual intensity which in that art was the one thing wanting, — we have indeed a product such as the world had never seen before and will not see again. We seem to be placed for the moment at the very centre of things : on the one hand there is laid bare before us the human heart as it really is or ought to be, with all its perversities and affectations stripped away ; and on the other hand we seem to be admitted to the secret council-chamber of the Most High, and to have revealed to us the plan by which He governs the world, the threads in all the tangled skein of being. No wonder that the parables have exercised such an attractive power, not over any one class or race of men, but over humanity wherever it is found. Then the nature of the parable, at once presenting a picture to the mind and provoking to the search for a hidden meaning or application beneath it, would seem to be exactly suited to the paedagogic method of Jesus, 72 TEACHING AND MIRACLES which ahvays calls for some responsive effort on the part of man, and which prefers to produce its effects not all at once, but rather with a certain suspense and delay, so that the good seed may have time to germinate and strike its roots more deeply into the soil. This natural action of the method of teaching by parables seems so obvious that we might well be con- tent not to seek any further. But when we turn to the Gospels, we find there stated a motive for the adoption of this method of teaching which is wholly different, and it must be confessed at first sight somewhat para- doxical. All three Synoptists agree in applying to teaching by parables the half-denunciatory passage Is 6""'°; they would make its immediate object not so much to reveal truth as to conceal it — at least to conceal it for the moment from one class while it is I revealed to another, and its ulterior object to aggravate the guilt of those from whom it is concealed. And, what is still more remarkable, all three Synoptists ascribe the use of this quotation to our Lord Himself, as though it really expressed, not merely the result of His chosen method of teaching, but its deliberate purpose. What are we to make of this ? One group of critics would roundly deny that the words were ever used in this manner by our Lord. Jiilicher {e.g.) takes his stand on Mk 4^^ ' with many such parables spake he the word unto them, as they we?-e able to hear /V,' which would seem to make the method a tender con- cession to slowness of apprehension rather than a means of aggravating it. But, on the other hand, we observe that the quotation is attributed to our Lord in what must have been the common original of all three THE TEACHING OF JESUS 73 Gospels, i.e. in one of our best and oldest sources. And while such passages as Jn 12^*"^^ (where the same quotation is applied by the evangelist) and Ac 28^'^ (where it is applied by St. Paul) would show that it was part of the common property of the apostolic age, the fact that it was so would be still more intelligible if the example had been set by our Lord Himself. Nor would it be less but rather more appropriate as coming from Him, if we regard it as summing up in a broad way what He felt was and must be for many of those among whom He moved the final outcome of His mission. The lesson is very similar to that of Jn 12^^^ The Son of Man does not need to pass judgment on those who reject Him. His word judges them by an automatic process. That which is meant for their life becomes to them an occasion of falling, when from indolence or self-will it makes no impression upon them. This was the actual course of things ; it was a course rendered inevitable by the laws which God had laid down, and which in that sense might be re- garded as designed by Him, And inasmuch as the Son associates Himself with the providential action of the Father, it might be also spoken of as part of His own design. It is so, however, rather in the remoter degree in which, allowing for the contrariant action of human wills, whatever is is also ordained, than as directly purposed before the appeal has been made and rejected. It belongs to that department of providential action which is not primary and due to immediate Divine initiative, but secondary or contingent upon human failure. There is then perhaps sufficient reason to think that 74 TEACHING AND MIRACLES the words may after all have been spoken, much as we have them, by our Lord. But granting this, we should still not be forbidden to surmise that they are some- what out of place. Standing where they do they come to us with a shock of strange severity, which would be mitigated if they could be put later in the ministry, where they occur in St. John. The transference may have been due to the position which the original pas- sage occupies in Isaiah, where it also serves as a sort of programme of the prophet's mission. There, too, the arrangement may conceivably represent the actual historical order, but it may also represent the result of later experience, which for didactic effect is placed at the beginning of the career rather than at the end. b. Contents of the Teaching. § 31. There are five distinctive and characteristic topics in the teaching of Jesus — (i) The Fatherhood of God. (2) The Kingdom of God. (3) The Subjects or Members of the Kingdom. (4) The Messiah. (5) The Paraclete and the Tri-unity of God. With that simplicity which we have seen to be so marked a feature in His teaching, Jesus selects two of the most familiar of all relations to be the types round which He groups His teaching in regard to God and man — the family and the organized state ; God stands to man in the relation at once of Father and of King. These two types by no means exclude each other, but each helps to complete the idea derived from the other without which it might be one-sided. At the THE TEACHING OF JESUS 75 same time, in different connexions, first one and then the other becomes more prominent. Thus, when stress is laid upon the Divine attributes, God appears chiefly in the character of Father ; when attention is turned to the complex relations of men to Him and to one another, they are more commonly regarded under the figure of a Kingdom. § 32. (i) The Fatherhood of God. — It has just been said that the doctrine that God is Father by no means excludes the doctrine that He is also King. This idea, too, is repeatedly put forward (Mt 5^ 18-^ 22^ etc.). The title ' King ' brings out what in modern language we are accustomed to call the ' transcendence ' of God. But the recognition of this was, as we saw (p. 13, sup?), a strong point in the contemporary Judaism, and there- fore it needed no special emphasis. It was otherwise with the idea of Fatherhood. Not that this idea was unknown to the pagan religions, and still less to the religion of Israel. From Homer onwards Zeus had borne the name * Father of gods and men.' But this was a superficial idea: it meant little more than ' originator.' This sense also appears in the older Jewish literature, but with further connotations added to it. God is more particularly the Father of His people Israel (cf. Dt 14^ 32", Jer 3^^ 31^- ^), in a yet deeper sense of the righteous in Israel (Is 63"^), and, though not with the same wealth of meaning, of the individual (Mai 2^^ Sir 23^- *). It is the tenderest side of the teaching of OT (Ps 103^^) which is now taken up and developed. It becomes indeed the corner-stone of the NT teaching J^ TEACHING AND MIRACLES about God. The name ' Father ' becomes in NT what the name Jehovah (Jahveh) was in OT, the fullest embodiment of revelation. If it is prominent in the apostolic writings, this is traceable ultimately to the teaching of Jesus (cf. Ro 8^^ and comms.). The title belongs primarily to Jesus Himself as 'the Son' (6 IlarT^p /xov, esp. Mt II-'). Through Him it descends to His followers (6 IlaT^p v/awv, o IlaTT^/a uov, Mt ^16. 45. 48 51. 4. 6. 8. 9. 14. 15 ^^^^^ ^^<^ ^^g \q^,^ of Qod as Father extends beyond these limits even to ' the unthankful and evil ' (Lk 6^", Mt 5^^). The presentation of God as Father culminates in the parable of the Prodigal Son. Older conceptions of God find their counterpart in the Elder Brother of this parable (Lk j^25ff. contrasted with v.^). The application which is thus made of the Fatherhood of God invests the teaching of Jesus with wonderful tenderness and beauty (Mt 6^^- 7" lo-^- ^", Lk 12^2 etc.). § 33. (2) The Kingdom of God. — If the conception of God as Father does not exclude His majesty as King, no more does the conception of His Kingdom exclude that of children gathered together in His family. Still, the leading term to denote those active relations of God with man, with which the mission of Jesus is specially connected, is 17 jSao-tXeta tou Otov or twv ovpavaJv. The use of these terms suggests a number of ques- tions which are still much debated. (i.) Were both names originally used ? Or if one is to be preferred, which? (ii.) What is the meaning of the phrase? Does fiaa-iXua = ' kingdom ' or ' reign ' ? (iii.) When THE TEACHING OF JESUS ']'] we have determined this, with what order of ideas is the phrase to be associated ? With the later Judaism ? or with the teaching of the prophets ? Or does it belong to the more novel element in the teaching of our Lord ? (iv.) Is the Kingdom merely conceived of from the side of man or from the side of God ? Is it some- thing which man works out or which is bestowed upon him ? (v.) Is it present or future ? Was it in course of realization during the lifetime of Jesus Himself, or is it mainly eschatological ? (vi.) Is it inward or out- ward ? A moral reformation or the founding of a society? (vii.) Was the conception as at first framed national or universal? These questions are put as alternatives. And they are usually so regarded. But it may be well to say at once that in almost every case there seems to be real evidence for both sides of the proposition ; so that the inference is that the conception to which they relate was in fact many-sided, and included within itself a number of different nuances^ all more or less valid. And the reason for this appears to be, that our Lord took up a conception which He found already existing, and, although He definitely discarded certain aspects of it, left others as they were, some with and some without a more express sanction, while He added new ones. The centre or focus of the idea is thus gradually shifted ; and while parts of it belong to so much of the older current conception as was not explicitly repealed, other parts of it are a direct expression of the new spirit introduced into it. The one element definitely expelled was that which associated the inauguration of the Kingdom with political violence and revolution. 78 TEACHING AND MIRACLES (i.) 77^1? Name. — It is well known that the phrase y] jSao-tXet'tt tojv ovpavSiv for 17 fiaa. t. 6eov is a peculi- arity of the First Gospel (where it occurs thirty-two times), and that it receives no sanction from the other Synoptics. Neither can Jn 3^, where the reading is distinctly Western, be quoted in support of it. Hence some have thought that it was a coinage of Matthew. It occurs, however, also in Ev. sec. Heb. (Handmann, p. 89) ; and the fact that /3ao-. t. 0. is found in Mt 12^ 21^^- ^ would go to show that the evangelist had no real objection to that form, while the corresponding phrase ■n-a.Trjp 6 iv Tots ovpavot<; though it disappears from Lk 11^ is verified by Mk II-^ Moreover, we know that ' heaven ' was a common metonymy for 'God' in the language of the time (cf. also Mk io^\ Lk 10^ 12^), and that the particular phrase 'kingdom of heaven ' (though not exactly in the sense usually assigned to it; see below under ii.) occurs repeatedly in the Talmud. It seems, therefore, on the whole probable that both forms were used by our Lord Himself. In any case they may be regarded as equivalents. (ii.) Meaning. — The phrase in both its forms is ambiguous : it may mean either ' kingdom ' or ' reign,' ' sovereignty,' ' rule ' of heaven, or of God. It appears that in the Talmud the latter signification is the more common (Schiirer, NT Zeitgesch? ii. 539 n. [Eng. tr. II. ii. 171] ; Edersheim, Life and Times, etc. i. 267 f.). And though the former is that more usually adopted by commentators, there seems to be no reason why re- course should not be had to the latter where it is more natural (as, e.g., in Lk 17^' ^^). The phrase covers both THE TEACHING OF JESUS 79 senses, and the one will frequently be found to shade off into the other. The best definition known to the writer is one given incidentally by Dr. Hort {Life ami Letters, ii. 273), ' the world of invisible laws by which God is ruling and blessing His creatures.' This is the most fundamental meaning ; all others are secondary. The ' laws ' in question are ' a world,' inasmuch as they have a connexion and coherence of their own ; they form a system, a cosmos within the cosmos ; they come direct from ' heaven,' or from God ; and they are ' invisible ' in their origin, though they may work their way to visibility. (iii.) Associations. — The sense just assigned was that which was most fundamental in the thought of Jesus. It was that which He saw ought to be the true sense, however much it might be missed by His contem- poraries. It was deeper and subtler than the concep- tion of Psalmist and Prophet, even than the bright and exhilarating picture of Ps 145"'^^ because it was compatible with any kind of social condition, and be- cause it did not turn mainly on the majestic exercise of power. And if this was true of the later and more developed conception, much more was it true of the earlier notion of the theocracy, which was simply that of the Israelite State with a Prophet or Judge at the head instead of a King (i S 12"-). The contemporaries of Jesus when they spoke of the ' Kingdom of God ' thought chiefly of an empire contrasted with the great world-empires, more particularly the Roman, which galled them at the moment. And the two features which caught their imagination most were the throwing off of the hated yoke and the transference of supremacy 80 TEACHING AND MIRACLES from the heathen to Israel. This was to be brought about by a catastrophe which was to close the existing order of things, and which therefore took a shape that was eschatological. This eschatological and catastrophic side Jesus did not repudiate, though He gave a different turn to it, but the essence of His conception was independent of all convulsions. The simplest paraphrase for ' the Kingdom of God ' is the clause which follows the peti- tion for the coming of the Kingdom in the Lord's Prayer: ' Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven.' The only difference is that the Prayer perhaps hints rather more at the co-operation of human wills. This is not excluded in the idea of the Kingdom, which is, how- ever, primarily the working out of the Will of God by God Himself. (iv.) The Nature of the Kingdofn : hoiv far super- natural? — The very name of the Kingdom 'of heaven or of God ' implies that it has its origin in the world above. It ' comes ' (lpx^$dv€iv, Mt i2^ = Lk ii'-^'j; it is 'given' (Mt 21'*") and 'received' (Mk 10^^ = Lk 18''} ; it is ' prepared ' by God (Mt 25*') ; it is ' inherited ' (/^.), and men ' enter into ' it (Mt 5^ 19^) J" 3'') '1 it is an object of ' search ' (Mt 6*' = Lk i2^S Mt 13*'). All this means that it is not built up by the labour of man, it is not a product of develop- ment from below, but ' of the creative activity of God ' (Liitgert, J?eieh Gottes, p. 26). It is a gift bestowed, not something to be done, but something to be enjoyed ('Nie eine Aufgabe, wohl aber eine Gabe,' Holtzmann, JVT Th. p. 202, partly after Liitgert). It is a prize, the THE TEACHING OF JESUS 8 1 highest of all prizes (Mt 13^^^), corresponding to the siiiiDnuin boniiin of pagan philosophy. This part of the conception has a considerable range, according as the context points to the popular view of the Messianic Kingdom as implying outward conditions of splendour, abundance, and enjoyment, or as it points to what we have called the inner thought of Jesus, the invis- ible laws of God's working, taken into and welcomed by the individual soul, as in the parables of the Pearl and the Treasure in the Field. These parables show that there is a place, though a subordinate place, left for human effort, the co-operation of the human will with the Divine. The process of ' seeking ' implies both effort and renunciation. There must be a concentrating of the powers of the soul upon the Will of God, if that Will is to be really done ; but where it is done it brings its own exceeding great reward (Lk 6*^). From this point of view it may be said, with Holtz- mann {NT Th. i. 202-207), that the negative side of the conception is the Forgiveness of Sins as the first condition of entrance into the Kingdom, and that the positive side of it is the active practice of Righteous- ness with the peace and contentment which that practice brings. (v.) Present or Future? — There can be no real ques- tion that the Kingdom is presented in both lights as present and as future. Strictly speaking, the future is divided, and the notes of time are threefold — present, near future, and more distant future. Take, for in- stance, the following passages: Mt 12^ (= Lk ii"") ']f I by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then is the 6 82 TEACHING AND MIRACLES Kingdom of God come (c^^acrev) upon you ' ; Mk i" ( = Mt 4^^) 'The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand ' (yjyyiKev) ; Mk 9^ || ' There be some here . . . which shall in nowise taste of death till they see the Kingdom of God come {IXrjXvOviav) with power.' The only one of these passages about which there can be any doubt is the second (see above, p. 35), and even that belongs to the common groundwork of the Synoptic tradition, and it is supported by Mt lo^l- If the latest of these dates still falls within the lifetime of the then generation, there is a group of parables (the Mustard Seed, the Wheat and Tares, the Drag-net) which would seem at once to bring the Kingdom into the present, and to postpone its consummation. These apparent inconsistencies are probably to be explained in the same way as others which w^e meet with. The future coming, the more or less distant coming, of which the Son Himself does not know the day or the hour, is the eschatological coming of the current expectation, which, if we follow our authorities, we must believe that Jesus also shared. There was, however, a certain ambiguity even in this expectation as popularly held : it was not clear exactly in what relation of time the coming of the Messiah and the establishment of His Kingdom stood to the end of all things. And this ambiguity was necessarily heightened by the peculiar nature of the coming of Christ, and the conviction which gradually forced itself upon the minds of the disciples that there must needs be a double Coming, — one in shame, the other in triumph ; one therefore which for them was past, and another still in the future. THE TEACHING OF JESUS 83 But, apart from all this, it will be apparent that the more distinctive conception of the Kingdom as the ' world of invisible laws ' by which God works is not subject to the same limitations of time. In this sense it embraces the whole providential scheme of things from the beginning ; though, as we have said, it is really a cosmos within the cosmos, and it has its cul- minating periods and moments, such as was above all that which dates from the Incarnation. The most characteristic expression of this aspect of the Kingdom would be the parables of the Leaven and of the Seed growing secretly. (vi.) Imua?'d or Oufiaard? — A like conclusion holds good for the question which we have next to ask ourselves : Are we to think of the Kingdom of God as visible or as invisible ? Is it an influence, a force or collection of forces, or is it an institution ? We are familiar with the very common and often quite super- ficial identification of the Kingdom with the Church. Is this justified ? Many recent writers answer this question emphatically. No (list with reff. in Holtzmann, NT Th. i. 208). And it is true that there are certain passages by which it seems to be excluded. Conspicuous among these are the verses Lk 172"- 21 q^^ epxerai i] /3. T. 6. fiera Tvapariiprjcrew's. oiid^ ipovcriv, 'ISoi) tS5e •^ iKe?. Idov yap 7] (8. T. 6. ^vTos vfiQiv ecTTiv. A majority of leading German scholars, including Schiirer {Die Predigt. J. C. p. 18) and Holtzmann (with a slight modification, 'in your reach'), take the last words as meaning ' in your midst,' the main ground being that they are addressed to the Pharisees. But Field seems to have shown {Ot. Norv. ad. loc.) that this interpretation is lexically untenable ('no sound example'), and that the better rendering is iti animis vestris. But, on the other hand, parables like the Wheat and 84 TEACHING AND MIRACLES the Tares and the Drag-net are most naturally explained of a visible community ; and there can be no doubt that the popular expectation was of a visible kingdom, such as that in which the sons of Zebedee sought for a chief place. If we keep to the clue which we have hitherto followed, the facts will be sufficiently clear. The King- dom in its highest and most Christian sense is the working of ' invisible laws ' which penetrate below the surface and are gradually progressive and expansive in their operation. But in this as in other cases spiritual forces take to themselves an outward form ;. they are enshrined in a vessel of clay, finer or coarser as the case may be, not only in men as individuals but in men as a community or communities. The society then becomes at once a vehicle and instrument of the forces by which it is animated, not a perfect vehicle or a perfect instru- ment, — a field of wheat mingled with tares, a net containing bad fish as well as good, — but analogous to those other visible institutions by which God accom- plishes His gracious purposes amongst men, (vii.) National or Universal? — The same principle holds good throughout the whole of this analysis of the idea of the Kingdom. The aptest figure to express it is that of growth. It is a germ, secretly and silently insinuated, and secretly and silently working until it puts forth first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear. It is a mistake to cut a section of that which is thus ceaselessly expanding, and to label it with a name which might be true at one particular moment but would not be true at the next. The Kingdom of God is not the theocracy of the OT, nor the eschato- THE TEACHING OF JESUS 8$ logical Kingdom of the Apocalypses, nor the Christian Church of the present day, or of the Middle Ages, or of the Fathers. These are phases through which it passes ; but it outgrows one after the other. For this reason, because He foresaw this inevitable and continuous growth, the chief Founder and permanent Vicegerent of the Kingdom showed Himself, as we might think, indifferent to the precise degree of extension which it was to receive during His life on earth ; He was content to say that He ' was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel' (Mt 15^'^), though within a generation His gospel was about to be carried to the ends of the then known earth. It was enough that the seed was planted — planted in a soil suited to it, and under conditions that ensured its full vitality, ' like a tree by the streams of water, that bringeth forth its fruit in its season, whose leaf also doth not wither.' It is characteristic of God's processes that there is no hurry or impatience about them ; the Master was not so anxious to reap immediate fruit as the disciple (Ro i^^), and therefore He calmly left it to His followers to see 'greater things' than He saw Himself (Jn 14^^) ; but these ' greater things ' are none the less virtually His own. § 34. (3) T/ie Me7tibers of the Kingdom. — As the ' Reign of God,' the /3acrtAeta tov deov denotes certain Divine forces of laws which are at work in the world ; as the Kingdom of God it was at most stages a society, but at all stages a definite sphere or area, into which men might enter, and, by entering, become partakers of the same Divine forces or subject to the same Divine 86 TEACHING AND MIRACLES laws. It was therefore a matter of much moment what were the conditions of entrance into the Kingdom, and what was the character impressed upon its members. The two things run into each other, because it was required of those who entered that they should possess at least the germs of the character to be developed in them. (i.) Conditiotis of Entrance. — These are clearly laid down : ' Except ye turn, and become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven ' (Mt 1 8^). There was to be a definite change of mind, a break with the sinful past. This was to be ratified by submission to the rite of baptism, which, in the dis- course with Nicodemus, is described as a new birth of ' water and Spirit ' (Jn 3^). The entrance into the Kingdom is something more than a deliberate act of the man himself, it is a self-surrender to Divine in- fluences. The response on the part of God is forgive- ness, which is the permanent concomitant of baptism, not only that of John, but also that in the name of Christ (Mk i*||, comp. with Ac 2^^, Lk 24''^ etc.). (ii.) The Character of the Members. — The typical character of the members of the Kingdom is that of a ' little child,' in which the prominent features are innocence, simplicity of aim, absence of self-assertion, trustfulness, and openness to influences from above. A sketch of such a character is given in the Beatitudes (Mt 5^^^; the II in Lk 6^-'^ refers rather to conditions or circumstances suited to the character). The Chris- tian ideal here depicted stands out in marked contrast to most other ideals of what is admirable in man. The qualities commended ('poor in spirit' — where the THE TEACHING OF JESUS 8/ Matthaean gloss is in any case right in sense, — ' meek,' ' merciful,' ' pure in heart,' ' peacemakers ') are all of the gentle, submissive, retiring order. And this is fully borne out by other sayings, the cheek turned to the smiter, the litigant forestalled, the requisition of labour offered freely, and even doubled (Mt 5^^*1), enemies to be loved, prosecutors to be prayed for {ib. vv.*3- «), the sword to be sheathed (Mt 26^-), the duties of charity strongly inculcated (Lk 10-^^), the duty of forgiveness of injuries (Mt 18-^^), service greater than authority (Lk 22^^). And it is noticeable that the same type of character is praised by St. Paul (Ro 12^^ ' Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good'; cf. ch. 13). The whole duty of man is summed up in love to God and love to one's neighbour (again cf. Ro 13^^°). We observe, too, that the ethical teaching of Jesus is almost confined to that side of ethics which touches upon religion. Allusions to civic and industrial duties are very few, and those negative rather than positive (Mt 18^ 22^1 = Ro 13^. (iii.) Paradoxes of Christianity. — It is only natural that these features in the teaching of Christ should be taken hold of and made a charge against Christianity, as they have been from Suetonius onwards {Domit. 15, * contemptissimae inertiae,' of Flavius Clemens, probably as a Christian; cf. Tertull. Apol. 42, ' infructuosi in negotiis dicimur '). And it may be doubted whether even yet the full intention of our Lord has been fathomed, and the exact place of the specifically Chris- tian ideal in relation to civic and social duties ascer- tained. The following suggestions may be offered. The precepts in question were probably addressed 88 TEACHING AND MIRACLES in the first instance, not to promiscuous multitudes, but to the disciples. If certain passages (as Mt 5^) may be quoted to the contrary, it should be remembered that these introductory notes as to the circumstances under which discourses were spoken are among the least trustworthy parts of the Gospel tradition, and are often nQthing more than vague conjectures of the evan- gelists. The type of character described bears on its face the marks of being intended for the little com- munity of Christians (cf. Latham, Pastor Pastorum, P- 253)- As such we can see that it had a very special appro- priateness. It was not an accident that Christianity is the religion of the Crucified, The Cross is but the culminating expression of a spirit which was char- acteristic of it throughout. Its peculiar note is Victory through Suffering. An idea like that of Islam, making its way by the sword, was abhorrent to it from the first. Jesus came to be the Messiah of the Jews, but the narratives of the Temptation teach us that, from the very beginning of His career. He stripped off from His conception of Messiahship all that was political, all thought of propagating His claims by force. A new mode of propagating religion was deliberately chosen, and carried through with uncompromising thoroughness. The disciple was not above His Mas- ter ; and the example which Jesus set in founding His faith by dying for it, was an example which His disciples were called upon to follow into all its logical consequences. Christianity, the true Christianity, carries no arms ; it wins its way by lowly service, by patience, by self-sacrifice. THE TEACHING OF JESUS 89 History shows that there are no instruments of re- Hgious propaganda comparable to these. It also shows that the type of character connected with them is of the very highest attractiveness and beauty. Is it a complete type, a type to which we can apply the Kantian maxim, ' So act as if your action was to be a law for all human beings ' ? This would seem to be more than we ought to say. It is not clear that the Christian type would be what it is if it were not built upon, and if it did not presuppose, a certain structure of society, to which other motives had contributed. The ethical ideal of Christianity is the ideal of a Church. It does not follow that it is also the ideal of the State. If we are to say the truth, we must admit that parts of it would become impracticable if they were transferred from the individual standing alone to governments or individuals representing society. It could not be in- tended that the officers of the law should turn the cheek to the criminal. The apostles were to bear no sword, but the judge ' beareth not the sword in vain.' May we not say that the functions of Christian morals — specifically Christian morals — are these? (i) At their first institution to form a vehicle, the only possible vehicle, for the Christian religion. So far as Chris- tianity has taken a real and genuine hold upon society, it is through these means and no others. Other things may have commended it for a time, but no trust can be placed in them. (2) The Christian motive acting in the midst of other motives gradually leavens and modifies them, imparting to them something which they had not before. If we look round us at the 90 TEACHING AND MIRACLES principles which at this moment regulate the action of States, in their external or international relations as well as those which are internal, we shall see that if these principles are not wholly Christian, they are also not pagan. They have a certain coherence, and they mark a very conspicuous advance as compared with the principles of the ancient world. Christianity has shown a power of modifying what it does not altogether supplant. The world even outside Christianity is still God's world. It is a world of which the essential char- acteristic is that it is progressive ; and it may conduce most to this progress that it should be brought under the influence of the Christian precept, not pure but in dilution. And (3) may we not draw from this the augury that in the end, at some time which we cannot see, the social structure may be still more fully recast, under the influence of Christianity : ' Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more ' ? We can conceive a condition of things in which the Church became coextensive with the State, and in which religion penetrated the body politic in a sense in which it has never done so yet. When that time came, conduct which now would be only quixotic might be rational, and required by the public conscience. When the verse Mt 5''^ ' Give to him that asketh thee,' etc., is criticized from the point of view of modern political economy, the mistake is in applying a standard which is out of place. In those days the natural and, indeed, the only outlet of the kind for benefiting the poor was almsgiving ; and our Lord's main object was to strengthen the motive, which was in itself a thoroughly right one. It would have been in vain to h THE TEACHING OF JESUS 9 1 anticipate methods which God has evidently intended to be the result of long experience. The argument from analogy comes in here with great force. God might have removed many forms of human ill with a word ; but as it is, He has been pleased to let improved methods, and the wisdom to use them, grow gradu- ally and grow together. The advance which mankind slowly makes is a solid advance, and an advance not here and there, but all along the line. We have seen that our Lord was not careful to guard against misunderstandings. It has been a salutary exercise for His followers to find out what was the true sense of His sayings for themselves. § 35.(4) The Messiah. — We are not concerned here with the very remarkable historical evolution of the claim of our Lord to be the Messiah, which will come before us in connexion with the narrative of His life. At present we have to do only with His teaching on the subject, and that mainly with reference to the deeply significant names by which His claim was conveyed. (i.) The Christ. — We need not delay over the title ' Messiah,' ' Christ,' ' Anointed,' which is simply that of the current Jewish expectation. It is repeatedly applied to our Lord by others, and on three occasions, at least, expressly accepted by Himself (Jn 4^^, Mt 16", Mk 14^^*'^ II, cf. Jn 11^; but only once does our Lord use the term of Himself (Jn 17^ 'It/o-ow Xpto-rov), and that in a passage where we cannot be sure that the wording is not that of the evangelist. In like manner the title * Elect ' (cKXeXey/xej'os, Lk 9^ ; exAeKTos, Lk U' 92 TEACHING AND MIRACLES 23^), which is also current (cf. Enoch 40'), is applied to our Lord, but not by Himself. (ii.) Son of David. — Much the same may be said of another title which belongs to a prominent side of the expectation. ' Son of David ' occurs several times (on the lips of the crowd at and before the triumphal entry, of the Syrophoenician woman, of Bartimaeus, of the Pharisees), but Jesus Himself does not use it, and rather propounds a difficulty in regard to it (Mk 12^11). (iii.) Son of Man. — The really characteristic title which occurs some eighty times in the Gospels, and is without doubt the one which Jesus chose to express His own view of His office, is ' the Son of Man.' Whereas the other titles are used by others of Him, this is used only by Him and of Himself. What He desired to convey by this is a question at once of no little difficulty and of great importance (' Die Frage gehort zu den verwickeltsten ja verfahrensten der ganzen neutest. Theologie,' Holtzmann). The starting-point for this, as well as for the idea of the kingdom, is, we may be sure, Dn 7^^. The ' Son of Man ' in that passage, as originally written, stood for Israel. The four world-empires are represented by beasts, the dominion that falls to Israel is that of a man. But in this as in other respects the passage was interpreted Messianically. In the Similitudes of the Book of Enoch (chs. 37-70) the Son of Man takes a prominent place. He is a person, and a superhuman person. It is He who holds the great judgment to which the Apocalyptic writings look forward. The attributes ascribed to Him are all more or less directly THE TEACHING OF JESUS 93 connected with this judgment, which is at once to vindicate the righteous, and finally to put down the wicked. The date of this portion of the Book of Enoch has been much debated, but opinion at the present time is still more preponderantly in favour of the view that it is pre-Christian (between B.C. 94-64, Charles, Enoch, p. 29f.). The language of the Gospels requires that the title as applied to a person and to the Messiah should be not entirely new. It also requires that it should be not perfectly understood and familiar (Mt 16^", Jn 12^'*). It is probable that its use did not go beyond a small circle, the particular circle to which the Similitudes of Enoch belonged. This, however, would be enough to give the phrase a certain currency, and to make it at least suggest association with the Messiah. It is associated with Him, especially in His char- acter as Jvidge, and as the chief actor in that series of events which marks the end of the age, and the reversal of the places of good and wicked. This sense Jesus did not discard. It appears unmistakably in a number of passages (Mt 13^ i6-« 19^ 24"<"f- 2^'^"^- 26^ etc.). But at the same time there can be no doubt that He read into it a number of other ideas, new and original, just as He read them into the conception of the Kingdom. What is most distinctive in this novel element in the teaching of Jesus ? There is an increasing tendency among scholars to lay stress on the Aramaic original of the phrase. The Aramaic equivalent is said to mean and to be the only way which they had of express- ing ' Man ' (generically, i.e. ' Mankind '). Hence the attempt has been made to interpret the phrase im- 1 94 TEACHING AND MIRACLES personally, and to get rid more or less of its Messianic application (see Holtzmann, NT Th. i, 256ff.). It is true that an impersonal sense will suit such a passage as Mk 2^ ' The Sabbath was made for man . . . therefore the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.' At the same time this is by no means the necessary sense. And Wellhausen, who is one of those who most emphatically maintain the equation ' Son of Man ' = ' Man,' yet sees that the expression must have been used by our Lord to designate His own person {Israel. u. Jiid. Gesch? p. 381). Nor can this conclusion really be avoided by such an expedient as Holtzmann's, who calls attention to the comparative rarity of the title in the early chapters and early stages of the history {e.g. in Mark only 2^°-^), and would explain it during this period impersonally, and only after St. Peter's con- fession personally. Against this and against more sweeping attempts {e.g. by Martineau, Seat of Authority, p. 339) to get rid of the Messianic signification alto- gether, it may be enough to point out that if reasonable critics like Holtzmann allow, and a narrative such as that of the Temptation seems to prove, that Jesus from the first really assumed the character of the Messiah, and if our oldest authorities with one consent treat the title Son of Man as in the later stages Messianic, it is fair to presume that it is Messianic also in the earlier. If the Similitudes of the Book of Enoch are pre- Christian, this conclusion would amount almost to certainty. It is, however, fair to argue from the natural sense of the phrase in Aramaic, that by His use of it, Jesus did place Himself in some relation to humanity as a THE TEACHING OF JESUS 95 whole. And we are led to form the same inference by the conspicuous use of the corresponding Hebrew in Ps 8* ' What is man that thou art mindful of him ? and the son of man that thou visitest him ? ' Here the parallelism shows that * son of man ' = ' man.' We also know from He 2^^" that the psalm was at a very- early date applied to Jesus as the Messiah, and at a still earlier date (the Baptism) we have the neigh- bouring Ps 2' applied to Him. It seems to follow, or at least to be a very natural presumption, that these two psalms early became an object of close study to Jesus, and helped to give outward shape to His conceptions. Ps 8 seems specially adapted to fall in with these, as it brings out with equal strength the two elements which we know to have entered into the consciousness of Jesus — the combination of lowliness with loftiness, the physical weakness of man as contrasted with his sublime calHng and destiny. We can see here the appropriateness of the application of one and the same title to Him who, on the one hand, 'had not where to lay his head,' and who must needs 'go as it was written of him,' and who yet, on the other hand, looked to come again * with power ' in His Kingdom. We do not like to use such very modern phraseology as the ' ideal of humanity,' ' the representative of the human race ' ; and yet it would seem that Jesus did deliberately connect with His own person such ideas as these : He fused them as it were into the central idea of Messiahship, and we can see how the Jewish conception of the Messiah was enlarged and enriched by them. If the Messiah comes out in the claim to 96 TEACHING AND MIRACLES forgive sins, it is the Son of Man whose mission it was 'to seek and to save that which was lost' (Lk 19^"), ' not to be ministered unto but to minister, and to give his Ufa a ransom for many' (Mk io''^||). Here we have another connexion in which the name is frequently used. The prophecies of the Resurrection and of the Second Coming are closely associated with the fatal end of the First : ' The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders, and the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again ' (Mk 8'^^ etc.). If we ask for the OT original of this ' Saviour through suffering,' no doubt it is the Second Part of Isaiah, and especially Is 53. Still, it would be rather too much to describe this idea as embodied in the title ' Son of Man.' It is embodied in the character of the Son of Man as con- ceived by Jesus, but not exactly in the name. The name which expressed it was the ' Servant of Jehovah ' (Trats KvpLov) ; and this name was undoubtedly applied to Christ by the Church as soon as it began to reflect upon His life and mission (cf. Ac 3^^- -" 4^' '^°, Mt 12^'^), but we have no evidence that Jesus used it of Himself. One reason for the choice of the name ' Son of Man ' probably was that it admitted and favoured these associations, even if it did not directly suggest them. This comprehensive and deeply significant title touched at the one end the Messianic and eschato- logical expectation through the turn which had been given to it in one section of Judaism (the Book of Enoch). At the other and opposite end it touched the idea of the Suffering Servant. But at the centre it is broadly based upon an infinite sense of brotherhood THE TEACHING OF JESUS 97 with toiling and struggling humanity, which He who most thoroughly accepted its conditions was fittest also to save. As Son of God, Jesus looked upwards to the Father ; as Son of Man, He looked outwards upon His brethren, the sheep who had no shepherd. (iv.) Son of God. — Only once in the Synoptics (Mt 27*^) and in a few places in the Fourth Gospel (Jn 10^^ cf. 5^ 9^ var. lee. 11*) is it hinted that Jesus directly assumed this title. It is repeatedly given to Him by others — by the Baptist (Jn i'^), by Nathanael (Jn i*^), by Satan hypothetical ly (Mt 4^), as also by the crowd (Mt 27*), by the possessed (Mk 3"||), by the disciples (Mt 14^), by the centurion (Mk 15^^ = Mt 27^^), and by evangelists (Mk i-^ v. I. Jn 3^* 20^^). At the same time it is abundantly clear that the title was really assumed from the indirect mode in which Jesus constantly speaks of God as 'My Father.' This is very frequent in the Synoptics as well as in St. John (Mt 7-^ 10^^ II-'' 15^^ 16^'' etc.). And although, as we have seen, the consciousness which finds expression in this phrase becomes the basis of an extended doctrine of the Divine Fatherhood ('the Father,' 'our Father,' 'thy Father,' 'your Father'), there is nevertheless a distinct interval between the sense in which God can be claimed as Father by men, even the innermost circle of the disciples, and that in which He is Father to the Son. In this respect the passage Mt ii^ = Lk lo" is quite explicit (cf. also the graduated scale of being in Mk 13'^- = Mt 24^"). Although this passage stands out somewhat conspicuously in the Synoptics, the context in which it occurs is so original and so beyond the reach of invention, while it supplies so marvellously the key 7 98 TEACHING AND MIRACLES to that which distinguishes the history of Jesus from other histories, that doubt cannot reasonably be cast upon it. It is confirmed by the sense in which the title ' Son of God ' is taken by the Jews — not merely by the populace but by the learned (Mt 27""^'^ cf. Mk 15^^- ^-, n ig''). And, on the other hand, it confirms sufficiently the substantial accuracy of like passages in the Fourth Gospel {e.g. lo^"- "*). We are thus prepared for the unanimity with which the Church at the earliest date fixed upon this title to convey its sense of the uniqueness of Christ's nature (Ac 9^, Ro I^ Gal 2^, Eph 4l^ He 4" etc., i Jn 4^^ etc., Rev 2^«). This aspect of the question will come before us more fully later. We content ourselves for the present with observing that the teaching of Jesus, reserved and reticent as it is, presupposes as its background this wholly exceptional relation of ' the Son ' to ' the Father.' From that as centre radiate a number of other relationships to His immediate disciples, to the Church of which they formed the nucleus, and to man- kind. The Sonship of Jesus is intimately connected with His work as Messiah (Titius, p. 116). It is in this character that ' all things are delivered ' to Him (Mt 11^ 11), in this character that He is enabled to give to the world a revelation of the Father {ib.), in this character that He carries out His work of redemption even to the death (Mk i^^^\\). § 36. (5) The Paraclete and the Tri-tmity of God. — In the earliest Epistles of St. Paul we find that the Son of God is placed side by side with the Father, and is asso- ciated with Him as the ground of the Church's being. THE TEACHING OF JESUS 99 the source of spiritual grace, and as co-operating with Him in the providential ordering of events (i Th i\ 2 Th iS I Th 3I"'). It is difficult to describe the effect of the language used in any other terms than as attributing to the Son a coequal Godhead with the Father. And it is remarkable that St. Paul does this, within some twenty-two years of the Ascension, not as though he were laying down anything new, but as something which might be assumed as part of the common body of Christian doctrine. We observe also that throughout the earliest group of Epistles there are frequent references to the work of the Holy Spirit as the one great force which lies behind at once the missionary activity and the common life of the Church of the apostolic age (esp. i Co 12-14, but cf. I Th i^*^' 4^ 5^' etc.). This, too, it is assumed that all Christians would understand. How are we to account for the prevalence of such teaching at so early a date, and in a region so far removed from the centre of Christianity? It would be natural if the Lord Jesus Christ Himself in His intercourse with His disciples had prepared them to expect a great activity of the Holy Spirit, and if He had hinted at relations in the Godhead which made it threefold rather than a simple monad. Apart from such hints, the common belief of the Church respecting Christ Himself and the Holy Spirit seems very difficult to understand. Certain previous tendencies in Jewish thought might lead up some way towards it, but they would leave a wide gap unspanned. When, therefore, we find that one Gospel ascribes to our Lord rather full and detailed teaching respecting lOO TEACHING AND MIRACLES the Paraclete, which is explained to be another name for the Holy Spirit (Jn 14!'^ ^6 ^^26^^ ^^,^^^ ^|^gj.g -^ ^ield out a clear hope and promise of a new Divine influence to take the place of that which is being withdrawn, and when in another Gospel we are also told of the institution * of a rite associated with a new revelation of God under a threefold Name, that of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Mt 28^^), these phenomena are just what we are prepared for, and just such as we should have had to assume even if we had had no definite record of them. We may, then, regard them as having received — whatever the antecedent claims of the documents in which they are found — a very con- siderable degree of critical verification. The single verse 2 Cor 13'* seems to require something very like what we find in St. Matthew and St. John. Literature. — Much material of value will be found in the works on the Biblical Theology of NT by Weiss, Beyschlag, and esp. H. J. Holtzmann (1897). Reference may also be made to Bovon, Theol. du NT, Lausanne, 1S97. The most considerable recent work on the Teaching of Jesus as a whole is Wendt's Lehre Jesu, Gottingen, 1890 (Eng. tr., Charles Scribner's Sons, N.Y. 1892). Bruce, The Kingdom of God (1890 and later) embraces the Synoptic Gospels only. In the last few years a number of mono- graphs have appeared on the doctrine of the Kingdom and points connected with it — all, it may be said, bringing out some real aspect in the doctrine, though in the writer's opinion too often at the expense of other aspects. The series began with two prize essays, Die Lehre vom /■Seiche Gottes, by Issel and Schmoller (both Leiden, 1891), and includes treatises with similar titles by Schnedermann (Leipzig, 1893, 1S95, 1896), J. Weiss (Gottingen, 1892), Liitgert (Giitersloh, 1895), Titius (Freiburg i. B. u. Leipzig, 1895), Krop (Paris, 1897); ^^^o Bousset, Jesti * Not, of course, the first institution, but its confirmation as a rite and its first association with the triple formula. THE MIRACLES OF JESUS lOI Predigt in ihrefu Gegensatz zum Judentum (GoUingen, 1892); Paul, Die Vorstelhmgen voin Messias u. vom Gottesreich (Bonn, 1895); Lietzmann, Der Menschensohn (Leipzig, 1896); J. Weiss, Die Nachfolge Christi (Gottingen, 1895); Grass, Das Verhalten zu Jesus (Leipzig, 1895); Ehihardt, Der Grundcharakter d. Ethik Jesu (Freiburg i. B. u. Leipzig, 1895); Wiesen, Die Slellung Jesu zum irdischen GiU (Giitersloh, 1895). The Miracles of Jesus. § 37. There has been a certain tendency of late to recede from the extreme position in the denial of Miracles. Harnack, for instance, writes in reference to the Gospel history as follows : ' Much that was formerly rejected has been re-established on a close investigation, and in the light of comprehensive ex- perience. Who in these days, for example, could make such short work of the miraculous cures in the Gospels as was the custom of scholars formerly?' {^Christianity and History, p. 63, Eng. tr.). § 38. (i.) Different Classes of Miracles. — VzxtXy this change of attitude is due to the higher estimate which would now be put on the value of the evangelical sources generally, as to which something will be said below. Partly it would be due to a change of view in regard to the supernatural, which is no longer placed in direct antagonism to the natural, but which is more reasonably explained as resulting from the operation of a higher cause in nature. And partly also it would be due to the recognition of wider possibilities in nature, ' more things in heaven and earth ' than were dreamt of in the narrow philosophy of the Aujkldrung. 102 TEACHING AND MIRACLES (a) In particular, it may be said that medical science would have no difficulty in admitting a large class of miracles of healing. All those which have to do with what would now be called ' nervous disorders,' all those in which there was a direct action of the mind upon the body, would fall into place readily enough. Given a personality like that of Jesus, the effect which it would have upon disorders of this character would be strictly analogous to that which modern medicine would seek to produce. The peculiar combination of commanding authority with extreme gentleness and sympathy would be a healing foice of which the value could not easily be exagg-'^raied. A question would indeed still ue left as to the treat- ment of the ca-es of what Avas called ' demoniacal possession.' There can be no doubt that Jesus Himself shared, broadly speaking, the A^iews of His contem- poraries in regard to these cases : His methods of healing went upon the assumption that they were fundamentally what every one, including the patients themselves, supposed them to be. We can well believe that this was a necessary assumption in order to allow the healing influences to operate. We must remember that all the ideas of the patient would be adjusted to the current belief, and it would be only through them that the words and acts of Christ could take effect. In the accounts of such miracles we see that there was a mutual intelligence between Healer and patient from the first (Mk r"*"!] =^|| 5I). It was by means of this mutual intelligence that the word of command struck home. We should be prepared, then, to say that this class THE MIRACLES OF JESUS IO3 of miracles implied accommodation to the ideas of the time. But when we speak of ' accommodation ' on the part of our Lord, we do not mean a merely politic assumption of a particular belief for a particular purpose. We mean that the assumption was part of the outfit of His incarnate Manhood. There was a certain circle of ideas which Jesus accepted in becoming Man in the same way in which He accepted a particular language with its grammar and vocabulary. It would have been wholly out of keeping with tii general character of His Miaistry if Jesus had ati.u Lea this form of disease in any other way than through the belief in regard to it which at that time was universal. The scientific description of it has doubtless greatly changed. But it is still a question which is probably by no means so clear, whether, allowing for its temporary and local character, the language then used did not contain an important element of truth. The physical and moral spheres are perhaps more intimately con- nected than we suppose. And the unbridled wickedness rife in those days may have had physical effects, which were not unfitly described as the work of 'demons.' The subject is one which it is probable has not yet been fully explored. (/?) There is, as we have seen, one large class of diseases in regard to which the healing force exerted by the presence and the word of Jesus has a certain amount of analogy in the facts recognized by modern medicine. We must not, however, treat that analogy as going farther than it does. It does not hold good equally for all the forms of disease which are described as having been healed. Wherever the body is subject 104 TEACHING AND MIRACLES to the action of the mind, there we can give an account of the miracle which is to some extent — to a large ex- tent — rational and intelligible. But in cases in which the miracle involves a purely physical process it will not be possible to explain it in the same way. This other class of miracles will fall rather under the same head as those which were wrought, not upon man, but upon nature. In regard to these miracles, the world is probably not much nearer to a reasoned ac- count than it was. It must always be remembered that the narratives which have come down to us are the work of those who expected that Divine action would (as we should say) run counter to natural laws and not be in harmony with them, and that the more Divine it was the more directly it would run counter to them. We may be sure that if the miracles of the first century had been wrought before trained spectators of the nine- teenth, the version of them would be quite different. But to suppose this is to suppose what is impossible, because all God's dealings with men are adapted to the age to which they belong, and cannot be transferred to another age. If God intended to manifest Himself specially to the nineteenth century, we should expect Him to do so by other means. We are then compelled to take the accounts as they have come down to us. And we are aware beforehand that any attempt to translate them into our own habits of thought must be one of extreme difficulty, if not doomed to failure. § 39. (ii.) Critical Expedients for eliminating Miracle. — In view of the difficulty of giving a rational {i.e. a twentieth century) version of miracle, it is not surpris- THE MIRACLES OF JESUS IO5 ing that recourse should be had to critical expedients for explaining away Miracle altogether; in other words, to account for the narratives of miracles without assum- ing that objective facts corresponding to them really occurred. The expedients most in favour are : (a) imitation of similar stories in OT; (/?) exaggeration of natural occurrences ; (y) translation of what was origin- ally parable into external fact. These are causes which have about them nothing violent or incredible, and we may beheve that they were to some extent really at work. The question to what extent, will depend mainly upon the nature of the evidence for miracles and the length of time interposed between the evidence and the events. This will be the next subject to come before us. We may, however, anticipate so far as to say that whatever degree of verisimilitude belongs to the causes suggested in themselves, they do not appear to be adequate, either separately or in combination, to ac- count for the whole or any large part of the narratives as we have them. And there is the further considera- tion, on which more will also be said presently, that something of the nature of miracle, something which was understood as miracle, and that on no insignificant scale, must be assumed to account for the estimate cer- tainly formed by the whole first generation of Christians of the Person of Christ. § 40. (iii.) The Evidence for the Gospel Miracles i?i general. — Coming to the question as to the evidence for the Miracles recorded in the Gospels, there are three main observations to be made : (a) that the evidence for all these miracles, generally speaking, is strong ; I06 TEACHING AND MIRACLES (/3) that the evidence for all the different classes of miracles is equally strong; (y) that although for the best attested miracles in each class the evidence is equal, there is a difference between particular miracles in each class ; some are better attested than others. (a) It is unnecessary to repeat what has been already said (p. 4, sup?) about the general character of the Gospel History. The critical student must constantly have in mind the question to what state of things the different phases of that history as it has come down to us cor- respond. Does it reflect conditions as they existed after A.D. 70 or before? And if before, how far does it re- flect the later half of that period, and how far the earlier? How far does it coincide with a section of Christian thought and Christian life {e.g}) taken at the height of the activity of St. Paul ; and how far does it certainly point to an earlier stage than this ? In other words, how much of the description contained in the Gos- pels belongs to the period of consequences, and how much to the period of causes? Every attempt to treat of the life of our Lord should contribute its quota to the answer to these questions. And it is becoming more and more possible to do this, not merely in a spirit of superficial apologetics, but with a deep sense of responsibility to the truth of his- tory. And the writer of this article strongly believes that the tendency of the researches of recent years has been to enhance and not to diminish the estimate of the historical value of the Gospels. (/?) This applies to the Gospel records as a whole, in which miracles are included. It is natural next to ask, What is the nature of the particular evidence for THE MIRACLES OF JESUS I0;7 Miracles? How is it distributed? Does the distribution correspond to the distinction which we have drawn between the easier and the more difficult Miracles? If it did, we might suppose that the former class had better claims to credence than the latter. But an examination of the documents shows that this is not the case. Without committing ourselves to all the niceties of the Synoptic problem, there are at any rate broad grounds for distinguishing between the matter that is found in all the three Synoptics, in the First and Third, and in one only of the Three. Whether the ultimate groundwork is written or oral, the three- fold matter represents that groundwork, and is there- fore, if not necessarily the oldest, at least the most broadly based and authoritative. There is reason to think that the double matter is also very ancient. It consists largely of discourse, but some few narratives seem to belong to it. The peculiar sections of the dif- ferent Gospels vary considerably in their character, and it is natural to suppose that they would have the least antecedent presumption in their favour. Some confirma- tory evidence would be needed for facts which rested upon their testimony alone. Now, if it had happened that the Nature-Miracles had been confined to sections of this last kind, while the Miracles of Heahng — and especially the Healing of nervous diseases — had entered largely into the Double and Triple Synopsis ; or — inasmuch as discourse more often bears the stamp of unmistakable originality than narrative — if the miracles of one class had appeared only in the form of narrative, while the allusions in dis- course were wholly to miracles of the other, then the Io8 TEACHING AND MIRACLES inference would have lain near at hand that there was a graduated scale in the evidence corresponding to a like graduated scale in the antecedent probability of the miracle. But this is not the case. Miracles of all the different kinds occur in all the documents or sources. The Triple Synopsis contains not only the healing of de- moniacs and paralytics, but the healing of the issue of blood (Mk 5^11), the raising of Jairus' daughter (/<^.*-||), the stilling of the storm {ib. 4''''||), the feeding of the five thousand {ib. 6'''^||). This last miracle is found not only in all three Synoptists, but also in Jn 6^^-. And there is this further point about it, that if we regard the miracles generally as a gradual accretion of myth and not based upon fact, we should undoubtedly assume that the feeding of the four thousand (Mk 8\ Mt 15''-) was a mere duplicate of it. But it is probable that this story also belonged to the fundamental source, in spite of its omission by Luke. In that case both the feedings of a multitude would have had a place in the oldest of all our authorities, and the first growth in the tradition would have to be pushed back a step farther still. We should thus have a nature-miracle not only embodied in our oldest source, but at its first appear- ance in that source already pointing back some way behind it. (y) It thus appears that the evidence, externally considered, is equally good for all classes of miracles. It is not, as we might expect, that the evidence for the easier miracles is better than that for the more difficult, leaving us free to accept the one and reject the others. We cannot do this, because the best testimony we have THE MIRACLES OF JESUS I09 embraces alike those miracles which imply a greater deviation from the ordinary course of nature and those in which the deviation is less. It does not, however, follow that within the different classes of miracles the evidence for particular miracles is equal. When Prof. Goldwin Smith insists that all the miracles recorded in the Gospels stand or fall to- gether, he is going in the teeth, not so much of anything peculiar to the study of the Gospels, but of the historical method generally. And the examples which he gives are unfortunate. * We cannot pick and choose. The evidence upon which the miraculous darkness and the apparition of the dead rest is the same as that upon which all the other miracles rest, and must be accepted or rejected in all the cases alike ' ( Gicesses at the Riddle of Existence, p. 160). No critical student needs to be told that the evidence for the apparitions of the dead (Mt 2 7^-*'-) belongs just to that stratum which carries with it the least weight. The authority for the darkness is much higher, but its miraculous character need not be magnified. Any unusual darkening of the sky would naturally strike the imagination of the disciples ; and it might be not contrary to nature and yet also not accidental. §41. (iv.) The Quality of the Evidence. — So far we have spoken of the external character of the evidence. It is speaking within the mark to say that a large part of the evidence for the Gospel miracles, including some of those that are most miraculous, is separated from , the facts by an interval of not more than thirty years. ^ We may be pretty sure that before that date, and even no TEACHING AND MIRACLES much before it, stories of miracles like those recorded in the Gospels circulated freely among Christians, and were a common subject of teaching by catechists and others. We now proceed to ask, What is the quality of the narratives in which these stories occur ? What features are there in the stories themselves which throw light upon their historical value ? (a) We are met at the outset by the Temptation. If there is anything certain in history, it is that the story of the Temptation has a real foundation in fact, for the simple reason that without such a foundation it would have occurred to no one to invent it. It suits exactly and wonderfully the character of Jesus as we can now see it, but not as it was seen at the time. Men were trying to apprehend that character ; they had a glimpse here and a glimpse there ; but they cannot have had more than dim and vague surmises as to what it was as a whole. But whoever first told the story of the Temptation saw it as a whole. We have therefore already drawn the inference that it was first told by none other than Jesus Himself. And by that inference we stand. There is nothing in the Gospels that is more authentic. But the story of the Temptation presupposes the possession of supernatural powers. It all turns on the question how those powers are to be exercised. It not only implies the possession of power to work such miracles as were actually worked, but others even more remarkable from the point of view of crude interference with the order of nature. The story of the Temptation implies that Jesus could have worked such miracles if He had willed to do so; and the reason why THE MIRACLES OF JESUS III He did not work them was only because He did not will. The keynote which is struck by the Temptation is sustained all through the sequel of the history. We can see that the Life of Jesus was what it was by an act of deliberate denunciation. When He says, as the end draws near, ' Thinkest thou that I cannot beseech my Father, and he shall even now send me more than twelve legions of angels ? ' (Mt 26^^), the lesson holds good, not for that moment alone, but for all that has preceded it. The Public Ministry of Jesus wears the aspect it does, not because of Hmitations imposed from without, but of limitations imposed from within. Here lies the paradox of the Miracles of Christ. He seems at once to do them, and so to guard against a possible misuse that it is as if He had not done them. The common idea of miracles was as a manifestation of Divine power. Jesus gave the manifestation, and yet He seemed so to check it from producing its natural effect that it is as though it did not serve its purpose. It really serves His purpose, but not the purpose which the world both then and since has ascribed to Him. (/3) We have seen that the principles laid down at the Temptation governed the whole public life of Jesus. He steadily refused to work miracles for any purely self- regarding end. If the fact that He works miracles at all is a sympathetic adaptation to the beliefs and expectations of the time, those beliefs are schooled and criticized while they are adopted (Mt 12^^ || i6^*-, Jn 4*^), the element of mere display, the element of self-asser- tion, even of self-preservation, is eliminated from them. 112 TEACHING AND MIRACLES They are studiously restricted to the purposes of the mission. Now this carefully restricted character in the miracles of Jesus is unique in history. Among all the multitude of wonders with which the faith, sometimes super- stitious, but more often simply naive, of the later Church adorned the lives of the saints, there is nothing quite like it. We may say with confidence that if the miracles of Jesus had been no more than an invention, they would not have been what they are. We can see in the evangelists a certain dim half-conscious feeling of the self-imposed limitations in the use of the super- natural by Christ. But we may be very sure that they have this feeling, because the limitations were inherent in the facts, not because they formed part from the first of a picture which they were constructing a priori. (y) There are three kinds of restriction in the miracles of our Lord. The limitation in the subject-matter of the miracles is one ; the limitation in the conditions under which they are wrought is another (Mt 13*^ II 15^'*^^ j ^iid the limitation in the manner in which they are set before the world is a third. In a number of cases, after a miracle has been performed, the recipient is strictly cautioned to maintain silence about it (Mk 1"* II demoniacs, i^'* || leper, 3^^ demoniacs, cf. Mt 12^^, Mk f^' deaf and dumb, 8-^ blind). This hangs together with the manifest intention of Jesus to correct not only the current idea of miracles, but the current idea of thf Messiah as one endowed with supernatural power. If He was so endowed, it was not that He might gather about Him crowds and establish a carnal kingdom such as the Jews expected. THE MIRACLES OF JESUS II3 This, too, is a very original feature. It is certainly not one that the popular imagination would create, because the motive to create it was wanting. It is not to be supposed that the popular imagination would first correct itself and then embody the correction in a fictitious narrative. Here again we are driven to the conclusion that the narrative truly reflects the facts. (8) In yet another way do the accounts of the miracles work in with the total picture of the Life of Christ. They have a didactic value, which makes them round off the cycle of the teaching. This fact perhaps leaves some opening for the possibility that here and there what was originally parable may in course of trans- mission have hardened into miracle. An example of such a possibility would be the withering of the Fig-tree (Mk iii^"2o. 23 II compared with Lk 13'^^). But, on the other hand, it is just as possible that parable and miracle may stand side by side as a double enforcement of the same lesson. The story of the Temptation is proof that Jesus would not hesitate to clothe His teaching in a form at once natural and impressive to that generation, though it is less so to ours. In this He only takes up a marked characteristic of the OT Prophets. § 42. (v.) Historical Necessity of Miracles. — The truth is that the historian who tries to construct a reasoned picture of the Life of Christ finds that he cannot dispense with miracles. He is confronted with the fact that no sooner had the Life of Jesus ended in apparent failure and shame than the great body of Christians — not an individual here and there, but the mass of the Church — passed over at once to the fixed beUef that He was God. 114 TEACHING AND MIRACLES By what conceivable process could the men of that day have arrived at such a conclusion, if there had been really nothing in His life to distinguish it from that of ordinary men ? We have seen that He did not work the kind of miracles which they expected. The miracles in themselves in any case came short of their expecta- tions. But this makes it all the more necessary that there must have been something about the Life, a broad and substantial element in it, which they could recognize as supernatural and divine — not that we can recognize, but which they could recognize with the ideas of the time. Eliminate miracles from the career of Jesus, and the belief of Christians, from the first moment that we have undoubted contemporary evidence of it (say a.d. 50), becomes an insoluble enigma. § 43. (vi.) Natural Congruity of Miracles. — And now, if from the belief of the Early Church we turn to the belief of the Church in our day, there a different kind of congruity appears, but a congruity that is no less stringent. If we still believe that Christ was God, not merely on the testimony of the Early Church, but on the proof afforded by nineteen centuries of Christianity, there will be nothing to surprise us in the phenomena of miracles. ' If the Incarnation was a fact, and Jesus Christ was what He claimed to be, His miracles, so far from being improbable, will appear the most natural thing in the world. . . . They are so essentially a part of the character depicted in the Gospels, that without them that character would entirely disappear. They flow naturally from a Person who, despite His obvious humanity, impresses us throughout as being at home in THE MIRACLES OF JESUS II5 two worlds, . . . We cannot separate the wonderful life, or the wonderful teaching, from the wonderful works. They involve and interpenetrate and presuppose each other, and form in their insoluble combination one harmonious picture' (Illingworth, Divine Immanence, pp. 88-90). If we seek to express the rationale or inner congruity of miracles in Biblical language, we shall find this abundantly done for us in the Gospel of St. John. Miracles arise from the intimate association of the Son with the Father in the ordering of the universe, especially in all that relates to the redemption of man. When challenged by the Jews for healing a sick man upon the Sabbath, Jesus replied, 'My Father worketh even until now {i.e. since, and in spite of the institution of the Sabbatical Rest), I am working also' (Jn 5'^); the same law holds for the actions of the Son as for the conservation of the universe. And He goes on, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of him- self, but what he seeth the Father doing : for what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in hke manner. For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth : and greater works than these will he show him, that ye may marvel ' (Jb. w^^-^). Many other passages at once suggest themselves to the same effect (Jn 3'^ 8^*'- 14^°). The Son is ' sent ' by the Father, and He is invested with full powers for the accomplishment of that mission ; or rather with reference to it and for the purpose of it, He and the Father are one Qn 10'*). The sayings of this character are all from the Fourth Gospel. But there is a near approach to them in the well-known passage Mt 11^^ || ('AH things have been Il6 TEACHING AND MIRACLES delivered unto me of my Father ') ; and this does but form a natural climax to others, which, without it, would seem to leave something wanting and incomplete. § 44. (vii.) The Unexplained Element m Miracles. — When all the above considerations are borne in mind, some may think that there is a residuum which is not wholly explained — not so much as to the fact of miracles, or as to their congruity with the Person of Jesus, but rather as to the method of particular miracles in the form in which they have come down to us. It is quite inevitable that there should be such a residuum, which is only another name for the irreducible interval which must, when all is done, separate the reflective science- trained intellect of the twentieth century from the naive chroniclers of the first. Jesus Himself would seem to have been not without a prescience that this would be the case. At any rate there is a permanent significance, unexhausted by the occasion which gave rise to it, in His reply to the disciples of the Baptist, while appealing to works which, however beneficent, would. He knew, fail to realize all the Baptist's expecta- tions : * Blessed is he that shall find no scandal — or stumbling-block — in me' (Mt ii"!!). There was doubt- less something left in the mind of John which he could not perfectly piece together with the rest of such mental outfit as he had. And so we may be sure that it will be in every age, though age after age has only helped to strengthen the conviction that the modes of thought of the Zeitgeist may and do continually change, but that the worth for man of the Person of Jesus does not change but is eternal. THE MIRACLES OF JESUS I17 Literature. — Probably the best work in English at the present moment on the presuppositions of the Gospel Miracles would be Illingworth's Divine Immanence (1898), a sequel to his Bampton Lectures (1894). It may be worth while to compare Gore, Bamp. Lect. (1891). On the other hand, Mozley's lectures on the same foundation for 1865 have reference rather to a phase of the con- troversy which is now past. There is, of course, much on the subject in the various treatises on Apologetics ; and articles are constantly appearing in magazines, as well as shorter monographs, both British and Foreign. The present writer cannot say — or at least cannot remember — that he has gained as much from these several sources as in the case of the teaching of Jesus. He would like, however, to mention with gratitude, Grounds of Theistic and Christian Belief, by Dr. G. P. Fisher of Yale (Scribner's, New York, 1883; revised edit. 1903), a very clear and temperate statement of the evidence for the Gospel Miracles on older lines ; the chap, on Miracles in Dr. A. B. Bruce, Chief end of Revelation (3rd ed. 1890) ; and three short lectures, entitled The Supernatural in Christianity (by Drs. Rainy, Orr, and Marcus Dods, in reply to Pfleiderer, Edinb, 1894). The most considerable attempt in English to construct Chris- tianity without Miracles is Dr. Edwin A. Abbott's The Kernel and the Husk (1886), and 77ie Spirit on the Waters (1897). With this may be compared Dr. Salmon's Non-miraculous Christianity {and other Sermons). There are well-known systematic works on the Gospel Miracles by the late Archbishop Trench and Dr. A. B. Bruce. CHAPTER V. THE LATER MINISTRY. C. Middle or Culminating Period of the Active Ministry. § 45. Scene. — Galilee, with an excursion across the northern border. Time. — Passover to shortly before Tabernacles a.d. 28. Mt 14^-18^', Mk e^-g^o, Lk 9^"^, Jn 6. This is a period of culminations, in which the prophecy of Simeon begins to be conspicuously fulfilled : * Behold, this child is set for the falHng and rising up of many in Israel, and for a sign which is spoken against' (Lk 2^). The main culminations are (i.) of the zeal of the populace, followed by their disappointment and falHng away; (ii.) the still greater embitterment of the scribes and Pharisees ; (iii.) the awakening at last of a more intelligent faith in the disciples, reaching its highest point in St. Peter's confession ; (iv.) the Divine testimony to Jesus in the Transfiguration ; (v.) the consciousness of victory virtually won in 119 120 THE LATER MINISTRY Jesus Himself (Mt ir^-'*, Lk 20'"-=*); (vi.) at the same time He sees clearly, and begins to announce the seeming but transient catastrophe, the final humiliation and exaltation, in which His work is to end. The time of this period is clearly marked by the occurrence of the Passover of the year a.d. 28 at its beginning, and the Feast of Tabernacles (in October of the same year) at the end. It is probable that within these six months all the salient events referred to below may be included. The place is, broadly speaking, Galilee, beginning with the shores of the lake (Jn 6) ; but in the course of the period there falls a wider circuit than any that had been hitherto taken. In this circuit Jesus touched on, and probably crossed, the borders of the heathen districts of Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7-*||) ; He then returned eastwards through the neighbourhood of Caisarea Philippi (Mk 8^||) ; and He finally returned to Capernaum, not directly, but after taking a round to the east of the lake and through Decapolis (Mk 7"'). The motive was probably not so much on this occasion extended preaching as to avoid the ferment excited among the population of Central Galilee. Observe Mk 7-^ and the strict injunctions of secrecy in Mk 7^® S'^^lj 9^||. If we may follow our authorities (Mk 7^-*^- 8^*^- "^•) there was a certain amount of active work at the end of the circuit; but Mt n^^- appears to mark the practical close of the Galilsean ministry. The greater part of this circuit lay within the dominions, not of Herod Antipas, where Jesus had hitherto mainly worked, but of his brother Philip. Now we know that the hostility to Him was shared by MIDDLE PERIOD 121 the Pharisees with the partisans of Herod (Mk 3''' and p. 61 above; cf. also Mk S^'^). We have also, but probably at a still later date, threats, which if not actually made by Herod Antipas were at least plausibly attributed to him (Lk 13^^). In any case, it is likely enough that intrigues were on foot between the two allied parties of the Pharisees and Herodians ; and some writers, of whom Keim may be taken as an example, have attributed to these what they describe as a ' flight ' on the part of Jesus. They may have had something to do with His retirement. This division of our Lord's Life includes several narratives (the Feedings of the Five and Four Thousand, the Walking on the Water, the Transfiguration) which sound especially strange to modern ears. We must repeat the warning, that if a twentieth century observer had been present he would have given a different ac- count of the occurrences from that which has come down to us. But the mission of Jesus was to the first century and not to the twentieth. His miracles as well as His teaching were adapted to the mental habits of those to whom they were addressed. It is wasted ingenuity to try, by rationalizing the narratives, to translate them into a language more like our own. Essential features in them are sure to escape in the pro- ces3. It should be enough to notice that the narratives in question all rest on the very best historical authority. They belong to the oldest stratum of the evangehcal tradition. And more than this : if we suppose, as it is not unreasonable to suppose, that the Feedings of the Five and of the Four Thousand are different versions of the same event, this would throw us back some way 122 THE LATER MINISTRY behind even that oldest stratum ; because we should have to allow an additional period of time for the two versions to arise out of their common original (see p. io8 Slip). This would carry us back to a time when numbers must have been living by whom the truth of that which is reported might be controlled. In the case of the Feeding of the Five Thousand, we have the con- firmatory evidence of the Fourth Gospel, which for those who believe the author to have been an eye- witness must be little less than decisive. § 46. i. The Enthusiasm ajid Falling-away of the Populace. — It was just before the Passover of the year 28 that the impression which Jesus had made on the people of Gahlee seemed to reach its climax. This was the result of what is commonly known to us as the Feeding of the Five Thousand. The fact that the Passover was so near at hand accounts for a special gathering of pilgrims, or those preparing for the journey, from the Gahlaean towns. In such a mixed multitude there would doubtless be many Zealots and enthusiastic expectants of the 'deliverance of Israel.' The miracle convinces these that they have at last found the leader of whom they are in search. They are aware that hitherto He had shown no signs of en- couraging the active measures which they desired : and therefore they hasten to seize the person of Jesus in order to compel Him to put Himself at their head, with or against His will. He, however, retires from them; and their disappointment is complete when on the next day the more determined among them, after following Him at no little trouble into the synagogue at Caper- MIDDLE PERIOD 1 23 naum, find themselves put off with what they would regard as a mystical and unintelligible discourse. This is a turning-point in what had been for some time a gathering movement on the part of many who were willing to see in Jesus a Messiah such as they expected, but who were baffled and drew back when they found the ideal presented to them so different from their own. And the crisis once past, every possible precaution was taken to ensure that it should not recur (Mk f*- ^^ 8*|| 9^11, as above). Are the two Feedings of Mk 6^'^^ \\ and Mk S^-^ 1| to be regarded as two events or one ? Besides the general resemblance between the two narratives, a weighty argument in favour of the latter hypothesis is, that in the second narrative the disciples' question appears to imply that the emergency was something new. They could hardly have put this question as they did if a similar event had happened only a few weeks before. The different numbers are just what would be found in two independent traditions. The decision will, however, depend here (as in the instances noted above) on the degree of strictness with which we interpret the narrative generally. The discourse in the synagogue at Capernaum, Jn 6^^^, works up to one of those profound truths which fixed themselves especi- ally in the memory of the author of the Fourth Gospel. It is not a direct reference to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, but it is a preparatory statement of the deep principle of which that Sacra- ment is the expression. We shall have more to say on this head below (see p. 165). § 47. ii. Widening Breach with the Pharisees. — More than one incident occurs in this period which points to the increasing tension of the relations between Jesus and the Pharisees (Mk 8"- ^^). But the decisive passage is Mk 7"^||, the severity of which anticipates the denunciations of the last Passover. In this Jesus cuts 124 THE LATER MINISTRY away root and branch of the Pharisaic traditions and exposes their essential immorahty. From this time onwards the antagonism is open and declared. § 48. iii. The Climax of Faith among the Tiveive ; St, Peter's Confession. — We have seen how the enthusiasm of the multitudes reached its climax after the Feeding of the Five Thousand, but did not recover from the rebuff which it then received, and from that time more or less collapsed, until it flamed up for a moment at the triumphal entry. The Twelve were in a better position to enter into the mind of their Master, and it was but natural that they should be more steadfastly attached to His person. Hence their faith survived the shocks which it was continually receiving, and St. Peter gave the highest expression which it had yet received, when, in reply to a direct question, he ex- claimed, ' Thou art the Christ [the Son of the Living God] ' (Mt id'''"-'" II). Jesus marked His sense of the significance of the confession by words of warm com- mendation. He attributes it, indeed, to a direct in- spiration from Heaven. The value of the confession stands out all the more clearly when it is compared with the doubts of the Baptist (see above, p. 56). We are not to suppose that St. Peter had by any means as yet a full conception of all that was impHed in his own words. He still did not understand what manner of Messiah he was confessing ; but his merit was, that in spite of the rude shocks which his faith had been receiving, and in spite of all that was paradoxical and enigmatical in the teaching and actions of his Master, he saw through his perplexities the gleams of a nature MIDDLE PERIOD 125 which transcended his experience, and he was willing to take upon trust what he could not comprehend. It would be out of place to attempt here to discuss the conflict- ing interpretations of the blessing pronounced upon St. Peter. We can only say that although it is not adequate to explain the blessing as pronounced upon the confession and not upon St. Peter himself, it is nevertheless distinctly pronounced upon St. Peter as confessing. It is in the fact that there is at last one who, in the face of all difficulties, recognizes from his heart that Jesus is what He is, that the first stone, as it were, of the Church is laid ; other stones will be built upon and around it, and the edifice will rise day by day, but the beginning occurs but once, and the beginning of the Christian Church occurred then. It is not to detract from the merit of St. Peter — which so far as the build- ing up of the Church is concerned was as high as human merit could be — if we interpret the blessing upon him in the light of I Co 3^1. The Church has but one foundation, in the strict sense, Jesus Christ. It was precisely to this that St. Peter's confession pointed. But that confession was the first of all like confessions ; and in that respect might well be described as the first block of stone built into the edifice. V § 49. iv. The Ctibninating Point in the Missionary Labours of Jesus. — God seeth not as man seeth. To the average observer, even to one who was acquainted with St. Peter's confession, it would seem to be the solitary point of Hght in the midst of disappointment and failure. A retrospect of the Galilaean ministry seemed to show Httle but hard-heartedness, ingratitude, and unbelief (Jn 12^'"^"). Our Lord Himself can only denounce woe upon the cities which enjoyed most of His presence (Mt ii-*'"-''||). And yet about the same time two sayings are recorded which mark a deep inward consciousness of success. The ministry which might seem to be in vain was not really in vain, but potential and in promise ; to the eye which saw into the 126 THE LATER MINISTRY future as well as into the present, and which looked into the inmost counsels of the Father, the crisis might even be regarded as past. One of these sayings is Lk lo'^ The success of the disciples in casting out demons draws from Jesus the remark that the power of the prince of darkness is broken. And about the same time, as if ingratitude and opposition counted for nothing, He pours out His thanks to the Father : ' I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise and under- standing, and didst reveal them unto babes; yea, Father, for so it was well-pleasing in thy sight ' (Mt ii-^*^- II). The next verse in both Gospels contains the clearest expression in the Synoptics of that sense of oneness with the Father which is brought out so pointedly in John. And the verses which follow in Matthew are that wonderful invitation : ' Come unto me,' etc. He who understands this group of sayings has found his way to the heart of Christianity. § 50. V. T/ie Transfiguration. — To the confession of the apostle and to the words of thanksgiving, which are also words of serene contentment and inward assurance, there was not wanting an outward Divine sanction. This was given in the scene which is known to us as the Transfiguration (Mk 9"'^||). The narrative of the Transfiguration reminds us, in more ways than one, of those of the Baptism and Temptation. Once again the apostles hear words which seem to come from Heaven confirming the mission of their Master. At the same time they see a vision which brings out the significance of that mission in a way for which as MIDDLE PERIOD 1 27 yet they can hardly have been prepared. The appear- ance of Moses and EUjah by the side of, and as it were ministering to, Jesus, symbohzed the Law and the Prophets as leading up to and receiving their fulfilment in the Gospel. It is impossible not to see the appropriateness of this Divine testimony to the mission of Jesus occurring just where it does. That unique relationship of the Son to the Father, which forms the constant background of the narrative of the Fourth Gospel, and is not less the background — real, if not so apparent — of the Synoptics, could not but assert itself from time to time. And what time could be fitter for a clear pronouncement of it than this, when outward circumstances were for the most part so discouraging, and when the prospect was becoming every day nearer and more certain of the fatal and terrible end ! If the Son must needs go down into the valley of the shadow of death, the Father's face will shine upon Him for a moment before He enters it with a brightness which will not be obscured. As bearing upon the essentially historical character of the narra- tive, however difficult and even impossible it may be for us to recon- struct its details in such a way that we could be said to understand them, note (i) the significance of the appearance of Moses and Elijah at a time when that significance can have been but very imper- fectly apprehended by the disciples, and when there was absolutely nothing to suggest such an idea to them; and (2) the Transfiguration comes within the cycle of events in regard to which a strict silence was to be observed. This striking and peculiar stamp of genuineness was not wanting to it. We may note also (3) the random speech of St. Peter (Mk 9^||) as a little graphic and authentic touch which had not been forgotten. It might be supposed that the enlargements in Lk g^^^- were merely editorial, but, like not a few added details in this Gospel, they become more impressive upon reflexion. The other evan- gelists throw no light upon the subject of the converse between the glorified figures; Luke alone says that they 'spake of his decease which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.' This was, we may be sure, the subject which deeply occupied the mind of Jesus at this time; and it is hardly less certain that the particular aspect of it which would be most present to Him would be its 128 THE LATER MINISTRY relation to the prophetic Scriptures of OT (and the Law also had its prophetic side). We might expect an appearance of Isaiah rather than Elijah; but Elijah was the typical prophet, and the Jews expected his appearing (cf. Wetstein on Mt 17^). The other peculiar detail in Luke, that ' Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep,' may well seem confirmatory of the view (e.g.) of Weiss and Beyschlag, that the scene was presented to the three apostles in divinely caused vision. § 51. vi. 77/1? Prophecies of Death and Resurrection. — The period we are describing is a kind of water-shed, which marks not only the summit of the ascent but the beginning of the descent. We have seen how this was the case with the enthusiasm of the multitude : it was also the ca!se with Christ Himself. The confession of St. Peter was immediately followed, and the Trans- figuration both preceded and followed, by distinct pro- phecies of the fatal end which was to close His ministry — an end fatal in the eyes of men, but soon to be can- celled by His resurrection. As these prophecies will meet us again in the next period, to which they give its dominant character, we will reserve the discussion of them till then. D. Close of the Active Period : the Messianic Crisis in View. § 52. Scene. — Judaea (Jn f^- 1 1^*) and Persea (Mk io'||,Jn 10^"). Time. — Tabernacles a.d. 28 to Passover a.d. 29. Mt 19^-20'^ Mk 10, Lk 9^'- 1 9-^ (for the most part not in chronological order), Jn y^-n^". In this period we may note more particularly (i.) the peculiar section of St. Luke's Gospel which might on a superficial view seem to be CLOSE OF THE ACTIVE PERIOD 129 placed in this period ; (ii.) that portion of the Johannean narrative which really belongs to it ; (iii.) the general character of our Lord's Teaching at this time ; (iv.) in particular, the prophecies of Death and Resurrection ; and (v.) the hints which are given of a special significance attaching to these events. The time of this period extends from the Feast of Tabernacles in a.d. 28 to the Passover of a,d. 29. There is more difficulty in mapping out the distribution of its parts topographically. We have some clear landmarks if we follow the guidance of the Fourth Gospel. The events of the section Jn 7^-10^^ partly belong to the Feast of Tabernacles and in part follow at no great interval after it. We have again in Jn 10^" a clear indication of time and place, the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. This would be towards the end of December. After that, Jesus withdrew beyond Jordan to the place where ' John was at the first baptiz- ing ' (Jn io*°). Here He made a lengthened stay, and it was from hence that He paid His visit to Bethany for the raising of Lazarus. Then He again retired to a city called Ephraim on the edge of the wilderness north-east of Jerusalem, where He remairied until the Jews began to gather together to attend the Passover (Jn 11'^). We have thus a fairly connected narrative extending from the beginning of the year to the Pass- over of A.D. 29, the scene of which isdn part Judaea and in part Peraea. We have also a fixed point covering, perhaps, about a fortnight in the latter half of October and localized at Jerusalem. But what of the seven or eight weeks which separate this from the Feast of 9 I30 THE LATER MINISTRY Dedication ? Is it probable that Jesus returned to Galilee and continued His ministry there ? It does not seem so. The solemn and deliberate leave-taking from Galilee is not likely to have been so broken. The prin- cipal objection to this view would be that the secret and unexpected visit to Jerusalem at the Feast of Tabernacles does not seem consistent with the solemnity of this leave-taking. We may, however, suppose that the Galilsean ministry was practically complete before this date, and that strong expressions like those of Lk 9", if they are to be taken as they stand, refer to one of the later journeys. § 53. i. The so-called Percean Ministry. — There is a long section of St. Luke's Gospel, Lk 9^^-18^, which has been often treated as a single whole and as contain- ing the record of a special ministry, identified with the last journey towards Jerusalem, and having for its scene the lands beyond the Jordan. This is based upon the fact that the beginning of the section coincides with Mk io\ Mt 19^ and that the end of it brings us to the approach to Jericho (Lk 18^). It is true that some part of the time preceding the last Passover was spent in Pergea. We know this on the joint testimony of the other Synoptists and St. John (Mk 10^, Mt 19^ Jn 10^). But to suppose that the whole section must be localized there is to misunderstand the structure and character of St. Luke's Gospel. It is far more probable that he has massed together a quantity of material derived from some special source to which he had access, and which could not be easily fitted into the framework supplied to him by St. Mark. CLOSE OF THE ACTIVE PERIOD 131 When we come to examine these materials in detail, it would seem probable that they belong to very different periods in our Lord's ministry. Some incidents, for instance, appear to assume those easier relations to the Pharisees which we have seen to be characteristic of the earlier period (Lk li^'' [but not w. ■*2-54j i^iff). It would be natural also to refer to this or the middle period the three parables of ch. 15 (Weiss, Leben Jesti, i. 507). On the other hand, some of the incidents are practically dated by their co- incidence with the other Gospels : while others, like the severer denunciations of the Pharisees and eschatological sections such as Lk 1322-30 i720_i38^ are referred to the later period by their subject- matter. It would be wrong to lay too much stress on mere symmetry; but when a natural sequence suggests itself, it may be accepted as having such probability as can be attained. The document which St. Luke is using in this part has preserved for us discourses of the utmost value, and it is largely to them that the Gospel owes its marked individuality. § 54. ii. The Johannean Narrative of this Period. — The historical value of the Fourth Gospel comes out strongly in this period. Rarely has any situation been described with the extraordinary vividness and truth to nature of ch. 7 (see esp. vv."-i^- -^^r. 31. 32. 40-52) _ ^^^ less graphic are the details of ch. 9 ; and there is marked precision in the statements of Jn lo^^-^- ii^^^ We note a special intimacy with what passes in the inner counsels of the Sanhedrin (Jn 7'*"- 11*"^). This intimate knowledge might have been derived through Nicodemus or through the connexion hinted at in Jn 18^^.* But, apart from the peculiar verisimiUtude of these details, some such activity as that described in these chapters is required to explain the great cata- strophe which followed. It is impossible that Jesus * The theory of Delff has already been mentioned (p. 53 sup.'} ; but it turns too much upon a single set of data, and leads to an arbi- trary dissection of the Gospel. 132 THE LATER MINISTRY should have been so much a stranger to Judaea and Jerusalem as the Synoptic narrative would at first sight seem to make Him. For the steps which lead up to the end we must go to St. John. § 55. iii. The general Character of the Teaching of this Period. — There are no doubt portions of the teach- ing of this period preserved in the Synoptics. But except those contained in Mk lo^"*^! they are difficult to identify with certainty. For the greater part of our knowledge of it we are indebted to St. John, and we may observe that the teaching now begins to take a new character. Hitherto it has been mainly concerned with the nature of the Kingdom ; henceforward greater stress is laid on the person of the King. We have already noted the remarkable verse Mt ii-'|| 'AH 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 whom- soever the Son willeth to reveal him.' This verse may be said to represent the text which the discourses in St. John set in various hghts. We have now the self- revelation of the Son as the central life-giving and light-giving force of humanity. As He is the living Bread (Jn 6), so is He the living Water (Jn 7'^'^) ; He is the Light of the world (Jn 8^^ 9'') ; He is the Good Shepherd (Jn 10"), the Resurrection and the Life (Jn 11^). If we suppose that these discourses were really held, we shall understand better than we could do otherwise the state of Christian thought which meets us when we open the first surviving Epistles of St. Paul. CLOSE OF THE ACTIVE PERIOD 1 33 § 56. iv. The Prophecies of Death a?id Resurrection. — From the time of St. Peter's confession Jesus began in set terms to foretell that His mission would end in His death, soon, however, to be followed by His resurrec- tion (Mk S'^l). At the moment of His highest triumph, marked by the Transfiguration, the same solemn pre- diction is repeated (Mk (f^), and again yet a third time towards the end of the period with which we are now dealing (Mk lo'"--'^ ||). (a) Even an ordinary observer might have seen that the signs of the times were ominous. St. Peter's con- fession showed no more than one adherent whose fervid faith might be supposed capable of resisting a pressure of life or death. Herod Antipas and his faction were hostile. The Pharisees were yet more hostile, and their bitterness was growing every day. Within the period before us two deliberate attempts were made on the life of Jesus (Jn 8^^ 10'^). And with the certainty that the course on which He was bent would include nothing to conciliate these antagonisms, it was clear where they would end. {li) But the foresight of Jesus took a wider range than this. He had laid it down as a principle that it was the fate of prophets to be persecuted (Mt 5^- 23'^^- ^^). In particular. He had before Him the example of the Baptist, whose fate He associated with His own (Mk 9>^- II). {c) But there was a deeper necessity even than this. At the Betrayal, to him who drew sword in His defence Jesus replied calmly, ' How then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be ? ' And this is His consistent language (comp. Lk 24-^*'- ^- ^^ etc.). The 134 THE LATER MINISTRY mind of Jesus was steeped in the ancient prophecies. He had Himself, as we have seen, deUberately fused the conception of the conquering Messiah with that of the Suffering Servant of Jehovah, and He as dehberately went the way to fulfil these prophecies in His own person. There was nothing accidental about His Death. He ' set His face steadfastly ' on the road which led to it. (d) When we look into its lessons we are carried even behind the fulfilment of prophecy. We shall have to speak presently of the extraordinary novelty of the turn which Christ gave to His mission. Others had conquered by the exercise of force ; He was the first to set Himself to conquer by weakness, patience, non- resistance. And the natural and inevitable consumma- tion of this new method of conquest was Death. (e) In all this He was carrying out, and knew that He was carrying out, the Will of the Father. It was con- ceivable that that Will might have yet ulterior objects even beyond those, deep enough as we might think, which we have been considering. That Jesus ascribed to His Death such an ulterior object we are led to believe by the way in which He speaks of it. The two places in which He does so much must next engage our attention. § 57. v. Significmice of the Death of Jesus. — The first of the passages to which allusion has just been made is Mk lo''^ II * For verily the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.' We observe here that Jesus brings His Death under the category of service, and regards it CLOSE OF THE ACTIVE PERIOD 1 35 as the climax of a life of service. This is one way of stating the great paradox to which we have just alluded. The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over their subjects ; but such was not to be the ambition of the disciples of Christ ; rather the very opposite ; and it was Christ Himself who set them the example. At the end of the avenue stood a cross, and the Saviour of men walked up to it as if it had been a crown. It is a ques- tion of pressing interest how much farther we may go than this : is the Xvrpov avrl ttoXXwv to be interpreted by the dTroAwpwo-ts and iXaa-TyjpLov of Ro 3-^", and by the language of other similar passages ? By itself we could not say that it compelled such an interpretation ; but there is nothing forced in supposing that the early Church knew and followed the mind of its Founder. In that case we should have reason to think that Jesus Himself had hinted at the sacrificial character of His Death, and that He too regarded it as propitiatory. If this passage suggests a sacrificial aspect of one kind, the other is more explicit in bringing out sacri- ficial associations of another. All the extant accounts of the institution of the Eucharist connect the Blood shed upon the Cross with the founding of a * [new] Covenant.' This is certainly an allusion to the in- auguration of the first Covenant with sacrifice (cf. Ex 24''"^, He 9^^^^), and the death of Christ is clearly regarded as the Sacrifice inaugurating the second (see below, p. 166). In other words, the momentous question came before the mind of Jesus whether the New Dispensation which He was founding was or was not like the Old in includ- ing the idea of Sacrifice. He deliberately answered that 136 THE LATER MINISTRY it was. And He deliberately foresaw, and as deliber- ately accepted the consequence, that the Sacrifice of this New Dispensation could be none other than the Sacrifice of Himself. That which gives this particular Death a value which no other death could have had is (a) the fact that it is the Death of the Messiah, of One whose function it is to be the Saviour of His people, and whose Death like His Life must in some way enter into the purpose of the whole scheme of salvation ; and (/3) the further fact that although the Death is a necessity in the sense that it was required for the full development of God's gracious purpose, it was nevertheless a purely volun- tary act on the part of the Son, an expression of that truly filial spirit in which He made the whole of the Father's purpose His own. ' The good Shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep. . , . Therefore doth the Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. No one taketh it away from me, but I lay it down of myself I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This com- mandment received I from my Father' (Jn lo"-^'*^). It follows (y) that however much it may be right to con- ceive of the Death of Christ as a Sacrifice, and a sacrifice which has for its object the 'remission of sins' (Mt 26-**), we must not in connexion with it set the justice of God against His mercy, or think of Him as really turning away His face from the Son of His love. Literature. — The subject of these last two sections not only comes into the field of New Testament Theology in general and treatises (like Wendt's and others named above) on the Teaching CLOSE OF THE ACTIVE PERIOD 1 37 of Christ, but it necessarily occupies a prominent place in discussions of the Doctrine of the Atonement. Among these may be mentioned especially Ritschl's Kechtferiigung u. Versohmiiig, vol. ii. of which goes elaborately into the exegesis of the leading passages (ed. 2, 1882), and a recent treatise by Kahler, Zur Lekre von der Versdhiniiig (Leipzig, 1898), which gives prominence to the relation of the doctrine to the Life of Christ. A lengthy monograph by Schwartz- kopff deals directly with our Lord's predictions of His Passion (^Die Weissagunge7t Jesu Christi von seinem Tode, u.s.w., G5ttingen, 1895; Eng. tr., T. & T. Clark); and 'Christ's Attitude to His Death' is the title of some striking articles by Dr. A. M. Fairbairn in Expos. 1896, ii., and 1897, i- CHAPTER VI. THE MESSIANIC CRISIS. E. The Messianic Crisis : the Triumphal Entry, THE Last Teaching, Passion, Death, Resurrec- tion, Ascension. § 58. Scene. — Mainly in Jerusalem. Time. — Six days before Passover to ten days before Pentecost a.d. 29. Mt 21^-28-", Mk 11^-168 [vv.^^ an early addi- tion], Lk i9"-24^'-, Jn 1 2^-2 1^^ This series of momentous events has naturally furnished much matter for discussion and contro- versy, some of it very recent, (i.) Our first duty will be to sketch rapidly the course of the events with special reference to the motives of the human actors in them, (ii.) We must consider the debated points in the chronology of the last week, (iii.) We shall have to discuss the eschatological teach- ing which the Synoptists place in this period. (iv.) A number of points, critical and doctrinal, will meet us in connexion with the Last Supper, (v.) We shall have in like manner to consider both the attestation and the significance of the crown- 139 I40 THE MESSIANIC CRISIS ing event of all, the Resurrection. This will include some discussion of the Appearances which followed. Lastly (vi.), as our subject is the Life of Christ and not the Gospels, we must, even though in so doing we cross the threshold of St. Luke's ' second treatise,' follow the steps of the Master to His Ascension. § 59. i. The Action and the Actors. — Our four Gospels, taken together, in part convey and in part suggest a view at once clear and probable of the course of events which led to the Crucifixion, and of the motives which impelled the several actors in them. We have seen that the Fourth Gospel is needed to explain the heightened enmity which had so tragic an issue. A residence in Jerusalem and Bethany of four days would not be enough to account for the overtures to Judas. The events of the Feast of Tabernacles, the Feast of Dedication, and the Raising of Lazarus, with the knowledge that Jesus had been teaching and making disciples at no great distance from Jerusalem, supply what is wanted. And in the case of the Last Week the touches which the Fourth Gospel adds to its prede- cessors supplement them effectively. {a) The Populace. — Li the Triumphal Entry we seem to see a gleam once more of the enthusiasm which had followed the Feeding of the Five Thousand. It was probably quite as superficial. We may imagine the crowd made up in part of those who had been impressed by recent teaching beyond the Jordan or in Jerusalem itself, or by the news of the still more striking miracle wrought upon Lazarus : besides these, there would THE LAST EVENTS 141 doubtless be a contingent of pilgrims from more distant Galilee, the remnant of the crowds who had at one time or another followed Jesus there. But it would be too much to expect that all, or even many of these, had acquired an intelligent insight into the character of Him whom they were cheering. They were still in the twilight of their old Jewish expectations. They sup- posed that the moment had at last come when the hopes which they cherished would be realized, and when before the crowds assembled for the Passover Jesus would at last put Himself forward as the Leader for whom they were waiting. Nothing, however, came of this seeming appeal to their enthusiasm. A few discourses in the temple, partly levelled against the religious authorities they were most accustomed to reverence, but containing not a word of incitement against the Romans, and that was all. What wonder if their enthusiasm died away, and if in some of the fiercer among them it changed to bitter and angry disappointment ! Doubtless some of these Zealots mingled with those who cried ' Crucify him, crucify him ' ; it was natural that they should prefer one of their own trade, like Barabbas ; but the crowds in Jerusalem at Passover time were so great that many of these fanatics may have had no personal acquaintance with Jesus at all. The' choice between Jesus and Barabbas would seem to them a choice between a mock leader, a dreamer of dreams, who offered them nothing but words, and a true son of the people who had shown himself ready to grip the sword in the good cause. (^) Tlie Traitor. — It is possible that Judas Iscariot may have shared something of these feelings. In the 142 THE MESSIANIC CRISIS lists of the apostles he is usually named next to a Zealot. The long course of training which he had undergone may have failed to purge his mind of the carnal expectations of his countrymen. It may have been a sudden access of disappointment, greater than ever before, because the hopes by which it had been preceded had been greater, which impelled him to seek his interview with the members of the Sanhedrin. It has even been suggested that he did what he did in order to compel his Master to declare Himself, and with the belief that He would at last exert for the deliverance of the nation the supernatural powers with which He was endowed. For this we have no sufficient warrant; and we are told expressly (Jn 12^ RV text and most Comms.) that Judas was guilty of petty pilfering from the common fund, and therefore may infer that he was accessible to the temptations of avarice. Still, few men act from motives that they cannot at least make plausible to themselves : so that a mixture of obstinate and misguided patriotism is more probable than pure malignity. If Judas had not been at least capable of better things, it is not likely that he would have been chosen to be one of the Twelve. (c) The Pharisees. — By this time between Jesus and the Pharisees there is open war. Insidious questions are still put to Him, but only in order to ' ensnare him in his talk,' (Mt 2 2^^||). And on His side Jesus repHed to their treachery by the sternest denunciations. It need not be supposed that all ' scribes and Pharisees ' were equally the object of these. We know that Nico- demus and Joseph of Arimath^ea were members of the Sanhedrin ; we do not know that they belonged to the THE LAST EVENTS 143 party of the Pharisees, but we cannot doubt that there were some Pharisees like-minded with them ; just as we learn from the Acts that after the Resurrection a number of the 'priests' (Ac 6") and at least some Pharisees {ib. 15^) became Christians. {d) The Sadducees. — With the last week of our Lord's life, or rather, if we may trust St. John, as far back as the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7^^), a new party comes into prominence. The Sanhedrin begins to take official action against Jesus; and, although the Pharisees had some footing in that body, its policy was more deter- mined by the Sadducees, to whom belonged most of the 'chief priests,' and in particular Caiaphas, the acting high priest, and his yet more influential father-in-law and predecessor Annas. As against Jesus the two parties of Pharisees and Sadducees acted together, but their motives were different. The Pharisees were jealous for their authority and traditions, which were openly assailed. The Sadducees themselves rejected these traditions, — they were selfish politicians, who played their own game. Their motto was quieta non movere. They dreaded any kind of disturbance which might give the Romans an excuse to take the power out of their hands (cf. Jn. 11*^). It is curious to note how from this time onwards the bitterest opposition comes from the Sadducees, while leading Pharisees are neutral or even favourable (Ac 4^*"^^ 23^). (-3i||_ And it is true that these verses are fairly detachable from the rest and make a fairly compact whole. By thus eliminating the central passage on which the eschato- logical teaching of Jesus seemed to rest, it became not very difficult to explain away that teaching altogether. Weiffenbach did so by the hypothesis that the critically verified allusions to the Second Coming of the Messiah all originally referred to His Resurrection, the predictions of which formed the genuine nucleus out of which the rest had grown through misunderstanding of the words of Jesus and the blending with them of current apocalyptic doctrines. By this expedient, Weiffenbach, whose object was less radical than that of most of those who went with him, escaped some real difficulties ; but just in this it may be doubted whether he has found any follower. It will be seen that the critical analysis of Mk 1 3 II is the starting-point of the whole construction: and that has not perhaps as yet been brought to any final solution. § 62. iv. The Last Supper. — The part of the Last Supper of which it is most incumbent upon us to speak here is its culmination in the solemn acts and words which institute the second of the two great Sacraments. Besides the debates of centuries which have gathered round this subject, a number of questions have been raised in recent years which require discussion. In particular, new light has been thrown upon the text of one of our leading authorities. And our first step must be to determine as nearly as we can its exact bearing. § 63. (i) The Text of Lk. 22 ^^-^o. — The importance of 158 THE MESSIANIC CRISIS this section is such, and it is so desirable that the evidence should be given with completeness and pre- cision, that we may be forgiven if in this instance we print the full text of the original (after Greek RV), and then proceed to give the more crucial variants in technical fashion. The evidence of the leading Latin MSB is given in full ; that of the two oldest forms of the Syriac Version in a retranslation, based for the Sinai MS on Mrs. Lewis and Merx, and for the Curetonian on Baethgen. For the Coptic Version the new critical edition is used (Oxford, 1898). Lk, 22'*"^. ^* Ka2 Sre iyivero i] wpa, aviweae, koI oi airixTToKot €cnv dfiapTLwv Matthew). St. Paul not only doubles the command for repetition, but also adds, ' For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye proclaim the Lord's death till he come.' § 65. (3) Ot/ier NT Evidence. — We thus have the institution of the Sacrament fully set before us. But if we look at one of the documents upon which we have been drawing, the first in order of writing, though it is only incidentally historical, i Co 11, we find there that the Sacrament proper is associated with something else — the common meal or agape (Jude ^^, 2 P 2^^ var. lect). We ask ourselves what can be the origin of this association ? It can hardly go back to the original institution. It is more probable that the association arose out of the state of Koivoivia described in Ac 2^-*^^ Perhaps it goes back further still, at least to the very beginning of the period. For one of the char- acteristic expressions is ^ kAoio-is tov dprov, kXuv II 1 62 THE MESSIANIC CRISIS apTov (Ac 2*^- *'^), of which Blass says, ' est autem KXav Tov apTov soUemnis designatio cenge dominicse.' It must, however, be somewhat wider than that, for in the immediate context we have k\wvt€<; re Kar' oTkov apTOv fJi€TeXd[x^avov Tpo) On the other hand, if we must discard the tradition as to the beginning of the appearances, we must equally discard that as to their end. The wave of feverish enthusiasm to which on this hypothesis they owed their origin, certainly would not have subsided in the interval between Passover and Pentecost. We note, as it is, an ascending scale in the appearances — they occur first to individuals (Mary Magdalene, Peter, the Emmaus disciples), then to the Ten and the Eleven, then to the Five Hundred. We can see how one appearance prepares the way for another. St. Peter (e.g.) must have been present at three or four. With this increasing weight of testimony, and increasing predisposition in the minds of the disciples, we should naturally expect that the appearance to the Five Hundred would contain within itself the germs of an indefinite series. We should not have been surprised if the whole body alike of Christians and of half Chris- tians had caught the contagion. But that is not the THE RESURRECTION 183 case. There is just the single appearance to James ; and then — the vision of St. Paul standing rather by itself — with one more appearance to the assembled apostles, the list comes to what seems an abrupt end. This description of the facts rests on excellent evi- dence. The ' third day ' is hardly less firmly rooted in- the tradition of the Church than the Resurrection itself. We have it not only in the speech ascribed to St. Peter (Ac 10*''), but in the central testimony of St. Paul, and then in the oldest form of the Apostles' Creed. It is strange that so slight a detail should have been pre- served at all, and still stranger that it should hold the place it does in the standard of the Church's faith. We must needs regard it as original. And for the circumscribed area of the appearances, we have at once the positive evidence of the canonical documents, and a remarkable silence on the part of the extra- canonical. These phenomena are difficult to reconcile with a theory of purely subjective visions. An honest in- quirer like Keim felt the difficulty so strongly that, while regarding the appearances as essentially of the nature of visions, he held them to be not merely sub- jective, but divinely caused, for the express purpose of creating the belief in which they issued. This is the least that must be asserted. A beUef that has had such incalculably momentous results must have had an adequate cause. No apparition, no mere hallucination of the senses ever yet moved the world. But we may doubt whether the theory, even as Keim presents it, is adequate or really called for. It belongs 1 84 THE MESSIANIC CRISIS to the process of so trimming down the elements that we call supernatural in the Gospel narratives as to bring them within the limits of everyday experience. But that process, we must needs think, has failed. The facts are too obstinate, the evidence for them is too strong ; and the measures which we apply are too narrow and bounded. It is better to keep substantially the form which a sound tradition has handed down to us, even though its contents in some degree pass our comprehension. § 72. (4) The Permanent Significance of the Resur- rection. — The innermost nature of the Resurrection is hidden from us. And if we ask why the supreme proof that God had visited His people took this particular form, the answer y^o. can give is but partial. Some things, however, seem to stand out clearly. {a) In the first place it is obvious that the idea of a resurrection was present to men's minds. Herod thought that the works of Jesus were works of the Baptist restored to life (Mk e"-^"!!). Men were quite prepared to see Elijah or some other of the ancient prophets reappear upon the scene (Mk 9"'^^||, Jn i^). In Palestine and among the circles in which Christianity arose, no mark of special divine indwelling seemed at the time so natural. The belief had not been allowed to grow up without a reason. For it)) from the very first the ideas of bodily and spiritual resurrection were closely intertwined together. Perhaps the oldest passage in which there is a hint of such an idea is the vision of Ezekiel (ch, 37) ; and there the revivification of the body is the symbol of a spiritual THE RESURRECTION 1 85 revival. This intimate connexion of bodily and spiritual is never lost sight of in Christianity. (r) ' Die to live ' is one of the most fundamental of Christian principles, and this principle is embodied once for all in the Resurrection. If the one side was ' placarded ' before the eyes of the world (Gal 3^) in the Crucifixion, the Resurrection was a no less signal manifestation of the other. There is a double strain of inference and application. {d) On the one hand, the Resurrection of Christ was the pledge and earnest of physical resurrection and the life beyond the grave. St. Paul founds upon it the hope of immortaUty (i Th 4^^ Ro 8^ i Co 6'^ is^^ff.^ 2 Co 4" etc.). (if) But he equally founds upon it the most earnest, exhortations to holiness of life. It is not only that this follows for the Christian as a duty: if his relation to Christ is a right relation, it is included in it as a necessity (Ro 6^"*'). St. Paul can hardly think of the physical Resurrection apart from the spiritual. And there is a very similar vein in the teaching of St. John (Jn 5-*, I Jn 3'^). The Resurrection is the corner-stone of Christian mysticism. (/) In another aspect, as a divine act, the crowning mark of divine approval, it is a necessary complement of the Crucifixion. It supplies the proof, which the world might desiderate, that the Sacrifice of the Cross was accepted. If the death of the Cross was a dying for human sin, the rising again from the tomb was the seal of forgiveness and justification (Ro 4^^, of. 6'^). St. Paul saw in it an assurance that the doors of the divine mercy were thrown open wide ; and to St. Peter in like 1 86 THE MESSIANIC CRISIS manner it was through it that mankind was begotten again to a Mively hope' (i P i^). All this mass of biblical teaching hangs together. If the Resurrection was a reality it has a solid nucleus, which would be wanting even to the theory of objective visions. The economy which begins with a physical Incarnation, naturally and appropriately ends with a physical Resurrection. Thus much we can see, though we may feel that this is not all. Literature. — Besides the recent literature mentioned above (among which the paper by Dr. Loofs deserves rather special atten- tion), and besides the treatment of the subject in numerous works on the Gospel History and on Apologetics, it is well to remember two monographs in English — Dr. Westcott's Gospel of the Resurrec- tion (first pub. in 1 866), and the late Dr. Milligan's The Resurrection of our Lord (first pub. in i88l). § 73. (vi.) The Ascension. — The Resurrection in itself was incomplete. It was not the goal, but the way to the goal. The goal was the return of the Son to the Father, with His mission accomplished. His work done. § 74. (i) The apostolic writers unanimously repre- sent this return as a triumph. The keynote is struck in the speech which is put into the mouth of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost* (Ac 2^^). It would seem * When we ask how these early discourses were transmitted to the writer of the Acts, there is a natural reluctance to use them too strictly as representing the exact words spoken. And yet, taken as a whole, they fit in singularly well to the order of development and the thought of the primitive community, which has an ante- cedent verisimilitude and accords well with indications in the Pauline Epistles. 1 THE ASCENSION 1 8/ that the form of expression which the conception assumed was influenced largely by Ps iio\ a passage to which attention had been drawn by our Lord Him- self shortly before His departure, and which spontane- ously recurred to the mind as soon as the nature of His return to the Father had declared itself. Along with this would be recalled the saying with which our Lord had answered the challenge of the high priest (Mk i4^-||). Psalm and saying alike represented the Messiah as seated * at the right hand ' of the Most High. This phrase appears to have at once (in the forms ck 8e|tcov and iv Se^ta) established itself in the language of the primitive Church ; it occurs repeatedly, not only in the Acts (y^*"-) and in the Pauline Epistles, but in Hebrews, I Peter, and Revelation ; and, like the detail of the ' third day,' it occupies a fixed place in the Apostles' Creed. The speech of St. Peter culminates in the declaration, 'Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made him, whom ye crucified, both Lord and Christ ' (Ac 2^") ; and it is substantially a paraphrase of this when in a famous passage St. Paul, after speak- ing of the humiliation of the Christ, adds, 'Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow,' etc. (Ph. 2^-). The return of the Son to the Father was not merely the resumption of a previous state of glory (Jn 6®^ if etc.), it was the resumption of it with the added approval and recognition which His obedience unto death had called forth. We speak of these things Kara avOpayirov; or rather, we are content to echo in regard to them the language of the apostles and of the first Christians, 1 88 THE MESSIANIC CRISIS who themselves spoke Kara avOpoiirov. The reality lies behind the veil. § 75. (2) How did our Lord Jesus Christ enter upon this state of exaltation? Now that we have before us corrected texts of the Gospels, it would seem to be probable that they did not give an answer to this question. The answer was reserved for the second volume which St. Luke addressed to Theophilus ; it forms the opening section of the Acts of the Apostles. Mk 16^^ belongs to the Appendix to the Gospel, which v/e have seen (p. 170 f. sjtp.) to have been probably composed, not by St. Mark himself, but by the presbyter Aristion in the early years of the second century. The reading of Lk 24^^ stands thus — Kal dveepipero els rbv ovpavbv, K" ABCLXAAII, etc., c f q Vulg. Syrr. (Pesh.-Harcl.-Hier.) relL, Cyr.-Alex. Aug. 1/2. Om. X*D, a b e ff2 Syr.-Sin., Aug. 1/2. This means that the omission of the words is a primitive Western reading, which in this case is probably right : it was a natural gloss to explain the parting of the Lord from the disciples of the Ascension ; there was no similar temptation to omit the words if genuine. In Ac i^'" the final separation is described as an ' ascent unto heaven.' When the last instructions had been given, the disciples saw their Lord * taken up {(.irrjpdri) , and a cloud received him out of their sight.' The over-arching sky is a standing symbol for the abode of God ; and the return of the Son to the Father was naturally represented as a retreat within its blue recess, the ethereal home of light and glory. It is sometimes necessary that a symbol should be acted as well as written or spoken. The disciples were aware THE ASCENSION 1 89 of a vanishing, and they knew that their Lord must be where His Father was. That the narrative in the Acts is not a myth seems proved by an authentic little touch which it contains, a veritable reminiscence of what we may be sure was their real attitude at the moment, though it soon ceased to be. When they asked, ' Lord, dost thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel ? ' their thoughts were still running in the groove of the old Jewish expectation. It is the last trace of them that we have in this naive form. § 76. (3) From the point of view of Christian doc- trine, for those who not only accept the facts of the life of Christ but the construction put on those facts by the writers of NT, the main stress of the Ascension lies upon the state to which it forms the entrance, (a) It is the guarantee for the continued existence of Him who became incarnate for our sakes. (d) It not only guarantees His continued existence, but the continued effect of His work. It puts the seal of the divine approval upon all that the incarnation accomplished. It is the final confirmation of the lessons of the Baptism and of the Transfiguration, 'This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.' (c) The primitive phrase * at the right hand of God ' describes as nearly and as simply as human language can describe the double truth that Christ still is and that His work still is, that the Incarnation was no transient episode, but a per- manent and decisive factor in the dealing of God with man. (d) This truth is stated in other words in the doctrine of the High Priesthood of Christ, a doctrine IQO THE MESSIANIC CRISIS implicitly contained in many places in the writings of St. Paul, and worked out with great clearness and ful- ness in the Epistle to the Hebrews. There is something in the relation of the exalted Son to the Father and to His Church corresponding to and that may be expressed in terms of the functions of the earthly high priest in relation to God and to Israel. The great High Priest presents the prayers of His people ; He intercedes for them ; He ' pleads ' or * presents ' His own sacrifice. Only, when we use this language it should be remem- bered that we are not speaking of 'specific acts done or words spoken by Christ in His glory. His glorified presence is an eternal presentation ; he pleads by what He is ' (Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, p. 246 n.). Literature. — Dr. Milligan left a volume on the Ascension as a pendant to that on the Resurrection {Baird Lectures for 1891), which is the most comprehensive treatment of the subject in English. CHAPTER VII. SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER: THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY. § 77. Throughout His public ministry Jesus passed for the son of Joseph and Mary, two peasants of Nazareth. Some of those who were present at the long discourse in the synagogue at Capernaum expressed their astonishment at the high pretensions which it seemed to contain, by asking, * Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know ? ' (Jn 6*; cf. i^). The inhabitants of Nazareth appear to have put a similar question when He came and preached there. The exact words are somewhat differently trans- mitted. Mk 6^ has (in the better attested text), * Is not this the carpenter?' Mt 13^^ 'Is not this the carpenter's son ? ' Lk 4^ a passage which, although divergent, contains reminiscences of the same original, has still more directly, * Is not this Joseph's son ? ' In the preliminary chapters the same evangelist speaks repeatedly of ' his parents ' (yom?, Lk 2^- *^- ^). And not only does he himself resolve this into 'his father and his mother ' (2^, but he makes the mother of Jesus say, 'Thy father and I sought thee sorrowing' (2*^. 191 192 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER It is in keeping with this language that both the First and the Third Gospels place in their forefront genealogies of Jesus, which, in spite of many attempts to prove the contrary, must be admitted to trace His descent through Joseph and not through Mary. Yet, on the other hand, the same two Gospels, though differing widely in the details of the narrative, assert unequivocally that Joseph had no share in the parentage of Jesus, and that the place of a human father was taken by the direct action of the Spirit of God. The differences show that the two traditions are independent of each other; and yet both converge upon this one point. They agree not only in represent- ing Jesus as born of a virgin, but also in representing this fact as supernaturally announced beforehand, — in the one case to Joseph, in the other case to Mary. What account is to be given of these seeming incon- sistencies? We cannot get rid of them by assigning the opposed statements to different sources. In St. Matthew the genealogy which ends in Joseph is followed immediately by the narrative of the Annunciation and Virgin-Birth. In St. Luke the successive sections of ch. 2, which begins with the nativity and ends with the scene of the boy Jesus in the Temple, where we have seen that such expressions as * his parents,' * his father and mother' occur so freely, are linked together by the recurrent note, ' Mary kept all these sayings, pondering them in her heart,' ' his mother kept all these sayings in her heart' (Lk 2^^- "; cf. also the argument which Professor Ramsay skilfully draws from i**- 240. 52*^^ ^^^ when we turn to St. John we cannot but * IVas Christ born at Bethlehem ? p. 87. THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY 1 93 remember that the Gospel which records so frankly the Jews' question, ' Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know ? ' if it nowhere refers directly to the Virgin-Birth, yet goes further than any other Gospel in asserting the pre-existence of the Son as God with God. What we regard as inconsistent will clear itself up best if we consider the order of events and the way in which these preliminary stages of the history were gradually brought to the consciousness of the Church. The sources from which the knowledge of them was derived were, without doubt, private.* We shall con- sider presently the character of these sources. We know more about that of which use was made by St. Luke than of that used by St. Matthew, and we can rely upon it as a historical authority with greater con- fidence. We shall see that it is ultimately traceable to the Virgin herself, in all probability through the little circle of women who were for some time in her company. We are told expressly that the Virgin Mary ' kept all these sayings (or things) in her heart.' She, if any one, might well say, (xva-T-qpiov ifxov ifjiOL. It was only by slow degrees in the intimacy of confidential inter- * * Luke gives, from knowledge gained within the family, an account of facts known only to the family, and in part to the Mother alone' (Ramsay, op. cii. p. 79). Professor Ramsay, how- ever, seems to go too far in contrasting Matthew with Luke when he says, ' Matthew gives the public account, that which was generally known during the Saviour's life and after His death.' We do not think that any account was known during the Saviour's life, and we prefer to think of the Matthaean version as parallel to rather than contrasted with the Lucan. 13 194 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER course that she allowed her secret to pass beyond her- self, and to become known. Even if committed to writing before it came into the hands of St Luke, it probably did not reach any wide public until it was embodied in his Gospel. The place which the Virgin- Birth occupies in Ignatius and in the Creed seems to show that it cannot have been much later than the middle of the century before the knowledge of it made its way to the headquarters of Christianity. But before some such date as that there is no reason to think that it was generally known. It was no part of our Lord's own teaching. The neighbours among whom His early life was passed, the changing crowds who witnessed His miracles or gathered round Him to hear Him, had never had it proclaimed to them. 'Jesus son of Joseph, the prophet of Nazareth,' was the common name by which He was known. And it is a great presumption of the historical truth of the Gospels that they so simply and naturally reflect this language. We may well believe that the language was shared, as the ignorance which caused it was shared, even by the Twelve themselves. It would be very fitting if the channel through which these sacred things first came to the ears of the Church was a little group of women.* * ' If we are right in this view as to Luke's authority, and as to the way in which that authority reached him, viz. by oral communication, it appears that either the Virgin was still living when Luke was in Palestine during the years 57 and 58 ... or Luke had conversed with some one very intimate with her, who knew her heart and could give him what was almost as good as first-hand information. Beyond that we cannot safely go ; but yet one may venture to state the impression — though it may be THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY 1 95 § 78. i. The Sources of the Narrative. — It has often been observed that whereas the first two chapters of St. Matthew appear to be written from the point of view of Joseph, the first two chapters of St, Luke are written from the point of view of Mary. In Matthew the Annunciation is made to Joseph ; it is Joseph who is bidden in a dream not to fear to take to him his wife ; Joseph who is told what the Son whom she is to bear is to be called. It is Joseph, again, who is warned to take the young Child and His mother into Egypt, and who, when the danger is past, receives the com- mand to return ; and it is Joseph also whose anxious care is the cause that the family settle in Galilee and not in Judaea. On the other hand, when we turn to St. Luke the prominent figures at first are the two kinswomen, Elisabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, and Mary. Mary herself receives the announcement of generally considered fanciful — that the intermediary, if one existed, is more likely to have been a woman than a man. There is a womanly spirit in the whole narrative, which seems incon- sistent with the transmission from man to man, and which, more- over, is an indication of Luke's character ; he had a marked sympathy with women' (Ramsay, op. cit. p. 88). In view of the close resemblance between much that appears in the text and Professor Ramsay's admirable chapter, it is perhaps right to explain that this had not been read at the time when the text was written, and that it represents an opinion formed long ago. The question as to whether the source was written or oral is left open, because there is reason to think that St. Luke used a special (written) source which may have been connected with the women mentioned below, and through them with the Virgin Mary. The writer could not speak quite so confidently as Professor Ramsay as to the nearness of this source to the Virgin, but he does not think that it could be more than two or three degrees removed from her. It must have been near enough to retain the fine touches which Professor Ramsay so well brings out. 196 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER the holy thing that is to be born of her. The Magnificat is her song of thanksgiving. She treasures in her heart the sayings of the shepherds and of her Divine Son. The aged Simeon points his prophecy to her, and foretells that a sword should pierce through her soul. In regard to the Matthsean document we are in the dark. The curious gravitation of statement towards Joseph has a reason; but beyond this there is not much that we can say. It would not follow that the immediate source of the narrative was very near his person. In the case of St. Luke we can see farther down the vista. We have already had grounds for connect- ing the source from which he draws ultimately with the Mother of Jesus. Through what channel did it reach the evangelist ? Probably through one of the women mentioned in Lk 8^ 24^"; and as Joanna is the least known of the group, and therefore the most likely to drop out for any one not personally acquainted with her, perhaps we may say, by preference, through her (cf. p. 172 sup^. We learn from Jn 19^ (cf. Ac i") that the Mother of Jesus was thrown into contact with this group, — perhaps not for any great length of time, but yet for a time that may well have been sufficiently long for the purpose. And we believe that thus the secret of what had passed came to be disclosed to a sympathetic ear. Such an inference, if sound, would invest the contents of these chapters with high authority. Without enlarg- ing more on this, we may perhaps be allowed to refer in confirmation to what has been already said as to the appropriateness of the picture given of the kind of THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY 1 97 circle in which Christ was born, and in which His birth was most spontaneously greeted (see p. 22 ff.). It was just the Simeons and Annas, the Elisabeths and Zachariahs, who were the natural adherents of such a Messiah as Jesus. And the phrases used to describe them are beautifully appropriate to the time and circumstances, 'looking for the consolation of Israel,' ' looking for the redemption of Jerusalem ' (Lk 2^- ^). The elaborate and courageous attempt of Resch ( TU iv. Heft 3, 1897) to reconstruct, even to the point of restoring the Hebrew original, a Kindheits-evaftgeliiirn, which shall embrace the whole of the first two chapters of Luke and Matthew with some extra- canonical parallels, is on the face of it a paradox, and, although no doubt containing useful matter, has not made converts. § 79. ii. [77;,? Text of Mt i^^ — Within recent years certain phenomena have come to light in the text of the first chapter of St. Matthew which demand con- sideration in their bearing upon this part of our subject. The peculiarities of the Curetonian Syriac, the (so-called) Ferrar group, and some MSS of the Old Latin, had been known for some time, but in themselves they did not seem of very great importance. A new and somewhat startling element was intro- duced by the publication of the Sinai- Syriac in 1894. More recently still a further authority has appeared, which contains the eccentric reading. This is the curious dialogue published by Mr. F. C. Conybeare under the names of Timothy and Aquila (Oxford, 1898). It professes to be a public debate between a Christian and a Jew held in the time of Cyril of Alexandria (a.d. 412-444), and it is in the main a string of tesiimonia commonly adduced in the Jewish controversy. It is a question how far some of this material comes from a work older than the date assigned. The criticism of the dialogue has been acutely treated by Mr. Cony- beare, but the subject needs further examination. We will set 198 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER forth the evidence at length, and then make some remarks upon it. Mt I^* 'laKu^ di iy^vvrjirev rbv 'Iwctt/^ t6i> &vdpa Maplas, i^ tjs iyevv-qdr] 'Irjaovs 6 Xeydfiefos Xpicrrds, Codd. GrcEC, unc. qui exstant onin. minusc. quamplur. Verss. [incl. fffo, def. 1), cf. Dial. Tim. et Aq. fol. 113 r°. 'laKw^ 5^ iyivvriae t6v 'Iojcttj^, (^ /xf-qcrTevdeXcra irapdivoi Maptafi iyivvqffev '\7)(Todv rbv Xeybfievoi ^picrrdv, 346—826—828 {aiictore K. Lake, def. 13-69); cui desponsata virgo (o/«. q) Maria genuit Jesum qui dicitur (vocatur g^, q), Christus a gi, q, cf. Dial. Tim. et Aq. fol. 93 v°. Similiter, cui desponsata virgo Maria genuit (peperit d) Jesum Christum ((?;«. rbv Xeydp.., Christum Jesum d) d k Syr.-Cur. Jacob autem genuit Joseph, cui desponsata erat virgo Maria : virgo autem Maria genuit Jesum b (cf. c). IaKw/3 iyivv7)(Tev t6v Iuctt]^ rbv &v8pa Maplas, i^ ■^s iyevv^Or) 'IijcroOs 6 Xeybfievos Xpiffrbs • Kal 'I(t)(rrj(p iyevvTjffkv rbv IijtroOi' rbv \eybpje- vov Xpicrrbv, Dial. Tifn. et Aq. fol. 93 r°. 'loKWjS i'^f.vv. rbv 'luarjcp- 'Iwctt;^, y i/j.vTjO're'Lidr) irapdivoi Mapid/x, iyivvri) The reading might be the result of textual corruption. There would always be a natural tendency in the minds of scribes to assimilate 200 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER mechanically the last links in the genealogy to pre- ceding links. A further confusion might easily arise from the ambiguous sense of the word yewav, which was used of the mother as well as of the father (cf. Gal 4^'*). If we suppose that the original text ran, 'luxryjcji Tov avSpa Ma/at'as 17 iyevvrjaev 'Irjcrovv Tov Xcyofievov XpLo-Tov, that would perhaps account for the two divergent lines of variants better than any other. A reading like this appears to lie behind the Coptic (Bo- hairic) Version. {<:) It is conceivable that the reading (or group of readings) in Syr.-Sin. may be of definitely Ebionite origin. That which we call * heresy ' existed in so many shades, and was often so little consistent with itself, that it would be no decisive argument against this hypothesis that the sense of the readings is contradicted by the immediate context. It would be enough for the scribe to have had Ebionite leanings, and he may have thought of natural and supernatural generation as not mutually exclusive. We can only note these possibilities ; the data do not allow us to decide absolutely between them. Literature. — The fullest discussion of this subject took place in a lengthy correspondence in TAe Acade?ny, towards the end of 1894 and beginning of 1895. § 80. iii. The Genealogies. — At the time when it was thought necessary at all costs to bring one biblical statement into visible harmony with another, two hypo- theses were in favour for reconciling the genealogy of our Lord preserved in Mt i^-^^ with that in Lk 3^^^^. These were {a) the hypothesis of adoption or levirate marriage, according to which the actual descent might THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY 201 differ at several points from the legal descent, so that there might be two equally valid genealogies running side by side ; and {&) the hypothesis that the one genealogy might be that of Joseph, as the reputed father of Jesus, and the other genealogy (preferably St. Luke's) that of Mary. A certain handle seemed to be given for this latter supposition by the tradition which was said to be found in the Talmud (tr. Chagig. 77, col. 4, Meyer-Weiss), that Mary was the daughter of Eli. [This statement appears to be founded on a mistake, and should be given up ; see G. A. Cooke in Gore, Dissertations, p. 39 f.] It was felt, however, that this view could only be maintained by straining the text of the Gospel ; and it is now generally (though not quite universally) agreed that both genealogies belong to Joseph. On the other hand, the theory of levirate marriage or adoption, though no doubt a possible ex- planation, left too much the impression of being coined to meet the difficulty. The criticism of to-day prefers to leave the two genealogies side by side as independent attempts to supply the desiderated proof of Davidic descent. Were they the work of our present evangelists, or do they go back beyond them ? Both genealogies appear to have in common a characteristic which may point to opposite conclusions as to their origin. That in the First Gospel bears upon its face its artificial structure. The evangelist himself points out (Mt i^^) that it is arranged on three groups of fourteen genera- tions, though these groups are obtained by certain deliberate omissions. That would be, in his case, con- sistent with other peculiarities of his Gospel : he evidently shared the Jewish fondness for artificial 202 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER arrangements of numbers (Sir John Hawkins, Horcz Synopticce, p. 131 ff.). From this fact we might infer that the stem of descent had been drawn up by himself from the OT and perhaps some local tradition. If such tradition came to him in writing, the list might still conceivably have ended in some such way as that which is found in the Sinai-Syriac, though if the list was first committed to writing in the Gospel the probability that it did so would be considerably diminished. It would seem that a like artificial arrangement (77 generations = 7 X 11) underlies the genealogy in Luke. But as this is not in the manner of the Third Evan- gelist, and as he does not appear to be conscious of this feature in his list, it would be more probable that he found it ready to his hand. In that case it would be natural that it should come from the same source as chs. I. 2, which would invest the genealogy with the high authority of those chapters. We cannot speak too confidently, but the conclusion is at least spontaneously suggested by the facts. § 81. iv. The Census of Quirinius. — Until a very short time ago the best review of the whole question of the Census of Quirinius (Lk 2^"^) was that by Schiirer in NTZG § 17, Anhang i {HJF i. ii. 105 ff.). This was based upon a survey of the whole previous literature of the subject, and was really judicial, if somewhat severely critical, in its tone. As distinct from the school of Baur, which was always ready to sacrifice the Christian tradition to its own reconstruction of the history. Dr. Schiirer is an excellent representative of that more cautious method of inquiry which carefully collects the J THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY 203 data and draws its conclusions with no prepossession in favour of the bibhcal writers if also without prejudice against them. In the present instance he summed up rather adversely to the statements in St. I-uke ; and in the state of historical knowledge at the time when he wrote (1890?), that he should do so was upon his prin- ciples not surprising. According to St. Luke, our Lord was born at Beth- lehem on the occasion of a general ' enrolment ' {a.7ro- ypacfiy) ordered by the Emperor Augustus and carried out in Palestine under Quirinius as governor of Syria. The date was fixed as being before the death of Herod, which took place in B.C. 4 ; and it was explained that Joseph and Mary, as belonging to the lineage of David, had gone up to enter their names at Bethlehem, David's city. There were several points in this statement which seemed to invite criticism, (i.) In the first place, there was no other evidence that Augustus ever ordered a general census of the empire, although there was good reason to think that he took pains to collect statistics in regard to it. (ii.) Even if he had ordered such a census, it seemed doubtful whether it would be carried out in a kingdom which possessed such a degree of independence as Judaea. And (iii.) if it had been conducted in the Roman manner, there would have been no necessity for Joseph and Mary to leave their usual place of residence. Further, (iv.) while it was allowed, on the strength of a well-known inscription, that Quirinius probably twice held office in Syria, yet, as it was known that Sentius Saturninus was governor B.C. 9-7, and QuinctiHus Varus at least b.c. 7-4, it was argued that Quirinius' 204 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER first term of office could not be before B.C. 3-1, i.e. after the death of Herod, (v.) As there was, in any case, a census of Judgea conducted by Quirinius after its annexation by the Romans in a.d. 6, it was thought that St. Luke had a confused recollection of this, and antedated it (in the Gospel, though not in Ac 5^) to the lifetime of Herod. The chief authority for the census of A.d. 6 is Josephus ; and an eminent German scholar, Dr. Th. Zahn, put forward in 1893 the view that it was Josephus who was at fault in dating from this year an event which really fell in B.C. 4-3 {Neue Kirchliche Zeit- schrift, pp. 633-654). This brought the data more nearly, though still not entirely, into agreement with St. Luke. The theoiy need not, however, be more fully considered as it has not met with acceptance, and there can be little doubt that it seeks a solution of the difficulties in the wrong direction. There was one little expression which might have given pause to the critics of St. Luke, viz. his careful insertion of the word 'first' ('the first enrolment made when Q. was governor of Syria '). It might have shown that he was in possession of special knowledge which would not permit him to confuse the earlier census with that of a.d. 6. And yet the existence of the earlier census remained without confirmation, until it suddenly received it from a quarter which might have been described as unexpected if experience did not show that there is hardly anything that may not be found there — the rubbish heaps of papyrus fragments in Egypt. Almost at the same time, in the year when Dr. Zahn made his ingenious but unsuccessful attempt (1893), three scholars, one English and two German, made the discovery that periodical enrolments (dTroy/aa^at) THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY 20$ were held in Egypt under the Roman empire, and that they came round in a fourteen-year cycle. The proof of this was at first produced for the enrolments of A.D. 90, 104, 118, 132, and onwards; but in rapid succession the Hst was carried back to a.d. 76, 62, and 20. This gave the clue, which was almost at once seized, and the whole problem worked out afresh in masterly fashion by Prof. W. M. Ramsay, first in two articles in Exp. 1897, and then in his volume. Was Christ born at Bethlehem ? A Study in the Credibility of St. Luke (London, 1898). It was not too much to say that every detail is absolutely verified. The age of Augustus as compared with that which precedes and with that which follows is strangely obscure, and the authorities for it defective. But considering this, the sequence of argu- ment which Prof. Ramsay unfolds is remarkably clear and attractive. (i.) He shows it to be very probable that there was a series of periodical enrolments initiated by Augustus at the time when he first received the tribunician power, and his reign formally began in B.C. 23 (this is the official date usual in inscriptions, p. 140). (ii.) He also makes it probable that this was part of a deliberate and general policy — that the census- takings were not confined to Egypt, but extended to other parts of the empire, and more particularly to Syria. Here, too, there was a tendency to periodic recurrence, though the evidence is not, and is not likely to be, so complete as in the case of Egypt, (iii.) He has shown that Palestine was regarded as part of the 'Roman world,' i.e. of the empire. Though Herod had the liberty of a rex socius, the Roman power and the 2o6 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER emperor's will were always in the background; he had to see that the whole Jewish people took an oath of allegiance to the emperor; he could not make war without being called to account; he could not determine his own successor or put to death his own son without an appeal to Rome ; in a moment of anger Augustus threatened that whereas he had hitherto treated him (Herod) as a friend, he would henceforth treat him as a subject (Jos. Ant. xvi. ix. 3). It was therefore likely enough that Herod would wish, if he was not positively ordered, to fall in with the imperial policy by taking a census of his people, as another subject king did in Cilicia in a.d. 35. (iv.) But although Herod held a census at the instance of Augustus, it would be in keep- ing with his whole character and conduct to temper it to Jewish tastes as much as possible ; and he would do this by following the national custom of numbering the people by their tribes and families. This was the broad distinction between this enrolment of Herod's and the subsequent census of a.d. 6 or 7. The latter was carried out by Roman officials and in the Roman manner, which was the real cause of the offence which it gave, and of the armed resistance which it excited, (v.) Some uncertainty still hangs over the mention of Quirinius. Mommsen thought that he was the acting legatus of Syria in B.C. 3-1. Prof. Ramsay inclines to the view that he held an extraordinary command by the side of Varus some years earlier, as Corbulo did by the side of Ummidius Quadratus, and Vespasian by the side of Mucianus. Such a command might carry with it the control of foreign relations, and be included under the title ^yefjLwv. THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY 20/ § 82. The Meaning of the Virgin-Birth. — It is but a very few years since tliere arose in Germany (the date was 1892) a rather sharp controversy in which many leading theologians took part over the clause of the Apostles' Creed, ' Conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary.' The echoes of that controversy reached this country, and, although not much was said in public, it is probable that some impression was made upon public opinion. This impression was strengthened by the publication soon afterwards of the Sinai-Syriac with its peculiar reading, which was not unnaturally caught at as representing a more ancient and truer text than that to which we are accustomed. But if what has been written in the preceding sections has been followed, it will have been seen that for some time afterwards there was a certain reaction. The eccentric reading has found its level. As it stands, it cannot possibly be original ; and however it arose, it cannot really affect the belief of the Church, as it introduces no factor which had not been already allowed for. And at the same time the historical value of the documents, especially Lk i. 2, has been gradually rising in the estimation of scholars, until the climax has been reached in the recent treatise of Prof. Ramsay. Even those who desire to see things severely as they are must feel that the opening chapters of St. Luke are full of small indications of authenticity, that they are really not behind the rest of the Gospel, and that they form no exception to the claim made at the outset that the facts recorded have been derived from 'eye-witnesses and ministers of the word.' [The most recent period (1901- 1904) would have to be differently characterized.] 208 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTER Along with this process there has been growing up a better and fuller philosophy of the Incarnation. This has been due especially to some of the contributors to Lux Mtindi, and may be seen in Bishop Gore's Bampton Lectures (1891) and Dissertations (1895), in Dr. Moberly's Lux Mundi essay, and in Mr. Illingworth's Bampton Lectures (1894) and Divine Lmmanence (1898). To those who regard primitive ideas as compounded of nothing but idle imagination, ignorance, and super- stition, the evidence in folk-lore of stories of super- natural birth (such as are collected in Mr. Sidney Hartland's Legend of Perseus, vol. i., 1884) seems to discredit all accounts of such birth, even the Christian. They do not sufiticiently consider the entire difference of the conditions under which the Christian tradition was promulgated from those which surrounded the creations of mythopoeic fancy. The Christian tradition belongs to the sphere, not of myth but of history. It is enshrined in documents near in date to the facts, and in which the line of connexion between the record and the fact is still traceable. But, apart from this, if we believe that the course of human ideas, however mixed in their character — as all human things are mixed — is yet part of a single de- velopment, and that development presided over by a Providence which at once imparts to it unity and pre- scribes its goal, — those who believe this may well see in the fantastic outgrowth of myth and legend some- thing not wholly undesigned or wholly unconnected with the Great Event which was to be, but rather a dim unconscious preparation for that Event, a groping towards it of the human spirit, a prophetic instinct THE NATIVITY AND INFANCY 209 gradually moulding the forms of thought in which it was to find expression. And if we ask further what it all means, — why the Son of Man was destined to have this exceptional kind of birth, the answer is, because His appearance upon earth — His Incarnation, as we call it — was to be in its innermost nature exceptional; He was to live and move amongst men, and was to be made in all points like His brethren, with the one difference that He was to be — unlike them — without sin. But how was a sinless human nature possible ? To speak of a sinless human nature is to speak of something essentially outside the continuity of the species. The growth of self-conscious experience, expressed at its finest and best in the formulae of advancing science, has empha- sized the strength of heredity. Each generation is bound to the last by indissoluble ties. To sever the bond, in any one of its colligated strands, involves a break in descent. It involves the introduction of a new factor, to which the taint of sin does not attach. If like produces like, the element of unlikeness must come from that to which it has itself affinity. Our names for the process do but largely cover our ignor- ance, but we may be sure that there is essential truth contained in the scriptural phrase, '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.' [The most important literature has been mentioned in the course of this section.] 14 CHAPTER VIII. CONCLUDING SURVEY: THE VERDICT OF HISTORY. A. Christ in History. § 83. So far we have been involved in the study of the details of the Life of Christ, mainly on the basis of the Gospels. But the Gospels alone, though the fragments which they have preserved for us of that Life are beyond all price, would yet convey an incomplete idea of the total impression left by it even upon contem- poraries, still less of all that it has been in the history of the world. Especially would this be the case if, as some would have us do, we were to follow the first three Gospels only, to the exclusion of the fourth. To that point we shall return for a moment presently. But the time has now come to enlarge our view, to look back upon our subject from the vantage-ground which we occupy at the beginning of the twentieth century, and to endeavour to see it no longer as an episode affecting a small portion of an 'unimportant branch of the Semitic peoples,' but as it enters into the course of the great world-movement of the centuries. 212 CONCLUDING SURVEY If we would appreciate this, we must once more go back to the Origins, not now so much in search of details, as in order, if possible, to catch rather more of the total impression. We cannot, of course, attempt to interrogate the whole of history. For our present purpose it may be enough to consider (i.) the net result, if we may so speak, of the portraiture of Christ in the Gospels; (ii.) the impression left by a similar reading of other parts of the New Testament, especially the Epistles; (iii.) the testimony borne by the Early Church, both formulated and informal ; (iv.) the ap- peal that may be made to the religious experience of Christians. The last of these heads is not really so disparate as it may seem from the rest. The ultimate object that we have in view is to bring home — or to suggest lines on which it may be possible to bring home — what Christ really was and is to the individual believer. In order to do this we endeavour to collect (i.) what He was to those among whom He moved during His hfe on earth; (ii.) what He was to His disciples, and primarily to the apostles after His departure ; (iii.) what the still undivided Church apprehended Him as being. It will thus be seen that there is no real anti- thesis, as though the appeal were in the one case to history and in the other to experience. For our present purpose history may be regarded as the collective ex- perience of the past, which we are seeking to put into line with the individual or collective experience of the present. Our historical survey, so far as it goes, simply embodies so many superimposed strata of ex- perience. CHRIST IN HISTORY 213 § 84. i. The Christ 0/ the Gospels. — We should thus be inclined to deprecate the attempts which are from time to time made to set in contrast some one or other branch of the appeal that we are making as against the rest. In this country we are accustomed to the opposi- tion between the Christ of the (Synoptic) Gospels and the Christ of ' Dogma ' or of the Church. And in Germany of late there has been a tendency to oppose the Christ conceived and preached by the apostles to the biographical Christ of the Gospels, and the experi- ence of faith to any external and objective standards. (See especially the works of Kahler and Hermann men- tioned on page 216.) The disparagement of the Gospels as biographies seems to us, so far as it goes, — and neither writer is really very clear on the subject, — to rest upon a some- what undue degree of scepticism as to the critical use that can be made of the Gospels, It does not follow that all that is doubted is really doubtful. For a more detailed testing of the historical character of the Gospels we must content ourselves with referring to the previous part of this article, only adding to it the two points which will be more appropriately introduced at the end of the next section, — the peculiar kind of confirmation which the two pictures (the evangelic and the apostolic) supply to each other, the difference between them show- ing that the teaching of the Epistles has not encroached upon the historical truth of the Gospels, while the less obvious Hkeness shows that they are in strict continuity. We shall also have to state once more in that context our reasons for believing the Fourth Gospel to be really the work of an eye-witness. 214 CONCLUDING SURVEY But the point that concerns us most at the present moment is that, even if we make to negative criticism larger concessions than we have any right to make, there will still remain in the Gospel picture ineffaceable features which presuppose and demand that estimate of the Person of Christ which we can alone call in the strict sense Christian. Take, for instance, that central passage Mt n^*^ * 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.' Could we conceive such words put into any other lips, even the loftiest that the history of mankind has produced? They are full of dehcate self-portraiture. They present to us a char- acter which we may say certainly was, because it has been so described. No mere artist in words ever painted such a canvas without a living model before him. The portrait is of One who is ' meek and lowly in heart,' whose yoke is easy and His burden light; and yet He speaks of both yoke and burden as ' His ' in the sense of being imposed by Him ; He invites men to ' come ' to Him, evidently with a deep significance read into the phrase ; He addresses His invitation to weary souls wherever such are to be found ; and (climax of all !) He promises what no Alexander or Napoleon ever dreamt of promising to his followers, that He would give them the truly supernatural gift of rest — the tranquillity and serenity of inward peace in spite of the friction of the world ; that all this should be theirs by * coming ' to Him. CHRIST IN HISTORY 21 5 And then how easy is it to group round such a passage a multitude of others ! ' I say unto you, Resist not him that is evil : but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also ' (Mt 5^). 'The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister' (Mk lo'*^ ||). 'Suffer the little children to come unto me ; forbid them not : for of such is the kingdom of God' {ib. v. "||). 'Whosoever would save his life shall lose it : and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's shall save it ' (Mk S'^). 'The Son of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost ' (Lk 19^", comp. the three parables of Lk 15). 'Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me ' (Mt 25^). Sayings like these, it is needless to add, could be multipHed almost indefinitely. Through all of them there runs, indirectly, if not directly, the same self- portraitures. And it is a self-portraiture that has the same two sides. On the one hand there is the human side, the note of meekness or lowliness, condescension that is not (though it really is !) condescension but infinite sympathy, patience, tenderness ; and, on the other hand, no less firmly drawn, for all the lightness and restraint of touch, an absolute range of command and authority; all things delivered to the Son in heaven and on earth (cf. Mt 11^ aS^^). That which we have called the ' human side ' fills most of the foreground in the Gospels ; the other, the transcendental side, is somewhat shaded by it ; and we can see that it was deliberately shaded, that the pro- portions were such as mainly (though, as we shall see, not entirely) corresponded to the facts, or, in other 2l6 CONCLUDING SURVEY words, to the divine method and order of presentation. But when we turn from the Gospels to the rest of the NT we shall find these proportions inverted. We only pause upon this Gospel picture a moment more to say that, apart from any question of criticism of documents or of details in the narrative, it seems to us to be utterly beyond the reach of invention. The evangelists themselves were too near to the events to see them in all their significance. They set down, like honest men, the details one after another as they were told them. But it was not their doing that these details work in together to a singular and unsought harmony. Literature. — The fullest account of recent discussions as to the adequacy and trustworthiness of the presentation of Christ in the Gospels will be found in the second enlarged edition of Kahler's Der sogenannte historische Jesus und der geschichtliche, biblische Chris- tus, Leipzig, 1896. Another work, which lays the stress rather on personal experience of the life of Christ, and is written with great earnestness from that point of view, but seems to us too restricted in its historical basis, is Hermann's Der Verkehr des Christen mit Goit, ed. 2, Stuttgart, 1892 (Eng. tr. 1895). § 85. ii. The Christ of the Apostles. — In passing over from the Gospels to the rest of the NT we find ourselves hampered by critical questions. What we should most wish to ascertain is the conception of Christ held by the mass of the first disciples. And to some extent we can get at this; but, so far as we can do so, it is nearly always indirectly. The writings that have come down to us are those of the leaders, not of the followers ; and many even of these are encumbered with questions as to date and origin. Some of these do not so much CHRIST IN HISTORY 21/ matter, because in any case they belong to the end rather than the beginning of the apostohc age. The one book which we should most like to use more freely than we can is the Acts, the earlier chapters of which we quite agree with the author of the article in Dr. Hastings' Dictionary in estimating highly. We will, however, cut the knot by not attempting to summarize the teaching of all the undisputed books, but by taking a single typical example of manageable compass, the first extant NT writing, i Thessalonians, written probably about a.d. 51 — in any case not later than 53, or within the first quarter of a century after the Ascension. Let us suppose for a moment, with the more extreme critics, that a thick curtain falls over the Church after this event. The curtain is lifted, and what do we find ? We turn to the opening verse of the Epistle (emended reading). St. Paul and his com- panions give solemn greeting to the ' Church of the Thessalonians (which is) in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.' An elaborate process of reflexion, almost a system of theology, lies behind those familiar terms. First we note that the human name ' Jesus ' is closely associated with the title ' Christ ' or ' Messiah,' which in the Gospels had been claimed with such quiet reticence and unobtrusiveness. From this time onwards the two names are almost inseparable, or the second supersedes the first: in other words, Jesus is hardly ever thought of apart from His high Messianic dignity. This effect is pressed home by the further title 'Lord' (Ki^ptos). The disciples had been in the habit of ad- dressing their Master as 'Lord' during His lifetime, in a sense not very different from that in which any Rabbi might be addressed by his pupils (Jn is^^''-)- But that sense is no longer adequate; the word has been filled with a deeper meaning. That ' Jesus is Lord ' has become the distinctive confession of Christians (i Co 12^, Ro 10^), where ' Lord ' certainly = ' the exalted Lord ' of the Resurrection and Ascension (cf. Ac 2^^). What is still more remarkable, the glorified Jesus is, as it were, bracketed with 'God the Father.' Let us think what this would 2l8 CONCLUDING SURVEY mean to a strict Jewish monotheist ; yet St. Paul evidently holds the juxtaposition, not as something to which he is tentatively feel- ing his way, but as a fundamental axiom of faith. In the appella- tion 'Father' we have already the first beginning — may we not say the first decisive step, which potentially contains the rest? — of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. And we observe, further, that the Thessalonian Church is said to have its being • in Christ ' as well as ' in God.' This is a characteristic touch of Pauline mysticism. The striking thing about it is that in this, too, the Son already holds a place beside the Father (cf. 2^* 4^^). There is another passage in the Epistle (i Th 3^1) in which there is the same intimate combination of ' our God and Father ' and ' our Lord Jesus.' Here the context is not exactly mystical, but the two names are mentioned in connexion with the divine pre- rogative of ordering events. The apostle prays that God and Christ will together 'direct' (Kareu^i/mt, ' make straight and unimpeded') his way to them (the Thessalonians). It is not by accident that the Holy Spirit is in a similar manner impHcated in divine action (i^* ^ 4^ 5I9), though it would be too much to say that the Spirit is spoken of distinctly as a Person. The historical events of the life of Christ are hardly alluded to, except His death and resurrection (1^° 4I* 5I''). In the last of these verses Christ is said to have died ' for us'; and in the preceding verse 'salvation,' which is contrasted with 'death,' is said to come 'through' Him. In i^" He is also spoken of as delivering Chris- tians ' from the wrath to come.' It is assumed that Christ is in heaven, from whence He is expected to come again with impressive manifestations of power (l^'' 4^^*^'; cf. also the frequent allusions to 7) irapovffia tov Kvplov). The Second Coming is the only point on which the Epistle can be said to contain direct and formal teaching. The other points mentioned are all assumed as something already known, not as im- parted for the first time. Not only may we say that they are known, but it is also fair to infer that they are undisputed. There is a hint of controversy with the unbelieving Jews, but no hint of controversy with the Judsean Churches, which stand in the same relation to Christ (2^*-i^). This is important ; and it is fully borne out by the other Epistles, which show just how far the disputed ground between St. Paul and the other apostles extended. There was a good deal of sharp debate about the terms on which Gentiles shou'd be admitted. There is no trace of any debate as to the estimate of the Person of Christ. CHRIST IN HISTORY 219 We have referred to the Pauline mysticism and to the hints, slight but significant, of what is known as the doctrine of the Atonement. It is clear that St. Paul ascribed to Christ not only divine attributes but divine activities — activities in the supersensual sphere, what he elsewhere calls * heavenly places ' (to, eTTovpavLa). We know how these activities are en- larged upon in the Epistles to Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans. It would, of course, be wrong to suppose that all Christians, or indeed any great number, had an intelligent grasp of these ' mysteries ' ; but we can see from the Epistle to Hebrews, i Peter, Epistles of John, and Revelation, that conceptions quite as trans- cendental had a wide diffusion. And a verse like 2 Co 13" shows that there must have been large tracts of important teaching which are imperfectly represented in our extant documents. When we consider how occa- sional these documents are in their origin, the wonder is not that they have conveyed to us so little of the apos- tolic teaching, but that they have conveyed so much. The summary impression that we receive is indeed that the revolution foreshadowed at the end of the last section has been accomplished. The historical facts of the Lord's life were not neglected ; for Gospels were being written, of which those which we now possess are only surviving specimens. But in the whole epis- tolary literature of NT they have receded very much into the background, as compared with those transcen- dental conceptions of the Person and Work of Christ, to which the Gospels pointed forward, but which (with, one exception) they did not directly expound. No doubt this was in the main only what was to 220 CONCLUDING SURVEY be expected. The narrative of the Gospels goes back to the period before the Resurrection; the epistolary literature dates altogether after it. Still it is remark- able how we seem to be plunged all at once into the midst of a developed theology. Nor is the wonder lessened, it is rather increased, when we remark that this theology is only in part set before us dehberately as teaching. The fact that it is more often presupposed shows how deep a hold it must have taken alike of the writer and of his readers. Impressive contrasts are sometimes drawn {e.g. at the beginning of Dr. Hatch's Hibbert Lectures) between the Sermon on the Mount and the Nicene Creed; and the contrast certainly is there. But it goes back far beyond the period of the Arian controversy. It is hardly less marked between the Sermon on the Mount and the writings which have come down to us under the names of St. Peter and St. Paul. And yet these writings are practically contemporary with the com- position of the Gospels. The two streams, of historical narrative on the one hand and theological inference on the other, really run side by side. They do not exclude but rather supplement, and indeed critically confirm, each other. For if the Gospels had been really not genuine histories of the words and acts of Christ, but coloured products of the age succeeding His death, we may be sure that they would have reflected the characteristic attitude of that age far more than they do. They do not reflect it, but they do account for it by those delicate hints and subtly inwoven intimations that He who called Himself so persistently Son of Man was also Son of God. CHRIST IN HISTORY 221 The one Gospel which bridges the gap more un- mistakably than the others is the Fourth. And the reason is obvious, if St. John was its author. He had a foot in both worlds. As the disciple whom Jesus loved, he vividly remembered His incomings and out- goings. And in the same capacity, as a disciple who was also an apostle, it fell to him to build up that theology which was the deliberate expression of what Jesus was to His Church, not in a section only of His being, the short three years which He had spent among His followers, but in His being as He had revealed it to them as a whole. It is difficult to think of either function as merely assumed by the writer at second-hand. On the contrary, we acquire a fresh understanding of the weight and solemnity of his words when we think of these as springing from direct personal contact with Christ, and intense personal conviction of what Christ really was, not to himself only, but to the world. In this respect the Fourth Gospel is unique ; and the very expansion which it gives of the divine claims of Christ prepares us more completely than the other Gospels alone might have done for the transition from them to the Epistles. It is an especial satisfaction to be able to quote, in support of this view of the first-hand character of the Fourth Gospel, Dr. Loofs in PRE^ iv. 29. § 86. iii. The Christ of the Undivided Chtirch. — For the purpose which we have before us we must examine the evidence of the Undivided Church on three distinct points, {a) What was the estimate of the Person of Christ in the age immediately succeeding that of the 222 CONCLUDING SURVEY Apostles? {b) Are there any traces of a tradition different from this? {c) What is the bearing upon the subject of the creeds and conciUar decisions? {a) On the first head we may say broadly that the mass of Christian opinion was in strict continuity with the NT, rarely (as we might expect) rising to an apprehension of its heights and depths, and keep- ing rather at the average level, but steadily loyal in intention, and showing no signs of recalcitrance. Ignatius of Antioch has the strongest grip of distinctive features of NT teaching (Virgin-Birth, pre-existence, incarnation, Logos, Trinitarian language). Clemens Romanus, though much less theological, also has pre-existence and a clearly implied Trinity (Iviii. 2). In the former point Barnabas and Hermas agree, though the latter shows some confusion, not uncommon at this date, between Son and Spirit, And then we have the opening words of 2 Clement which exactly describe the general temper, ' Brethren, we ought so to think of Jesus Christ as of God, as of the Judge of quick and dead.' These, with Polycarp and Aristides, who adopt a similar tone, are the writers. And then when we look for evidence as to popular feeling and practice, we have the wide prevalence of baptism in the Threefold Name {Didache and Justin), and the hymns sung * to Christ as God' (Pliny, Ep. ad Trajan, xcvi.; cf. Eus. HE V. xxviii. 5). It is clear that prayer was generally offered to Christ. Origen's objection to this was a theological refinement, as he held that the proper formula was evx'ipi-<^Telv tQ eei^ 5ia X. 'I. (de Orat. 15). The group of Apologists which stands out so clearly in the middle of the second century is characterized chiefly by the use that is made of the Logos doctrine, which was identified with the Logos of philosophy. With them begins a more active spirit of reflexion and speculation. The relation of the Son to the Father, and indeed the whole problem of unity and distinctions in the Godhead (Justin and Athenagoras), is beginning to be keenly canvassed. And at the same time it is clear that the question of what were afterwards called the 'Two Natures' was causing much perplexity. It was this difficulty which really lies behind the CHRIST IN HISTORY 223 experiments of Gnosticism. When we come to the latter half and last quarter of the century, with the theologians of Asia Minor, Irenaeus, and Clement of Alexandria, the foundations have been laid of a Christian theology, which already bears the stamp that marks it throughout succeeding centuries, viz. that it is not free speculation, but reflexion upon data given by the Bible. (J)) It was natural, and could not well have been otherwise, that there was in this reflexion at first a con- siderable tentative element. There was no break, and no conscious divergence between it and the canonical writings. But are there no signs of such divergence? Are there no signs of a tradition differing from that embodied in these writings? Perhaps we ought to say that there are. The Gnostics began by inventing traditions of their own, but they soon fell into the groove, and professed to base their views like the rest on the canonical Scriptures. A conspicuous example of this is Heracleon's commentary on St. John. But in these circles there was what we might call recalcitrance, as when Ce- rinthus and Carpocrates rejected the Virgin-Birth as impossible (Iren. adv. Har. i. xxvi. i, xxv. i). The Gnostics, however, are outside the true development of Christianity, and their systems had a differ- ent origin. In closer contact with Christianity proper are the heretical Ebionites. For them a better claim might be made out to repre- sent a real divergence of tradition. It is possible that their denial of the Virgin- Birth was derived from the state of things when the canonical narratives had not yet obtained any wide circulation. And yet we should have to pass upon these Ebionites a verdict similar to that already passed upon the Gnostics. They were really Jews imperfectly Christianized. If they regarded Christ as yl/CKh% Apdpujiros, it was doubtless because the Jews did not expect their Messiah to have any other origin. This is a different thing from, though it may have some subordinate connexion with, the views (e.g.) of Paul of Samosata, whose difficulty was caused by the union of the two natures. The human nature he regarded as having an ordinary human birth, though it came to be united to the Divine Logos. 224 CONCLUDING SURVEY A like account would hold good of Theodotus of Byzantium and the Rationalists described in Eus. HE V. xxviii. At last the reader may think that he is upon the track of a genuine Rational- ism ; but this did not go very deep. It was consistent with belief in the Virgin-Birth and in the Resurrection (Hippolytus, Ref. Har. vii. 35); in fact it probably amounted to little more than a dry literal exegesis. The Clementine Homilies point out that Christ did not call Him- self ' God ' but the ' Son of God,' and they emphasize this distinction somewhat after the manner of the later Arians (xvi. 15, 16). When we have said this, we shall have touched (it is believed) on all the main types of what might be thought to be a denial of Christ's full Godhead. The more pressing danger of primitive Christianity lay in an opposite direction. Loyalty to Christ was so strong that the simpler sort of Christians were apt to look upon the humanity as swallowed up in the divinity. This is the true account of the early prevalence of Docetism (which made the deity of Christ real, the humanity phantasmal or unreal), and of the later prevalence of what is known to students as Modalistic Monarchianism, and to the general reader as Sabellianism (the doctrine that the Son and the Spirit were not distinct Persons in the Godhead, but modes or aspects of the One God). The answer of Noetus was typical of the frame of mind that gave rise to this, ' What harm do I do in glorify- ing Christ?' (Hippol. c. Noet. l) : it seemed meritorious to identify Christ with God. Both these tendencies were far stronger and more widely spread than anything that savoured of Rationalism. Docetism entered largely into the Apocryphal Gospels and Acts, which were very popular ; and both Tertullian {Prax. i, 3) and Hippolytus {Ref. HiBr. ix. 6, /j-^yiffros ayd)v') imply that the struggle against Monarchianism was severe. It is evident from this to which side the scales incHned. The traces of anything like Rationalism in the modern sense are extremely few and slight. For the most part, what looks like it is not pure Rational- ism (or Humanitarianism) at all. More formidable was the excess of zeal which exalted the divine in Christ at the expense of the human. But the main body of the Church held an even way between both extremes, — CHRIST IN HISTORY 22$ held it at least in intention, though there were no doubt a certain number of unsuccessful experiments in the construction of reasoned theory. {c) It was inevitable that in the early centuries there should be a great amount of tentative thinking. But little by Httle this was sifted out; and by the middle of the fifth century the ancient Church had practically made up its mind. It formulated its belief in the Chalcedonian definition (o/aos t^s c'v XaXKT^SoVt rcrdpTr]^ a-vv68ov) of the year 451 (which counts as Ecumenical, though the only Westerns present were the two legates of Pope Leo and two fugitive bishops from Africa), and in the Quicianque viilt, a liturgical creed composed, according to a tradition which may be sound, by Dionysius [of Milan] and Eusebius [of Vercelli], (cf. the remarkable preface in the Irish Liber Hyninorum, i. 203, ii. 92, ed. Bernard and Atkinson, Lond. 1898). This creed and the definitions of Chalcedon represent the end of the process; the beginning is marlced by the creed known as the Apostles'. Criticism has of late been active upon this creed as well as upon the so-called Nicene and Athanasian, with a result which tends, it may be generally said, to heighten the value of all three. The date of the Apostles' Creed (in its oldest and shortest form) has been reduced within the limits a.d. 100-150; Kattenbusch, the author of the most elaborate monograph on the subject, leans to the beginning of that period, Harnack to the end. It is agreed that it was in the first instance the local baptismal creed of the Church of Rome, and that it was the parent of all the leading provincial creeds of the West. The principal open question at the present time (1899, 1904) is as to its relation to the Eastern creeds. Kattenbusch and Harnack both think that it was carried to the East under Aurelian {circa 270), and that it became the parent of a number of Eastern creeds, including that which we know as the Nicene; but this is conjecture. Harnack thinks that the Roman creed coalesced with floating formulae, to which he gives the name of Kerygttiata, already circulating in the East. 15 • 226 CONCLUDING SURVEY But these also are more or less hypothetical. And the question is whether the Eastern creeds, which resemble the Roman, were not rather offshoots, parallel to it, of a single primitive creed, perhaps originating in Asia Minor. This is substantially the view of Dr. Loofs. The main argument in favour of it is that characteristic features of the Eastern type of creed already appear in Irenseus and in a less degree in Justin. Harnack would explain these features as due to his Kei-ygmata ; and from the point of view of the history of doctrine the difference is not very great, because the Kerygmata were in any case in harmony with the creed. It would be difficult to overestimate the value of the existence of this fixed traditional standard of teaching at so early a date. It was the rallying and steadying centre of Catholic Christianity, which kept it straight in the midst of Gnostic extravagances and among the perils of philosophical speculation. Our so-called Nicene Creed is only the Apostles' Creed in one of its more florid Oriental forms, with clauses engrafted into it to meet the rising heresies of Arius and Macedonius; while the Chalcedonian formula and the Quicuinque take further account of the controversies connected with the names of Apollinaris, Nestorius, and Eutyches. The decisions in question were thus the outcome of a long evolution, every step in which was keenly debated by minds of great acumen and power, really far better equipped for such discussions than the average Anglo- American mind of to-day. If we can see that their premises were often erroneous (especially in such matters as the exegesis of the OT), we can also see that they possessed extraordinary fertility and subtlety in the handling of metaphysical problems. The dis- paraging estimates of the Fathers, which are often heard and seen in print, are very largely based upon the most superficial acquaintance with their writings. There are many things in these which may provoke a smile, but as a whole they certainly will not do so in any really open mind. There exists at the present time in Germany a movement, which bears the name of its CHRIST IN HISTORY 22/ author Albrecht Ritschl (182 2-1 889), directed against metaphysics in theology generally. No doubt Ritschl also was a thinker and writer of great ability ; and the stress that he lays upon religious experience is by no means without justification. But it has not yet been proved that the negative side of his argument is equally vahd, or that metaphysics can be wholly dispensed with. And so long as this is the case we certainly cannot afford to ignore these ancient decisions. Every word in them represents a battle, or succession of battles, in which the combatants were, many of them, giants. Literature. — The subject of this section brings up the whole history of ' Christology,' which may be studied in well-known works of Baur, Dorner, and Thomasius, or in Harnack's History of Dogma. There is an excellent survey by Loofs in PRE^ iv. 16 ff., art. ' Christologie, Kirchenlehre,' marked by much inde- pendent judgment and research. In English may be mentioned Gore, Bampton Lectures (1S91); Fairbairn, Christ in Modern Theology (1893); R. L. Ottley, Doctrine of the Incarnation (1896). The later phases of the critical discussions on the creeds are set forth in Kattenbusch, Das Apost. Symbol (Leipzig, 1894, 1897, 1900); Harnack's art. 'Apost. Symb.' in PRE^'\. 741 ff. (this is the author's most complete and latest utterance ; the Eng. reader may consult Hist, of Dogma, i. 157 ff.), and an important art. by Loofs in Gott. gel, Anzeigen, 1895. For Ritschl's attitude it may be enough to refer to his tract, Theologie u. Metaphysik, Bonn, 1 881. We had an English version of the opposition to metaphysics in the writings of Matthew Arnold. § 87. iv. The Christ of Personal Experience. — In the case of Ritschl the religious experience of the individual or of communities is directly pitted against metaphysics as the criterion of theological truth. But apart from philosophical theory it is the criterion which is practi- 228 CONCLUDING SURVEY cally applied by hundreds of thousands of plain men — we will not say in search of a creed, but in support of the creed which they have found or inherited. And there is an immense volume of evidence derived from this source in corroboration of the truth of Christianity, or of what amounts to the same thing, the Christian estimate of the Person of Christ. The singular attrac- tion of this Person, the sense of what Christ has done, not only for mankind at large but for the individual believer, the sense of the love of God manifested in Him, have been so overpowering as to sweep away all need for other kinds of evidence. They create a passionate conviction that the religion which has had these effects cannot be wrong in its fundamental doc- trine, the pivot of the whole. This personal experience operates in two ways. It makes the individual believer cling to his belief in spite of all the objections that can be brought against it. But it also possesses a formative power which so fashions men in the likeness of Christ, that they in turn become a standing witness to those who have not come under the same influence, St. Paul expresses this by a forcible metaphor when he speaks of himself as in travail for his Galatian converts ' until Christ be formed ' in them, as the embryo is formed in the womb (Gal 4'^). The image thus formed shines through the man, like a light through glass, and so He who came to be the Light of the world has His radiance transmitted downwards through the centuries and outwards to the remotest corners of the earth. This that we speak of is, of course, matter of com- mon knowledge and of everyday experience. The note THE PERSON OF CHRIST 229 of the true Christian cannot help being seen wherever there is genuine Christianity. It is, however, an in- estimable advantage that the process should have found expression in such classics of literature as the Confes- sions of Si. Augustine and the De Imitatione. In these it can not only be seen but studied. B. The Person of Christ. § 88. It is necessary that these outlines should be brought to a close, and the close may seem rather abrupt. And yet the design which the writer set before himself is very nearly accomplished. It will be his duty at a later date to return to his subject on a somewhat larger scale ; and for the present he would conclude, not so much by stating results as by stating problems. § 89. The Problem as it stands. — We have seen that there are four different ways of attempting to grasp what we can of the significance of the Person of Christ. Towards these four ways the attitude of different minds will be different. For some the decisions of the undi- vided Church will be absolutely authoritative and final. They will not seek to go either behind them or beyond them. Others will set the comparative simplicity of the Gospel picture against the more transcendental and metaphysical conceptions of the age that followed. To others, again, the picture traced in the Gospels will seem meagre and uncertain by the side of the exalted Christ preached by the apostles.* Yet others will take * ' We know, literally speaking, with much greater certainty what Paul wrote than what Jesus spoke.' 'The centre of gravity 230 CONCLUDING SURVEY refuge in the appeal to individual experience, which will seem to give a more immediate hold on Christ and to avoid the necessity and perplexities of criticism. Others, still more radical in their procedure, will begin with the assumption that Christ was only man, and will treat all the subsequent development as reflecting the growth of the delusion by which He came to be regarded as God. This last is a drastic method of levelling down the indications of the divine in history, against which human nature protests and will continue to protest. But, short of this, the other milder alternatives seem to us to put asunder what ought rather to be combined. They seem to us to propound antitheses, where they ought rather to find harmony. As the phases in question, distinctly as they stand out from each other, are so many phases in the history of Christianity, they ought to contribute to the elucidation of the Christianity which they have in common. They ought to contribute to it, and we believe that they do contribute to it. There is, however, room still left for closer study, especially of the transitions. We have been so much in the habit of studying the Gospels by themselves and the Epistles by themselves that we have not paid sufficient attention to the transition from the one to the other. If we follow this clue, it will, we believe, show that the first three Gospels in particular need supplementing, that features which in them appear subordinate will bear greater emphasis, and that the for the understanding of the Person (of Christ) and of its significance falls upon what we are in the habit of calling His Work.' Kahler Jesus u. das A T, pp. 37, 5o. THE PERSON OF CHRIST 23 1 resulting whole is more like that portrayed in the Fourth Gospel than is often supposed. For instance, we are of opinion that much of the teaching of Jn 14-16 is 7-equired by the verse 2 Co 13" and other allusive passages in the early Epistles of St. Paul; that the command of Mt 28^^ (or something like it) is required by Didache vii. i, 3; Just. Apol. i. 61 ; that the teaching respecting the Paraclete is required by the whole Pauline doctrine of the Spirit ; that the allegory of the Vine is required by the Pauline doctrines of the Plead and the Members, and of the Mystical Union; that the full sense of Mk 10'*^ || is required by such passages as Ro 3-''-^ 4^ 5^^ etc., and the full sense of Mk 14-^ || by He 9^^-^. And observations of this kind may be very largely extended. In like manner, while it is certainly right that the conceptions current in the early Church as to the Person and Work of Christ should be rigorously analyzed and traced to their origin, full weight should be given to the analogues for them that are to be found in NT; and where they have their roots outside the Bible, even there the efforts of the human mind to express its deepest ideas may deserve a more sympathetic judgment than they sometimes receive. And throughout, it is highly important that the doctrinal conceptions, whether of the apostolic age or of subsequent ages, should be brought to the test of living experience, and as far as possible expressed in the language of such experience. The mind and heart of to-day demands before all things reality. It is a right and a healthy demand ; and the Churches should try with all their power to satisfy it. If they fail, the 232 CONCLUDING SURVEY fault will not lie in their subject-matter, but in them- selves. § 90. ii. A pressing Portion of the Problem. — There is one portion of the problem as to the Person of our Lord Jesus Christ which both in this country and in Germany has excited special interest in recent years. In its most concrete form this is the question as to our Lord's Human Knowledge, which, however, runs up directly into what is generally known as the question of the Kenosis. And that, again, when thoroughly ex- amined, will be found to raise the whole question of the Two Natures. In regard to this series of connected questions there is still abroad an active spirit of inquiry. It was started in the first instance by the argument from our Lord's use of the OT in its bearing upon the question of OT criticism. This led to a closer examination of the text, Mk 13^2 II var. led. That, again, expanded into a discussion of the technical doctrine of the Kejiosis (see DB, s.v.), an episode in which was a renewed study of the exegesis of Ph 2^'^. And that, in turn, in its later phase (H. C. Powell's Principle of the Incarnation, 1896), has opened up the whole question of the Two Natures, which in Germany for some time past has been far more freely handled than in Great Britain. These discussions have produced one little work of classical value, Dr. E. H. Gifford's study of Ph 2^^!, entitled the Incar- nation, a model of careful and scientific exegesis, which appears to leave hardly anything more to be said on that head. It is also right to note the special activity on this subject of the diocese of Salisbury, largely due to the initiative and encouragement of its bishop (Mr. W. S. Swayne's Our Lord^s Knowledge as Alan, with a preface by the Bishop of Salisbury, 1891, and Mr. Powell's elaborate work mentioned above). Weighty contributions have been made to the subject by Dr. Bright in IVaymar/cs of Church History (1894), Canon [now Bishop] Gore {Dissertations, 1898), and in arts, in the Ch. Quarterly, Oct. 1891, and July 1897. THE WORK OF CHRIST 233 On the Continent special views of the Kenosis are connected with the names of Dorner, Thomasius, Gess, Godet, and others rather more incidentally. Tracts upon the smaller questions appeared not long ago by Schwartzkopff {Konnie Jesus irren? 1896), and Kahler {Jesus ti. das AT, il In spite of all this varied activity, it may be doubted whether the last word has yet quite been said (Dr. Gifford's treatment of the exegetical question seems to us to come nearest to this). The first concern of the historian is that the facts shall be taken candidly as they are. It is more probable that our inferences will be wrong than the data from which they are drawn. And for the rest, we should not be surprised if a yet further examination of the subject should result rather in a list of tacenda than of pradicanda. C. The Work of Christ. § 91. In regard to the work of Christ also it is best for us to state problems. Of these the most important are the two that meet us first ; they have not been much discussed ; and complete agreement upon them has not yet been attained. § 92. i. The Place in the Cosmical Order of the Ethical Teaching of Christ. — It is almost a question of names when it is asked whether Christ brought into the world a new ethical ideal. The question would be what constituted a new ideal. The Christian ideal, properly so called, is a direct development of what is found in OT, esp. in Psalms and the Second Part of Isaiah. But it receives a finish and an enrichment 234 CONCLUDING SURVEY beyond what it ever possessed before, and it is placed on deeper foundations. The chief outstanding question in regard to it would be the relation in which it stood to the older ideals of the best pagan life and philosophy in regard to the civic virtues, and to the newer ideals put forward in modern times in the name of science, art, and industry. The Christian ideal, it must be confessed, rather leaves these on one side. That it should do so would be quite as explicable if we adopt the Christian estimate of the Person of Christ as if we do not. If we do not adopt it, then the omission (so far as there is an omission) would be one of the limitations for which we were pre- pared. But if we take St. John's view of the relation of the Son to the Father, and see in His action the action willed by the Father, we shall see it as part of the great world-movement, presupposing so much of that movement as had proved itself to be of permanent value in the past, and leaving room for further develop- ments, corresponding to altered states of society, in the future. The teaching of Christ was not intended to make a tabula rasa of all that had gone before in Greece or Rome any more than in Judaea ; nor was it intended to absorb into itself absolutely all the threads of subse- quent evolution, where those threads work back to antecedents other than its own. It was intended so to work into the course of the world-movement as ulti- mately to recast and reform it. Its action has about it nothing violent or revolutionary, but it is none the less searching and effective. It is a force 'gentle yet pre- vailing.' Some remarks have been made above (p. 89 f.) on THE WORK OF CHRIST 235 the way in which the Christian ethical ideal operates and has operated. It is not thought that they are really sufficient ; but they represent such degree of insight as the writer has attained to at present, and he would welcome warmly any new light on the subject. § 93. ii. The Significance of the Personal Example of Christ in regard to His Ethical Teaching. — When once it is reahzed that the root principle of the ethics of Jesus is Life through Death, the death of the lower self with a view to the more assured triumph of the higher, it must needs break in upon us that the Life of Christ bears to His teaching a wholly different relation from that which the lives of ordinary teachers bear to theirs. An honest man will no doubt try to practise what he preaches, but that will be just a matter of maxims of conduct. The Life of Christ, we can see, was some- thing very much more than this. It was a systematic working out of the Christian principle on a conspicuous and transcendent scale. The Death and Resurrection of Jesus were the visible embodiment of the law of all spiritual being that death is the true road to the higher life. When we reflect further who it was that was thus exhibiting in His own Person the working out of this law to the utmost extremity, we become aware that Christians have it indeed * placarded ' before their eyes (Gal 3^) in a sense in which no moral law ever was set forth before. Add that Christ had Himself predicted and that His followers generally believed that after His Ascension 236 CONCLUDING SURVEY He was again visiting His people through His Spirit ; that Divine forces were at work in the world, all radi- ating from Himself — Himself at once crucified and risen ; add this to the previous beliefs of which we have just spoken, — remember that Christians supposed themselves to be actually conscious of these forces impressing and moulding their own hearts and lives, and we may come gradually to understand what St. Paul meant when He spoke of ' dying ' or * being cruci- fied ' with ' Christ ' and ' rising again with Him.' It seems to be a similar idea to that which St. John ex- presses when he puts into the mouth of Christ the claim, * I am the Way.' Rather, perhaps, we should not narrow down this phrase to anything less than the whole content of the Life of Christ on earth. * He supplied in Himself the fixed plan, according to which all right human action must be framed : the Spirit working with their spirit supplied the ever-varying shapes in which the one plan had to be embodied ' (Hort, Hills. Led. p. 30). § 94. iii. The Work of Christ as Redemptive. — Here we come on to more settled ground. At a very early date Christian tradition gave to Christ the title 'Saviour' (Lk 2", Ac s^^ 13^3 etc.; cf. Mt i'\ Lk 19^"), 'Saviour of the world' (Jn 4*-'; cf. 3^^ 12*'). What does this title 'Saviour' include? It doubtless includes every sense in which Christ rescued and rescues men from the power and the guilt of sin. He does this, as we have seen, both by teaching and by example — by inimitable teaching and by a consummate example. But if we follow the method indicated above (p. 230 f.), THE WORK OF CHRIST 237 if we take the hints in the Gospels, with the fuller light thrown upon them by the Epistles, we shall be led to the conclusion that there was something yet more in the Life and Death and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ than this, that there was something in these connected acts of His which had its counterpart in the sacrifices of OT; and that the deepest meaning and purpose of sacrifice was fulfilled in Him. This is a belief which Christians have held from the first days onwards ; and it is a belief which does not and will not lack careful restatement at the present time. § 95. iv. The Work of Christ as Revelation. — On a similar footing is the belief that Christ came not only to give, but to be a revelation of the inmost mind and character of the Father. Such a revelation was needed. It is not contained in the * cosmic process.' If we had that process alone before us, we could not infer that God was a Being absolutely righteous and absolutely loving. The idea that He might be so could not rise above a hypothesis. But at this point the Incarnation intervenes. And here again the Synoptic Gospels present us with one central passage (Mt ii^||) with other scattered hints which are taken up and made more explicit in the Fourth Gospel, while that again does but give the fuller ground for a belief which was certainly held in the apostolic circle (comp. e.g. the central passage Jn 14"" with lo"*'- 3^^, i Jn 4*-^^, Ro 5* etc.). So we get the broad doctrine led up to by St. Paul and Epistle to the Hebrews (2 Co 4*^ Col i". He i'), and finally formulated by St. John, that the Son was the Logos or Word (which might bo 238 CONCLUDING SURVEY paraphrased * mouthpiece,' or ' vehicle of utterance of the mind ') of the Father. § 96. V. The Founding of the Church. — Conventional language is too often heard as though the immediate object of the Incarnation was the founding of the full hierarchical system as it existed in the Middle Ages. This language is based on the complete identification of the Church with the ' kingdom of heaven ' (see p. 83 f. sup?). On the other hand, there is a school of critics, both in Germany and in England, who deny that ' Jesus ever created, or thought of creating, an organized society.' The main ground for this latter view is the doubt that rests over the two instances — one of them ambiguous — of the use of the word ' Church ' which are confined to the peculiar element of the First Gospel (Mt 16^* 18^^), and the certainty that there are some senses in which the ' kingdom ' and the Church cannot be identified. In some (though not in all) of those who adopt this Hne of reasoning there is the further tendency to minimize or restrict all that would imply an extended outlook of Jesus over the ages. It seems to us, however, to be going too far to say that the ' kingdom of heaven is without organization and incapable of being organized,' The two parables of the Tares and the Draw-net distinctly imply the existence of a society; and that the divine laws and influences which constitute the kingdom should ex- press themselves in a society as the vehicle for their realization is antecedently probable. But when Jesus gathered round Him the Twelve, He was practically THE WORK OF CHRIST 239 forming the nucleus of a society ; and that society has had a continuous existence ever since, so that it is difficult to think that it was not contemplated. More- over, when we turn to the writings of St. Paul, we find that even in his earlier Epistles he seems to think of Christians as forming a single body with differentiation of function (Ro 12*"^, i Co 12*^"), and in his later Epistles (Ephesians, Colossians, Pastoral Epistles) the unity of the Church with its regular forms of ministry is brought out still more emphatically. We also find that the Day of Pentecost is described in Acts as inaugurating a state of things which agrees well with the indications in the Epistles of St, Paul, while it confirms the promise of Lk 24^^, Jn 14^"-®. On the assumptions made in these Outlines it would be extremely improbable that this series of phenomena was not fully foreseen and deliberately designed by Christ. It would seem, however, that, after the manner of the divine operations in nature. He was rather content to plant a germ with indefinite capacities of growth, than thought it necessary Himself to fix in advance the details of organization. The exact nature of the powers conferred upon the apostles is still a subject of much discussion as these concluding lines are written (1899). § 97. Lives of Christ. — To write the Life of Christ ideally is impossible. And even to write such a Life as should justify itself either for popular use or for study, is a task of extreme difficulty. After all the learning, ability, and even genius devoted to the sub- ject, it is a relief to turn back from the very best of modern Lives to the Gospels. And great as are the merits of many of these modern works, there is none (at least none known to the writer — and there are several that he ought to know but does not) which 24© CONCLUDING SURVEY possess such a balance and combination of qualities as to rise quite to the level of a classic. What is wanted is a Newman, with science and adequate knowledge. No one has ever touched the Gospels with so much innate kinship of spirit as he. It should be needless to say that the Life of Christ can be written only by a believer. Renan had all the literary gifts — a curiosa felicitas of style, an sesthetic appreciation of his subject, and a saving com- mon-sense which tempered his criticism ; but even as literature his work is spoilt by self-consciousness and condescension, and his science was not of the best. It will be well here only to name a select list of books which may be used more or less systematically. The minor works are legion. Among the older works that would still most repay study would probably be those of Neander (ed. 7, 1873), Hase {Lebeit Jesu, ed. 5, 1865 ; Geschichte Jesu, 1876), Ewald (vol. vi. in Eng. tr. of Gesch. d. Volkes Israel, 1883), Andrews (revised ed. New York : Charles Scribner's Sons, 1892). In this country the books most generally current are Farrar's Life of Christ (since 1874); Edersheim's Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (since 1883, revised editions from 1886, abridged ed. 1890); to which should perhaps be added Cunningham Geikie, Life and Words of Christ (1877). Of these the best is probably Dr. Edersheim's (with very ample illustrations from Jewish sources) ; but none of the three can quite be said to grapple with the deeper underlying problems, critical or other. A striking attempt was made by the late Professor J. R. Seeley to realize in modern forms the ethical and social aspect of the Life of Christ in Ecce Homo (ed. 6, 1866). And the imaginative works. Dr. Edwin A. Abbott's Philochristiis (ed. 3, 1878), and the anonymous As Others Saw Him (1895, see p. 145 sup.), may be consulted with advantage. [Dr. Abbott's later works have already been mentioned (p. 117).] In French, besides Renan, E. de Pressense (1866, Eng. tr. same date and later; Protestant) may still be read. Pere Didon (1891, also translated ; Roman Catholic) represents with dignity the older orthodoxy ; and A. Reville (1897) ^^^ newer criticism. The most thoughtful and searching, as well as (if we except Dr. Edersheim) the most learned work, has been done in Germany. The two writers who have tried most earnestly to combine the old with the new are Bernhard Weiss and Beyschlag. Of these we prefer Weiss. His Leben Jesu (1882, Eng. tr. 1883, THE WORK OF CHRIST 241 1884) is a conscientious and thorough piece of work, which, however, has to be studied rather than read. Beyschlag's (1885 and later) is more flowingly written, but also exhibits rather more markedly the weaker side of a mediating theology. Keim's Jesu von Nazara (1867-1882, abridged ed. 1873-1883) is impressive from the evident sincerity of its author, his intellectual force and command of his materials, but the critical premises are un- fortunate. A concise Life which has just appeared by Dr. P. W. Schmidt of Basel {Gesch. Jesu, 1899) seems, if a glance may be trusted, to come under the head of minor works. It gains its conciseness by omitting debatable matter. [This work is now complete : vol. ii. contains elaborate Notes on the text of vol. i. There is also, now translated into English, a larger Life by Oscar Holtzmann, which may be said to represent (with a few individual- isms of no very great importance) the average opinion of German critical circles.] The student may be advised to take Weiss for his principal commentary, referring to Schiirer (p. 28 sup.) or Edersheim for surroundings, and using along with it Tischendorf 's Synopsis Evan- gelica, or a Harmony like Stevens and Burton's (new and revised ed. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1904). He should read Ecce Homo. 16