CTbe University of Chicago
Kubrarics
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
NEW VORK BOSTON CHICAGO DALLAS
ATLANTA SAN FRANCISCO
MACMILLAN & CO., LIMITED
LONDON BOMBAY CALCUTTA
MELBOURNE
THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.
TORONTO
. ' '
. I >
> 'l I
,., .,.'. \ '
THE i HOliV SPIRIT
GOSPELS
BY
J. RITCHIE SMITH, D.D.
PROFESSOR OF HOMILETICS IN PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL
SEMINARY. AUTHOR OF "THE TEACHING OF
THE GOSPEL OF JOHN"; "THE WALL
AND THE GATES."
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1926
AU rights reserved
tit
i t
1 <
fit*
If 11 t 1 ' I
< i ; ' >
< i i i i
it' , t t i > i i
11 iitte> '
t *
I I <
I lit
COPYRIGHT, 1926,
BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.
Set up and printed.
Published March, 1926.
Printed in the United States of America by
THE FERRIS PRINTING COMPANY, NBW YORK
, .1 (
- '*,. ,
1 ' ' I I .
1 ' '* ' * ,1 i
' " '. 11,,
u f) i" S3 -
To MY CHILDREN
745608
PREFACE
This volume comprises a series of exegetical studies,
in which every passage of the four Gospels relating to
the Holy Spirit is examined that its precise significance
may be discovered. Abundant use has been made of
the labour of many scholars in this field; but it has
been the constant endeavour to ascertain by the close
and direct study of the text, in humble reliance upon
the promised guidance of the Holy Spirit, what He has
chosen to reveal of his nature and his office. Every
earnest student of the Word knows how inadequate
is our poor thought to penetrate and our poor speech
to utter the deep things of God ; yet it is by constant
and diligent study that the truth is apprehended and
interpreted, the truth by which we live.
May He, to whom alone is due whatsoever of truth
and wisdom this book may contain, pardon all that
has been spoken amiss; and apply the truth with quick-
ening and sanctifying power to the hearts of those who
read.
And to God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, shall be
all the praise.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART ONE
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT . . 19
Polytheism. Monotheism in the Old Testament
and the New. Adumbrations of Trinity in Old
Testament. Plural forms of divine name with sin-
gular verbs and adjectives. Primal religion of man-
kind. Old Testament background of teaching of
Jesus. References to Holy Spirit in Old Testament.
Various meanings of the word spirit. The names
of the Spirit: Spirit of God, Holy Spirit, Thy good
Spirit. His Nature, His Work: in nature, in hu-
man life and history. Israel the sphere of his oper-
ation. Main work to prepare for public service.
Inspires the prophets. Qualifies Messiah for his
work. Servant of Jehovah distinguished from
Israel, in person, in character, in office. Outpouring
of the Spirit upon Israel foretold.
PART TWO
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS.
A IN THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS.
II. THE VIRGIN BIRTH 1 53
Critical and historical questions involved. The
text: mss. and versions, early writers, apostles'
creed. Doctrine rejected by section of the Ebion-
ites and of the Gnostics, and by Marcion. Has the
text of Luke been interpolated? Alleged inconsis-
tencies and contradictions in the Gospel record.
(1) In Luke Nazareth is the home of Joseph and
Mary; in Matthew, Bethlehem. (2) Luke's account
of the census called in question, (a) history knows
nothing of a general census under Augustus, (b) if
such a census had been taken, it would not have
included Judea, (c) history allows no room at this
9
10 CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
time for Quirinius. (d) if a census had been taken
Joseph and Mary would not have been required to
journey to Bethlehem. (3) The slaughter of the
children in Bethlehem is nowhere else recorded.
(4) The genealogies of Matthew and Luke are hope-
lessly at variance with each other. (5) No mention
of the virgin birth elsewhere in the New Testament.
Facts ascertained, conclusions drawn. Sources of
the Gospel narratives. Mythical theories. (1) Myth
of Jewish origin, based on Is. vii. 14. (2) of pagan
origin. Ultimate source of Matthew's narrative was
Joseph, Mary of Luke's. Jewish character of Luke's
narrative.
III. THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. ..'.... 90
Comparison of Matthew and Luke. (1) Luke's
account far more copious. Matthew does not, in
fact, relate the birth. (2) Accounts move in differ-
ent spheres. Joseph prominent in Matthew, Mary
in Luke. (3) Matthew tells a dark and troubled
tale; Luke's narrative radiant with light and joy.
(4) Narrative of Luke the Gentile more Jewish than
the story of Matthew the Jew. Prophecies cited by
Matthew: Is. vii. 14, Micah v. 2, Hosea xi, 1, Jer.
xxxi. 15, "called a Nazarene." Canticles of Luke:
salutation of Elisabeth, Magnificat, Benedictus,
Nunc Dimittis. Work of Holy Spirit more fully
brought out by Luke. Place of angels in Scripture
and in modern thought. Conception of Jesus im-
mediate act of Holy Spirit. The annunciation to
Mary. Mode of the conception. Son of God used
of angels in Old Testament, of the chosen people,
King of Israel, the Messiah; in New Testament of
all men, of Jesus in a unique sense, of those who
through faith in him are born of the Spirit. Does
the representation of the Spirit here go beyond the
teaching of the Old Testament?
IV. THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS . . 131
I. The Witness of John the Baptist. Origin of
John's baptism: washings of Mosaic law; wash-
ing of proselytes; references to cleansing of the
heart in Psalms and prophecy. Spiritual sig-
nificance of John's baptism. Gift of the Spirit :
nowhere referred in Old Testament to the Mes-
siah. New Testament teaching. Baptizing with
fire. Jesus' teaching in Luke xii. 49, 50, and
CONTENTS 11
CHAPTER PAGE
Mark ix. 49. II. The Baptism of Jesus. The place.
Why was Jesus baptized? Descent of the Spirit
upon him. The form of the dove. The voice of
the Father. Symbols of the Spirit in the Gospels.
III. The Temptation. Purpose of the temptation:
discipline, example, sympathy. IV. Jesus returned
in the power of the Spirit to Galilee. Reason of
his return. Directed by the Spirit, clothed with the
power of the Spirit. Teaching, miracles, casting put
of demons. V. Jesus rejoiced in the Holy Spirit.
The occasion and groutfd and nature of this re-
joicing.
B IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL
V. THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESTJS . . 175
Jesus is divine in all the Gospels; most evidently
and radiantly divine in the Fourth. Only two refer-
ences to the Spirit in the life of Jesus. I. The wit-
ness of John the Baptist. Meaning of "I knew him
not." Apparent discrepancy between the Fourth
Gospel and the First. In Synoptic Gospels John
represents the Messiah as the judge; in Fourth Gos-
pel presents Jesus as the Saviour. II. The Spirit
given without measure. Words of John the Bap-
tist, not of the evangelist. Different constructions
of the clause. A general truth, fulfilled in the Son.
PART THREE
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS
A IN THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS
VI. THE HOLY SPIBIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 189
Jewish apocryphal writings add nothing to Old
Testament doctrine of the Spirit. Terms used to
designate the Spirit. Spirit and Ghost. Significance
of the name Holy Spirit. Six references to Holy
Spirit in Synoptic record of Jesus' teaching, I.
Is. Ixi. 1, 2 fulfilled in him. Luke iy. 16. II. Blas-
phemy against the Holy Spirit. Differences in ac-
counts. Nature of blasphemy. Blasphemy against
the Son of man, against the Spirit. What is the
'sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Mean-
ing of Heb. vi. 4-6 and I John v. 16, 17. III. The
promise of the Spirit. Matt. x. 20. Mk. xiii. 11.
TV. The gift of the Spirit. Luke xi. 13. V. David's
Son and David's Lord. Matt. xxii. 41-45; Mk. xii.
12 CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGES
35; Luke xx. 41. Nature and scope of inspiration,
(a) David's authorship of Ps. ex. (b) David's in-
spiration. Jesus' attitude toward the Old Testa-
ment.
VII. THE HOLY SPIEIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS
II 227
VI. The baptismal Formula Matt, xxviii. 18-20.
Cf. Mark xvi. 15-18; Luke xxiv. 44-49; John xx. 21-
23 ; Acts i. 7, 8. The text of Matt. : attempt to
eliminate vs. 19. Witness of mss., versions, early
church writers, creeds. Eusebius' form of quotation.
Freedom of quotation in early writers, and in the
New Testament. Are these the words of Jesus?
New Testament usage indicates that Jesus did not
give a fixed form to be rigidly observed. Habitual
attitude of Jesus and of the New Testament toward
rites and forms; the Lord's Prayer, the Sabbath,
the Lord's Supper, the apostolic benediction, Bap-
tism. Jesus prescribed no fixed formula of any
kind. Passage alleged to be out of harmony with
general tenor of Jesus' teaching. Constituent ele-
ments are the act of baptism and the Trinitarian
. formula: both of which are found in the teaching
of Jesus. Earliest use of term Trinity in Greek
and Latin. Why did the apostles hesitate to admit
the Gentiles to the church, if Jesus gave this com-
mand? _ Interpretation of the passage. Rendering
of el? in or into? Distinction between baptizing
in and into. Importance of baptism in New Testa-
ment teaching. Baptismal regeneration not taught.
Relation of baptism to the mystery religions. Bap-
tize into the name. Use of name for person. Use
of the singular, name. No direction to pray to the
Spirit, no instance of such prayer in New Testa-
ment. Reasons: (a) full significance of the Per-
sonality of the Spirit not immediately apprehended
by church, (b) church accustomed to think of the
Spirit as sent by the Father and the Son; prayed
not to but for the Spirit. Place of the Spirit in the
doctrine and life of the early church.
B IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL
VIII. THE HOLY SPIKIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS
III 257
I. John III. The course of Jesus' teaching in
this chapter: the regeneration of the Spirit, the
CONTENTS 13
CHAPTBB PAGB
atonement of the Son, the grace of the Father.
Verses 16-21 the words of Jesus. Should jxvcoftev be
rendered again or from above? Meaning of the
phrase born of water. Water signifies baptism. A
symbol and a sacrament. Place of baptism in
teaching of New Testament, and in the theology
of the Reformed Churches. Not baptismal regen-
eration. Water and the Spirit. He is the life-
giving power, and uses the sacraments as means of
grace. The Spirit and the flesh. The Spirit and the
wind. Interpretation of John vi. 63. II. John vii.
37-39. "Rivers of living water." (a) the words of
Jesus. The occasion. To what Scripture does he
refer? Cj. this promise with John iv. 14. (b) the
interpretation of the evangelist. ''This spake he
of the Spirit." The earlier evangelists report, John
interprets. Exception in Mark vii. 19. The living
water of John iv. 10. The Spirit not yet given.
Revelation gradual and progressive. Pentecost in
the revelation of the Spirit answers to the Incarna-
tion in the revelation of the Son. (a) the Personal-
ity of the Spirit is more clearly disclosed. Even
today the Spirit is often spoken of as it. (b) the
Spirit given to individuals under the old economy,
now poured out upon the church, (c) He operates
more energetically and fruitfully. Change wrought
in the apostles by his coming at Pentecost.
IX. THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OP JESUS
IV 288
1 The Spirit in Chapters xiii-xvii. Nature of Jesus'
teaching. I am. He speaks of the Spirit with im-
mediate reference to needs of disciples. 1 Relation
of the Spirit to the Father. Sent by the Father, in
the name of the Son. (a) name of Jesus is the
sphere in which the Spirit moves, (b) in the name
of the Son signifies on the ground of your relation
to him. Procession of the Spirit^ Interpretation of
xv. 26. Scriptural basis of the doctrine of the Pro-
cession of the Spirit.
X. THE HOLY SPIBIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS
V. ............ 303
2 Relation of the Spirit to the Son. Sent by the
Son as by the Father. The Son equal in nature to
the Father, subordinate in office. Procession from
14. CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
the Son as from the Father. Historical development
of the doctrine of the Procession: Tertullian, Ori-
gen, Augustine, the Creeds. Division between
Greek and Roman churches. Procession from the
Son in accord with New Testament teaching. Min-
istry of the Spirit rests upon the work of the Son.
The Spirit related to the Son as the Son to the
Father. But revelation of the Father by the Son is
an outward historical manifestation; the revelation
of the Son by the Spirit is an inward experience.
XI. THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS
VI 321
3 Relation of the Spirit to the Disciples. Para-
clete, History of the word. Use in New Testa-
ment. Comforter an inadequate and misleading
rendering Advocate not satisfactory. Use of
Paraclete, Helper. Office of the Spirit, to guide
into all the truth. The Father is God above us,
the Son is God with us, the Spirit is God within us.
These distinctions relative, not absolute. Sphere
of the Spirit's ministry, the truth as it is in Jesus.
Nature of apostolic inspiration. In particular (a)
he shall bring to their remembrance all that Jesus
has taught, (b) shall teach them the truth that
Jesus had not taught them, because they were not
yet able to bear it. Nature and limits of the Spirit's
teaching. Purpose of the Spirit's work to glorify
the Son. (c) He not only recalls the past, he un-
veils the future. In what sense? In the writings of
the apostles, in the history of the church. No ref-
erence to the Spirit in the prayer of John xvii; but
his ministry is implied in every petition. Revela-
tion of truth and grace in Christ complete and final.
"It is expedient for you that I go away."
XII. THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS
VII 348
4 Relation of the Spirit to the world. World in
the Gospels. Relation of the world to disciples, of
disciples to the world. Church and world never at
peace. Church the organ and instrument of the
Spirit. John xvi. 8-11 only passage in New Testa-
ment which treats of the world-wide ministry of the
Spirit. "I pray not for the world." Nature of
Spirit's ministry in world : to convict (a) in respect
CONTENTS 15
CHAPTER PAGE
of sin; (b) in respect of righteousness. Meaning
of the word here; (c) in respect of judgment. John
xxi. 22, 22 brings Jesus' teaching regarding the Holy
Spirit to a fitting close, (a) the gift of peace. Peace
with God, the peace of God. (b) the mission of the
disciples, (c) the gift of the Spirit.
INDEX OP SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS 375
INDEX OF TEXT 381
PART ONE
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
CHAPTER I
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
Every form of religion known to history contains
elements of truth to which it owes its vitality and
power. It would be difficult indeed to frame an affirm-
ative creed which should be wholly false. Heresy
does not create, it perverts and corrupts. Error is the
shadow of truth, grotesque, distorted, deformed, as
shadows are, yet preserving in some strange, misshapen
fashion the likeness of the original. The most widely
diffused of all religious systems, polytheism, is the
perversion of a great truth, the truth of the variety
and fulness of the divine nature. Lacking the concep-
tion of a God everywhere present and active, men were
forced to assume a host of divinities, between whom
the attributes and energies of the Deity may be dis-
tributed, and who by virtue of their number may
accomplish the works of creation and providence.
This does not purport of course to be a complete
account of the genesis of the system, for there are
various reasons that lead men to the worship of many
gods. But in so far as polytheism was a serious attempt
to account for the tokens of the divine presence and
power that are manifest on every side, this thought
enters into and underlies every form in which it
appears. It is the distinctive mark of polytheism that
it sacrifices the unity to the variety of the divine
nature. Against this error the Old Testament every-
19
20 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
where contends. Not until it was extirpated from the
minds of the chosen people, and the taint of idolatry
purged away in the furnace of affliction, was the truth
revealed in all its fulness that polytheism vainly strove
to express. The Old Testament overthrows the error,
the New Testament brings to light the truth, of poly-
theism. It is true that the lawgiver, psalmist, prophet
constantly insist upon the infinite riches of wisdom,
power, and grace which are found in God; but the
crowning disclosure, the ultimate revelation, of the
divine nature is made in Christ alone, to whom all
authority is given, in whom are hid all the treasures
of wisdom and knowledge, in whom dwelleth all the
fulness of the Godhead bodily, in such form that it
may be apprehended and embraced by men. The
fulness and variety that men seek in many gods are
found in one. The doctrine of the Trinity at once
preserves the unity and discloses the fulness of the
divine nature. God is one, is the message of the Old
Testament; God is one in Three Persons, is the mes-
sage of the New ; and the revelation is complete. God
is one, distinguishes the religion of the Bible from
every form of polytheism; God is one in Three Per-
sons, distinguishes it from that hard and barren mono-
theism which speaks in the Koran.
The truth revealed to the men of the Old Covenant
was the unity, spirituality, and sovereignty of God,
The Old must furnish a point of attachment for the
New. The Gospel must rest upon the foundation of
the law and the prophets, for they proclaim the same
God. There is no doctrine of the New Covenant
which is not potentially and germinally contained in
the Old. We find, accordingly, hints and suggestions
in the earlier record which are seen in the light of the
New Testament to be adumbrations of the Trinity.
There are plural forms of the divine name with which
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 21
singular verbs and adjectives are usually joined: *
Elohim; Adonai; the Holy One; 2 Creator; 8 Maker.*
These are sometimes represented as survivals of the
polytheism which was the primitive religion of man-
kind, but they are more frequently and properly
regarded as the plural of eminence or majesty. 6
No sufficient reason has been shown why we should
set aside the Scripture representation that the worship
of the one living and true God was the primal religion
of the race. Man has not risen from the false to the
true; he has fallen from the true to the false. Decay-
ing monotheism crumbles into polytheism. 8 Israel
kept alive the knowledge of the truth, and these plural
forms indicate that the attributes which polytheism
distributed among a host of deities are all found in
their perfection in one God. Similar is the use of the
phrase seven spirits in Rev. i. 4; iii. 1; iv. 5; v. 6 to
express the manifoldness of the divine Spirit.
The plural in such passages as Gen. i. 26 "Let us
make man in our image," and Gen. xi. 7 "Come, let
us go down and confound their language," is sometimes
interpreted to mean that God addresses the angels
who form his court. But they are not his counsellors,
but his ministers. He does not consult with them, he
commands. "With whom took he counsel?" 7 God
communes with himself. In Gen. iii. 22 "Behold, the
1 Exceptions to the rule, as in Gen. xx. 13; xxxv. 7; Ex. xxii. 8;
Deut. v. 26; xxxii. 15; Josh, xxiv, 19; I Sam. xvii. 26, 36; II Sam.
xvii. 23; Ps. Iviii. 11, are commonly explained from the context;
but it is sometimes difficult to see why the plural is preferred.
Gesenius' Lex. Elohim. Delitzsch, on Isa. liv. 5.
2 Prov. ix. 10; xxx. 3. Eos. xi. 12.
8 Eccles. xii. 1.
* Job xxxv. 10. Ps. cxlix. 12. Isa. liv. 5.
6 Oehler, 0. T. Theol. 36; Schultz, 0. T. Theol. II. 126; David-
son, 0. T. Theol. p. 40; Driver, on Genesis Excursus 1. Delitzsch,
on Genesis i. 1. Toy on Proverbs ix. 10.
6 Orr, Problem of the Old Testamentj ch. v.
7 Isa. xl. 14.
2 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
man is become as one of us, to know good and evil,"
God apparently associates with himself the angels, who
like him possess the knowledge of good and evil to
which man has just attained. In Isa. vi. 8 "Whom
shall I send, and who will go for us?" the alternation
of singular and plural is not easily explained. There
are those who think that God addresses the seraphim
who stand above him; 8 but it is better to recognize
here as elsewhere the plural of majesty. God speaks
with himself. Why both singular and plural are used
in the same sentence does not appear. Gen. xix. 24
"Then Jehovah rained upon Sodom and upon Gomor-
rah brimstone and fire from Jehovah" is sometimes
interpreted as an intimation of the Trinity, but it is
better taken as an emphatic repetition, like Hos. i. 7;
Zech. x. 12; II Tim. i. 18.
There are indications, moreover, of the number of
Persons in the Godhead, and their various character-
istics and offices. Here of course we are reading the
Old Testament in the light of the New. These repre-
sentations would never of themselves convey the con-
ception of the Trinity, nor is there reason to believe
that the truth was apprehended by the sacred writers
themselves; but it lay in the mind of the Spirit, and
in the light of the event is seen to have a place in the
Old Scripture. If indeed there are Three Persons in
the Godhead, a truth so transcendent could not be
altogether concealed. Gleams of it must break through
the darkness. God could not reveal himself, however
obscurely, for the redemption of men, and give no
intimation of that threefold nature upon which the
work of redemption rests.
The Word of God, the Wisdom of God, the Angel
of God, the Servant of God, the Christ of God, are all
representations or manifestations of the Eternal Son.
In like manner the Spirit appears as the energy, the
8 Vs. 2.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 23
activity, the agent of Jehovah. The various attributes
of God may indeed be personified: light and truth in
Ps. xliii. 3; wisdom in Prov. viii.; righteousness and
peace, 'mercy and truth in Ps. Ixxxv. 10-13. But this
mode of speech is occasional and figurative only; while
our study will show that the representation of the
Spirit in terms of personality is frequent and con-
sistent. In fact, there is throughout the Old Testa-
ment no reference to the Spirit which may not be
interpreted literally of a person. He is nowhere called
a person, but he is always spoken of in terms that may
properly be applied to a person. Personal attributes
and acts are ascribed to him, as will presently
appear.
Smeaton discovers the doctrine of the Trinity in
Gen. i. 26 "Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness" ; and habitually imports into the Old Testa-
ment the distinctive features of the New. He fails
to recognize in an adequate way the difference between
the two dispensations which is clearly brought out in
Jn. i. 17 "The law was given through Moses; grace
and truth came through Jesus Christ." He even goes
so far as to say, "The Old Testament Church was in
many respects different from the New Testament
Church; the former being more occupied with exter-
nals, the latter being privileged to have a worship
which may be described as more in spirit and in truth.
But the divine personality of the Spirit, as we have
clearly seen, was not less known and not less recog-
nized in the one economy than in the other. He who
spoke by holy men from the beginning was in every
age recognized as a Divine Person." 8 The truth con-
tained in the first sentence of the citation should have
prevented the errors contained in the sentences that
follow. We must recognize both the essential unity
of the doctrine presented in the Old and New Testa-
9 Doct. Holy Spirit, p. 43.
24 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
ments, and the wide difference in the clearness and
fulness with which the truth is revealed.
The teaching of the Old Testament upon this as
upon every theme was the background and basis of
the teaching of Jesus. He regarded the Old Scripture
as in all its parts and throughout its whole extent the
word of God, and accepted the traditional view of
the order and authorship of the various books. Critical
questions of dates and authors and authenticity had
no place in his thought. To him all Scripture was
inspired and authoritative. It may be held that Jesus
was mistaken, but that this was his opinion is too
obvious to be denied. It is our purpose to study the
doctrine of the Spirit in the Old Testament, not from
the point of view of modern critical scholarship, but
from the point of view of Jesus and his disciples. We
are not concerned with the development of the doc-
trine, but only with the content of the doctrine as
Jesus found it. We are interested in the teaching of
the earlier record simply as it furnishes the basis for
the teaching of the New Testament. What did Jesus
learn from the Old Testament regarding the Spirit of
God? That question we may now proceed to consider.
The Journal of Biblical Literature for 1900, pp. 132-
145, contains an article by Prof. C. A. Briggs on the
"Use of Ruach in the Old Testament/ 5 which is sub-
stantially reproduced in the Lexicon of Brown, Driver,
and Briggs. The word is said to be used ninety-four
times with reference to the Divine Spirit, but the
references given seem to fall somewhat short of that
number. We take the article as the basis of our study
with certain omissions and additions. No list could
be prepared that would command universal assent,
for many difficult questions of text and interpretation
are involved.
-Omissions. (1) The allusion to the spirit of the
living creatures in Ezekiel i. 12, 20, 21 ; x. 17. The
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 25
term is better understood in the same sense as the
spirit of man, to signify the conscious and controlling
life principle, which proceeds indeed from the Spirit
of God, but is not to be identified with him.
(2) The references to the evil spirit that came upon
Saul, 10 and the lying spirit in the mouth of the false
prophets. 11 To the same class of passages, though it
is not cited in this sense by the Lexicon, belongs
Judges ix. 23 "And God sent an evil spirit between
Abimelech and the men of Shechem" ; as is recognized
by Prof. Moore in Intern. Grit. Comm., in loc. In
some of these instances, spirit might be taken to mean
inclination or disposition, but in other cases a personal
agency is evidently affirmed. In I Sam. xvi. 14 the
Spirit of Jehovah is expressly distinguished from the
evil spirit, and in the light of this distinction all these
passages should be interpreted. Evil spirits are sub-
ject to the will of God, and may be employed as his
ministers; and in this sense an evil spirit may be
termed a spirit of God. 12 But the term is parallel with
"an evil spirit from Jehovah," 13 and can in no way be
identified with the divine Spirit. The statement of
Prof. Briggs that "at this period Biblical ethics had
not advanced so far as to regard deception and violent
deeds as immoral even when instigated by the divine
spirit," 14 is doubly incorrect. The Bible never con-
dones deception, and never represents it as instigated
by the divine Spirit. Why should it be assumed that
the Bible approves of every recorded act which it does
not explicitly condemn?
(3) It is not apparent why Job xxxii. 8 should be
included "But there is a spirit in man, and the
breath of the Almighty giveth them understanding";
10 1 Sam. xvi. 14, 15, 16, 23; xviii. 10; xix. 9.
11 1 Kings xxii. 21, 22, 23. II Chron. xviii. 20, 21, 22.
la ISam. xvi. 23.
"Sam. xvi. 14.
14 Of. Schultz, 0. T. Theol ii, 270.
26 THE HOLY SPIKIT IN THE GOSPELS
and Job xxxii. 18 omitted "The spirit within me con-
straineth me." In both cases it is better to understand
the human spirit than the divine.
(4) Isa. xxxi. 3 "Now the Egyptians are men, and
not God ; and their horses flesh, and not spirit." The
first clause sets hi contrast the divine and the human ;
the second, the animal and the spiritual.
(5) Zech. xii. 10 "And I will pour upon the house
of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the
spirit of grace and of supplication." Here the word
evidently signifies disposition.
Addiions. (1) Genn vi. 3 "My Spirit shall not
strive with man forever." The verse is beset with diffi-
culties, but this appears the better rendering. The
Lexicon interprets my spirit to signify the spirit which
I have breathed into man, and renders, though with
hesitation, "my spirit shall not abide in man forever."
This view is confirmed by the weighty authority of
Dillman, Delitzsch, and Driver. But my spirit in this
sense is without example elsewhere, and no reason is
evident from the context why the ordinary meaning
my Spirit should not be accepted.
(2) Isaiah xl. 13 "Who hath directed the Spirit
of Jehovah"; where the Lexicon reads "mind of
Jehovah."
(3) Isaiah lix. 21 "My Spirit that is upon thee,
and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall
not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of
thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith
Jehovah, from henceforth and forever." Here the
Lexicon understands moral character to be signified.
But it is the Spirit of God who puts his words in the
mouth of his people.
(4) Ezekiel xxxvi. 27 "I will put my Spirit within
you" ; where the Lexicon interprets the word by moral
character.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 27
(5) Ezekiel xxxvii. 14 "And I will put my Spirit
in you" ; where the Lexicon renders by breath of life.
(6) Micah ii. 7 "Shall it be said, house of
Jacob, Is the Spirit of Jehovah straitened?" Briggs
renders the passage, "Is the temper of Yahweh impa-
tient?" But Spirit of Jehovah yields an appropriate
sense, and no reason is shown why the word may not
be so rendered.
Malachi ii. 15 is rendered in the R. V.: "And did
he not make one, although he had the residue of the
Spirit?" with marginal reading: "And not one hath
done so who had a residue of the spirit." The Lexicon
understands the word to signify the spirit of man.
The passage is so obscure, rivalling in the number of
interpretations Galatians iii. 20, that no account is
taken of it in our computation.
The difficulty of rendering the word arises, of course,
from the wide range of meaning which it exhibits,
beginning with mere wind or breath, and rising through
the mental and moral nature of man to God, in whose
image he was made. The Lexicon gives nine distinct
renderings of the word with various shades of signifi-
cance under each of them, making in all no less than
thirty-three different senses that the word may bear.
So closely related are the conceptions of wind or
breath and spirit, whether in God or man, that the
word may be used in both senses in the same passage,
or even in the same verse, as in John iii. 8. Isaiah
lix. 19 is rendered by the R. V.: "He will come as a
rushing stream, which the breath of Jehovah driveth" ;
with margin, "When the adversary shall come in like a
flood, the Spirit of Jehovah will lift up a standard
against him." Here the reading of the text is decidedly
to be preferred. In Job xxvi. 13 the R. V. reads "By
his Spirit the heavens are garnished," while the prefer-
able reading, "by his breath the heavens are bright,"
28 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
does not even find a place in the margin. The most
striking example of the interchange of meanings is
furnished by Ezekiel xxxvii. 1-14, where the word is
used to signify wind, breath, and Spirit, and the
marginal notes indicate the difficulty of deciding
between the various meanings. In Job xxxiii. 4 spirit
of God and breath of the Almighty are parallel expres-
sions, though the Revised Version reads, Spirit of God.
The Revised Version renders I Chron. xxviii. 12
"And the pattern of all that he had by the Spirit";
but the marginal reading, "in his spirit," is better, as in
Ezekiel xi. 5; xx. 32.
The Revised Version renders Isaiah xxxiv. 16 "For
my mouth, it hath commanded, and his Spirit, it hath
gathered them." The change from the first to the
third person suggests a better rendering: "My mouth,
it hath commanded, and the breath of it hath gath-
ered them." There is a striking parallel in Psalms xxxiii.
6: "By the word of Jehovah were the heavens made,
and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth."
The phrase occurs again in Job xv. 38; breath of his
nostrils is found in I Samuel xxii. 16, Job iv. 9, Psalms
xviii. 15; and breath of his lips in Isaiah xi. 4. In
Psalms cvi. 33 "Because they were rebellious against
his Spirit" : the connexion favours the reading, Spirit
of God, and not of Moses.
Since the spirit of man is the breath of God, it is
not always clear whether the Spirit of God or the spirit
of man is meant. 15 The same ambiguity is found in
the New Testament. 16 These examples, to which many
others might be added, may suffice to illustrate the
difficulties that beset the interpreter when he attempts
to fix the meaning of this elusive term.
With the omissions and additions indicated we have
15 Gen. vi. 3. Ps. cvi. 33. Mai. ii. 15.
18 Acts vi. 10; xx. 22. Rom. viii, 6; on which see Sanday & Head-
lam, Intern. Grit. Comm., p. 199: note on the Person and Work of
the Holy Spirit; Jas. iv. 5.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 29
as the basis of our study seventy-eight passages, each
of which will find a place in the exposition.
We proceed to consider the names, the nature, and
the work of the Spirit.
I. NAMES OF THE SPIRIT
(1) He is commonly called the Spirit of God.
Sixty-two times he is represented as the Spirit of
Jehovah, and twelve times as the Spirit of Elohim.
The significance of this will appear when we come to
study his work.
(2) Three times he is called the Holy Spirit. 17
The primary meaning of holy appears to be separated,
set apart. 1 * It may be applied to God, as he is removed
from the infirmity and imperfection of the creature;
and to persons, places, and things as they are set apart
to the service of God. The word thus covers a wide
range of meaning, embracing both ceremonial and
moral distinctions. It may be opposed to common
"There is no common bread under my hand, but there
is holy bread"; 18 and to sinful "Ye cannot serve
Jehovah: for he is a holy God; he is a jealous God;
he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins." so
The holiness or separation of God may be conceived
locally or ethically. He is removed from the creature
alike in place and character.
(a) Locally. His throne, his dwelling-place, are
in heaven. This thought of the divine transcendence
is frequently expressed; al and is denoted by the term
holy. 23
(b) Ethically. God is distinguished from his crea-
17 Ps. li. 11; Isa. Ixiii. 10, 11.
18 See Sanday & Headlam, Intern. Grit. Comm., on Romans i. 17;
Prof. H. P. Smith, Presbyterian Review, 1881, pp. 588-592.
18 1 Sam. xxi. 4.
2 "Josh. xxiv. 19.
81 Job xxii. 12. Ps. cxv. 3. Eccles. v. 2. Isa. Ixvi. 1.
22 Ps. xx. 6; xlvii. 8. laa. Ivii. 15; Ixiii 15.
30 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
tures not merely in those attributes which are called
natural, his power, wisdom, majesty, glory, but yet
more in his moral perfections, as he is free from all
infirmity and impurity of character, and possesses truth
and goodness in infinite degree. This ethical quality
is brought out most clearly by the prophets, who insist
that the holiness which God requires is not outward
and ceremonial but inward and spiritual. 23 What God
requires of men is found in him. The holiness of men
must reflect the holiness of God. "Ye shall be holy;
for I Jehovah your God am holy." 24 This ethical
conception of the divine holiness reaches its height in
Isaiah. In Isaiah vi. the moral purity of God is set in
sharp contrast with the sinfulness of his people; and
in Isaiah v. 16 the ethical quality of his holiness is
clearly defined: "Jehovah of hosts is exalted in jus-
tice, and God and the Holy One is sanctified in
righteousness." The name Holy One of Israel
occurs frequently in all parts of the books that bears
the name of Isaiah, and rarely elsewhere in the Old
Testament.
The meaning of the term cannot be restricted, there-
fore, to moral purity, for it appears at times to embrace
the varied attributes of the divine nature, so that it is
almost equivalent to divine. God hath sworn by his
holiness, as and God hath sworn by himself ae are vir-
tually convertible terms. In Isaiah vi. 3 "Holy, holy,
holy is Jehovah of hosts: the whole earth is full of his
glory" holiness is one of the elements or attributes of
that glory which is the outshining of his divine per-
fections. But while the word has this large and varied
significance, yet throughout the Old Testament when
the terms divine and holy are applied to God, the
ethical conception is always present in higher or lower
28 I Sam. xv. 22. Isa. i. 11-17. Jer. vii. 22, 23. Micah vi. 6-8,
"Lev. xix. 2. ZB Amos iv. 2. a8 Amos vi. 8,
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT $1
degree. Never is it forgotten that God is distinguished
from the creature, not only by his greatness, but yet
more sharply by his moral perfection.
Here again we are not concerned with the develop-
ment, but only with the content of the doctrine, for
we are engaged with the study of Old Testament
teaching only in so far as it affected the thought of
Jesus. Questions of a critical nature were foreign to
his teaching, and therefore do not require our consid-
eration. We ask only what did Jesus find in the Old
Testament regarding the Spirit of God.
The Spirit of the holy God is holy. In Isaiah Ixiii.
10, 11, he is represented as the guide of the children of
Israel in the wilderness, and is called holy because he
sought to lead them in the way of holiness, that holi-
ness which consists in obedience to the will of God.
In the prayer of Psalm li. 10, 11, which in spite of the
trend of modern criticism should be regarded as per-
sonal, not national, the Spirit is termed holy as the
source and spring of holiness in men. From him pro-
ceed the right spirit and the clean heart. "Create in
me a clean heart, God; and renew a right spirit
within me. Cast me not away from thy presence;
and take not thy holy Spirit from me." As Isaiah
Ixiii. 10, 11, portrays the work of the Spirit in the
nation, Psalms li. 11 portrays his work in the individ-
ual heart. This is the closest and clearest approxima-
tion to the New Testament doctrine of sanctification
by the personal Spirit which the Old Testament
affords.
(3) In Neh. ix. 20 he is termed thy good Spirit:
"Thou gavest also thy good Spirit to instruct them."
And in Ps. cxliii. 10 we read, "Thy Spirit is good."
In these passages good is not equivalent to holy, but
signifies rather kind, gracious, as the context indi-
cates.
32 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
II. His NATURE
Here we are concerned with the relation of the Spirit
to God.
The breath is conceived as the condition and there-
fore as the symbol and expression of life, or even as
the vital principle itself, as is indicated by the phrases
breath of life, 27 or breath of the spirit of life. 88 Spirit
thus readily assumes the meaning of energy or activity,
the exercise and operation of the life. The Spirit of
God is the manifestation, the expression, of the divine
nature in its various energies and activities. The
Spirit of God and the hand of God may be used inter-
changeably as the instruments of his power 29 so that
the inspiration of the prophets may be referred to
either. 80 The New Testament presents an instance of
the same kind. In Matt. xii. 28 Jesus says, "If I by the
Spirit of God cast out demons"; while the parallel
passage, Luke xii. 20 reads, "By the finger of God."
The spirituality of God is obscured in the Old Tes-
tament by the constant anthropomorphism which
distinguishes it from the later revelation. Bodily
senses and members are ascribed to him: eyes and ears
and nose and hands and feet. The representation is
obviously figurative of course, but it throws a veil over
the divine nature which was never removed under the
old covenant. There are clear indications of his spirit-
ual nature, as in Ps. cxxxix. 7, where thy presence and
thy Spirit are equivalent terms; and in Isaiah xxxi. 3:
"Now the Egyptians are men, and not God; and their
horses flesh, and not spirit," where the contrast between
man and God is parallel to the contrast between flesh
and spirit. The second commandment rests upon the
assumption, developed by Paul in his discourse at
Athens, 81 that God cannot be expressed in visible form.
87 Gen. ii. 7. 80 Isa. viii. 11. Ezek. i. 3.
28 Gen. yii. 22. 81 Acts xvii. 24, 25, 29.
89 Ezek. iii. 14; viii. 3; xxxvii. 1.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 33
But side by side with this conception of the spirituality
of God is set the constant representation of him in
terms of the physical and material. The truth does
not stand put, therefore, with the clearness and dis-
tinctness given it in the New Testament, where Jesus
declared, "God is a Spirit/' 82 and where the anthro-
pomorphisms so frequent in the Old Testament are
rarely found. 33
The clearest evidence of the spirituality of God
afforded by the Old Testament is the fact that his
activity alike in nature, in providence, in grace, are
referred to his Spirit. "Not by might, nor by power,
but by my Spirit, saith Jehovah of hosts." 84 If the
exercise and operation of the divine nature are spirit-
ual it is easy to conclude that the divine nature is
spiritual. Because the Spirit is the manifestation or
action of the divine power, he is at once identified with
God and distinguished from him. Thy Spirit and thy
presence are synonymous terms (Ps. cxxxix. 7). And,
on the other hand, there are various passages in which
God is said to send or pour out the Spirit. The Spirit
is manifestly divine, though he does not yet appear as
a Person.
III. His WORK
1 in nature. References to the agency of the Spirit
in the work of creation are few, and are all given
. below.
(1) Gen. i. 2 "The Spirit of God brooded upon
the face of the waters." This is the rendering of Dill-
mann, Delitzsch, Driver, and Skinner, 35 and it is
admitted by the Lexicon, though hovered is preferred.
The Revised Version reads moved, with was brooding
32 John iv. 24.
38 See Oehler, 0. T. Theol, p. 46; Schultz, 0. T. Theol, ii. 110.
Davidson, O. T. Theol, p. 106; HBD., II, 206, art. "God in N. T."
84 Zech. iv. 6.
SB Intern. Grit. Comm.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
in the margin. Amid the darkness that shrouded the
primeval chaos the Spirit of God is discovered, brood-
ing upon the face of the waters, like a bird upon its
nest. God's relation to Israel is illustrated by a similar
figure in Deut. xxxii. 11 "As an eagle that stirreth
up her nest, that fluttereth over her young, he spread
abroad his wings, he took them, he bare them on his
pinions." The narrative makes no further allusion to
the creative activity of the Spirit, but the figure implies
that he was the agent of the divine purpose in impart-
ing life, and reducing the void, waste earth to order and
clothing it with beauty. And this is confirmed by the
references that follow.
(2) Ps. civ. 30 "Thou sendest forth thy Spirit,
they are created; and thou renewest the face of the
ground." In the first clause creation is referred to the
Spirit, and in the second to God himself . He creates
through his Spirit.
(3) Isa. xl. 13 "Who hath directed the Spirit of
the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him?"
It is plain from the context that the work of creation
and providence is here ascribed to the Spirit. The
preferable renderings of Job xxvi. 13, xxxiii. 4, and Isa.
xxxiv. 16 have been given, and they contain no refer-
ence to the Spirit.
In these three passages alone is the Spirit repre-
sented as the agent of God in the work of creation.
Ordinarily creation is referred directly and immediately
to God. If an agent is named, it may be his Spirit; his
Word; 3B his breath; 8T his hands; 8S his wisdom. 89
2 the ethical and spiritual is the main sphere of
the Spirit's operation. His work in nature is over-
shadowed by his work in the life and history of man-
84 Ps. xxxiii. 6, 9; cxlviii. 5. Comp. the phrase God said in
Gen. i.
87 Job xxxiii. 4. Ps. xxxiii. 6.
88 Ps. viii. 3; xcv. 5; cii. 25. Isa. xlv. 12; xlviii. 13.
"Prov. iii. 19; viii. 30. Ps. cxxxvi. 5. Jer. x. 12; li. 15.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 35
kind. To his common operation among men, his
agency in the world at large, there is but one distinct
reference in the Old Testament, and that is in dispute:
Gen. vi. 3 "My Spirit shall not strive with man for-
ever." From this tune forward throughout the whole
course of the history the work of the Spirit is confined
to the chosen people. There are evidences of his
power, indeed, among the Gentiles, as in the case of
Melchisedec and Ruth, and the repentance of the
men of Nineveh under the preaching of Jonah; but
nowhere is he named. Balaam, indeed, may seem to
furnish an exception, but the Spirit came upon him
for the sake of Israel. 40 The Spirit withdrawn from
the world was not restored until he was sent by the
risen and glorified Christ.* 1
Israel is the sphere of the Spirit's operation. And
it is also true that the Old Testament contains not a
single prediction that the Spirit shall ever be given
to all mankind. Joel ii. 28 is sometimes regarded as a
prophecy of the world-wide effusion of the Spirit, but
his ministry is plainly confined to Israel. The line is
sharply drawn by the prophet between the people of
God and the heathen world, for which he foresees only
judgment." The promise is not that the Spirit
hitherto restricted to Israel shall be poured out upon
all mankind, but that the Spirit hitherto given to a
chosen few in Israel shall be poured out upon all the
people of God, fulfilling the desire of Moses that "all
Jehovah's people were prophets, that Jehovah would
pour his Spirit upon them." 4S When Peter cited the
promise on the day of Pentecost, there is no reason to
believe that he gave it a wider meaning. Those whom
he addressed were Jews and proselytes. 4 * "To you is
the promise, and to your children, and to all that are
4 "Num. xxiv. "Num. xi. 29.
41 John vii. 39. Acts ii. 33. " Acts ii. 10.
" iii. 1, 2, 16, 17, 19-21.
36 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call
unto him." * 5 The Jews and Jewish proselytes only are
represented as the heirs of the promise, those present
in Jerusalem, and those dwelling at a distance.
Nowhere in Peter's discourse do the Gentiles find a
place. It is true that the words of the prophet are
capable of a larger application, which lay in the mind
of the Spirit, and was declared by the event; but, so
far as the record indicates, it was apprehended neither
by prophet nor apostle, and the primary reference of
the promise is to Israel alone.
Throughout the Old Testament, then, after Gen.
vi. 3, with the partial exception of Balaam, the Spirit
is represented as exercising his ministry in Israel alone.
There are indications of God's gracious working beyond
the borders of Israel, but it is nowhere ascribed to the
Spirit. So closely is the kingdom of God restricted to
Israel that very rarely does his ministry among the
Gentiles appear, and his name is never found. The
ministry of grace associated with his name is carried
on among the chosen people alone. Israel was the
channel of God's grace to mankind, and to Israel from
the days of Abraham the kingdom of God in its out-
ward, visible, organized form was confined.
We find accordingly that he is much more fre-
quently termed the Spirit of Jehovah, the God of the
Covenant, than of Elohim, the God of nature. No
rigid line of division, indeed, can be drawn. The
Spirit of Jehovah is operative in nature; * 8 while the
Spirit of Elohim is represented, with the single excep-
tion of Gen. vi. 3, as acting in Israel alone. But it was
always the Spirit of Jehovah that came upon the
judges who were raised up to deliver Israel, and upon
the Messiah ; and in general upon the prophets, though
the Spirit of Elohim came upon Balaam; * 7 upon Saul
45 Vs. 39. * 6 Ps. civ. 30. "Num. xxiv. 2.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 37
and his messengers/ 8 and upon Azariah/ 9 Zechariah, 50
and Ezekiel. 51 In the case of Saul and Ezekiel Spirit
of Jehovah and Spirit of Elohim are used interchange-
ably.
The work of the Spirit in Israel was mainly to pre-
pare men for service. Personal sanctification, which
is his chief office in the New Testament, fills a much
smaller place in the earlier record, and is referred to
directly only in Ps. li. 11; cxliii. 10; Isa. xxxii. 15;
xliv. 3; Ixiii. 10, 11; Ezek. xxxvi. 27, xxxvii. 11.
It is characteristic of the Old Testament, as of all
ancient civilization, that the individual is subordinated
to the organization, the State or the church. Man is
estimated primarily as a member of society, and valued
by his contribution to the general welfare. Jesus
restored to man his rightful place, and made his well-
being the end of all organizations and institutions.
"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the
Sabbath," 62 is a principle far-reaching and revolu-
tionary, which has changed the face of the world. In
the New Testament, where alone the rights and inter-
ests of the individual and of society are fully reconciled
and harmonized, sanctification is the main aspect of
the Spirit's work. The outward and visible form of
the kingdom is prominent in the Old Testament, the
inward and spiritual in the New. The dominant figure
of the Old Testament is, my people Israel; in the New,
the man Christ Jesus. In the Old Testament Jehovah
is the Father of Israel; in the New, of the individual
believer; in the Old Testament Christ is the King of
the Jews; in the New he is the Saviour of the World.
Distinctions of this kind are of course misleading,
unless it be borne in mind that they are relative only,
48 1 Sam. x. 10; xi. 6; xix. 20, 23.
"I Chron. xv. 1. B1 xi. 24.
60 II Chron. xxiv. 20. B2 Mark ii. 27.
38 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
not absolute. In the Old Testament the personal
element is not wanting, as the Psalms conspicuously
and frequently attest. The modern tendency to elim-
inate from the Psalter the element of personal experi-
ence, and make of them merely a monument of church
consciousness B3 does violence at once to the spirit and
the letter of some of them, and robs them of their
proper place in the unfolding of Old Testament history
and doctrine.
Many of the Psalms in their original form were
composed as an expression of private devotion.
These features remained even after they were
adapted by editorial revision for use in the syna-
gogues."
Is it not true, indeed, that all the great hymns and
prayers of the church are born of personal experience?
How can a man express the hopes and aspirations of
the church except as he speaks out of the fulness of
his own heart?
In the Old Testament the work of the Spirit is
mainly directed to preparing men for public service,
and is almost entirely confined to extraordinary per-
sons and events. He intervenes only upon occasions
of exceptional interest and importance, and his gifts
usually are conferred for a limited time and a par-
ticular purpose. His habitual and unceasing activity,
so prominent in the New Testament, is rarely brought
to light. The nation rather than the individual is the
sphere of his operation, and he works in men chiefly
to qualify them for the service of the state. To him
may be ascribed! every gift and talent that is con-
spicuously useful in the history of the chosen people:
the craft of the artificer; B5 the skill of the com-
Ba H. B. D., IV, p. 158a.
B * Briggs, Intern. Crit. Comm., I, p. CXV.
BB Exod. xxxi. 3; xxxv. 31.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 39
mander; B * the wisdom of the ruler; 5T the strength of
the hero; 68 the inspiration of the prophet. 59 His
power is not limited to distinctively religious acts and
exercises, but moves as freely in the sphere of the
secular as of the sacred; for whatever form his activity
may assume, it is always ethical hi aim and motive.
He is the Spirit of the holy God, and Israel, the sphere
of his operation, is a holy people. Their history in
every particular is religious, and the work of the Spirit
in shaping their history is religious. All that concerned
Israel as a people set apart to God was sacred. The
references to the distinctively ethical and religious
work of the Spirit are few, because his work, whatever
form it might assume, was all ethical in purpose,
motive, result. From him proceed all the gifts by
which Israel was qualified for its place in the unfolding
of the kingdom of God. All the work of the Spirit,
however secular it may appear, was in scope and
purpose religious, preparing Israel, and through Israel
the world, for the coming of the Christ. Thus the
book of Esther, in which the name of God does not
occur, finds its place in the canon because it discloses
the divine hand guarding his people. Even on the
bells of the horses shall be written, Holiness unto the
Lord, and every pot in Jerusalem and hi Judah shall
be holy as the pots in the house of Jehovah. 90
Thus throughout the Old Testament, not personal
sanctification, but public service is represented as the
chief purpose of the Spirit's ministry.
The Spirit may use even wicked men as his organs
and agents. When Saul is said to have become a new
man," 1 it is evident that not a change of heart is indi-
cated, but only a temporary exaltation of spirit. Some-
tunes the Spirit transforms and renews the man, some-
B " Judges vi. 34; xi. 29. 5 * I Kings xviii. 12 and often.
"Num. xxvii. 18. "Zech. xiv. 20, 21.
88 Judges xiii. 25. " I Sam. x. 9.
40 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
times he simply confers upon him new aptitudes and
powers, or quickens and strengthens his natural gifts.
He is said to have clothed himself with men, Gideon, 62
Amasai, 6S and Zechariah, 64 that is, to take possession
of them. He may come even upon the enemies of God
and of his people, and speak and act through them,
as in the case of Balaam. Holiness is not an indis-
pensable condition of service. In this respect the
Old Testament differs from the New, where sanctifi-
cation always precedes service. If Caiaphas should
seem to be an exception/ 5 it must be borne in mind
that Caiaphas was high priest under the old economy,
and the Spirit was not given in the New Testament
sense until Jesus was glorified. 66 Personal sanctifica-
tion is essential to service, so that the Spirit works
only through holy men. Tha;t is the general rule in
the Old Testament, the invariable rule in the New.
There are certain offices of the Spirit which call for
special mention.
1 the inspiration of the prophets. The distin-
guishing mark of the prophet is immediate inspiration.
The priesthood was a hereditary office, the prophet
was personally called and qualified of God. To him
and through him the will of God was made known.
"Surely the Lord Jehovah will do nothing except he
reveal his secret unto his servants the prophets." 67
The prophet belonged to no particular family or class
or tribe; was set apart by no ceremony, bore no out-
ward mark of distinction. Only in the case of Elisha 88
and of the Messiah 80 is the prophet said to be anointed,
and in both cases the word appears to be used in a
figurative sense. The only qualification required of
the prophet is that the word of God should come to
him, the Spirit of God rest upon him. The prophet
62 Judges vi. 34. 66 John vii. 39.
63 1 Chron. xii. 18. " 7 Amos iii. 1.
6 "II Chron. xxiv. 10. 68 I Kings xix. 16.
85 John xi. 49. 89 Isa. Ixi. 1.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 41
is the man that hath the Spirit. 70 In this he was
distinguished from the false prophets, who claimed
indeed the same inspiration; 71 but followed their own
spirit, 72 and spoke from their own heart or like Saul 7S
were possessed by an evil spirit. 74
The prophet is not the passive instrument, but the
conscious and willing agent of the Spirit. He may
justly, therefore, be held to account for the proper dis-
charge of his mission. The Spirit uses men according
to their capacity, temper, experience. After he came
upon them, they differ among themselves as widely as
before. He does not destroy, but develops and directs
the native gifts and energies of men, so that under his
inspiration every man becomes more truly and thor-
oughly himself. The message bears the impress of the
personality of the prophet. The substance is com-
municated by the Spirit; the form is determined by
the character and experience of the messenger, acting
indeed under the control and direction of the Spirit.
2 the Spirit qualifies the Messiah for his work.
This is directly affirmed by Isaiah alone. The Messiah
is represented as a branch or shoot of the stock of
Jesse, the house of David: "and the Spirit of Jehovah
shall rest upon him." When the Spirit is further
defined as the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the
Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge
and of the fear of Jehovah, 75 he is described by the
gracious fruits of his ministry in the lives of men. 76
Again the Messiah is portrayed as the servant of
Jehovah. The term is used in various senses. It may
be applied to anyone who serves the purpose of God,
even unconsciously. "I will send unto Nebuchadnez-
zar, King of Babylon, my servant." 77 And Cyrus,
TO Hos. ix. 7. 78 xi. 1, 2.
71 1 Kings xxii. 24; II Chron. xviii. 23. 76 Cf. Gal. v. 22, 23.
72 Ezek. xiii. 3. 7T Jer. xxv. 9.
7S I Sam. xviii. 10. >
74 See Riehm, Messianic Prophecy, Part I.
THE HOLY SPIKIT IN THE GOSPELS
though he is not called my servant, is termed my shep-
herd,'' 8 my anointed, he whom Jehovah loveth. 80
On this theme consult the Comm. of G. A. Smith. 81
The phrase is used more precisely to designate a con-
scious and voluntary agent of the divine will. In this
sense it is applied to Abraham, to Moses, to David, to
the prophets. And indeed the whole company of the
chosen people are my servants**
In Isa. xli. 8 the collective term my servant is applied
for the first time to Israel as the chosen people: "But
thou, Israel, my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen,
the seed of Abraham my friend." Henceforth through-
out the prophecy the figure of the servant is conspicu-
ous and dominant. 88
But it soon appears that much is said of the charac-
ter and office of the Servant that cannot be applied to
the Jewish people. He is expressly distinguished from
them in several particulars.
(1) in person. In chapter xlix the Servant speaks:
"and he said unto me, Thou art my servant, Israel" ; 8 *
"and now saith Jehovah that formed me from the
womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him,
and that Israel be gathered unto him." 85 Here the
Servant is at once identified with Israel and distin-
guished from them. He bears the name of Israel, but
is sent to lead Israel back to God. The Servant is
Israel, but not all Israel. He may be an individual,
or the righteous remnant of Israel, those who in the
midst of a corrupt and rebellious generation hold fast
their faith in God and seek to do his will.
But in chapter liii. the Servant can no longer be
taken to represent the righteous in Israel, or any one
78 Isa. xliv. 28. r8 Isa. xlv. 1. 80 Isa. xlviii. 14.
81 Isaiah II, ch. x. 8a Lev. xxv. 55.
83 Isa. xli. 9; xlii. 1; xliii. 10; xliv. 1, 21; xlv. 4; xlviii. 20;
xlix. 3; lii. 13; liii. Cj. Jer. xxx. 10; xlvi. 27; Ezek. xxviii. 25;
xxxvii. 25.
"Vs. 3. 88 Vs. 5.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 43
of them. As clearly as the godly are distinguished
from the ungodly among the chosen people, so clearly
is the Servant distinguished from all Israel. The
prophet and those for whom he speaks are not the
Servant, but bear witness to him. "Who hath believed
our message?" The notion that it is the heathen who
speak may be dismissed without consideration, as for-
bidden alike by the text and the context of the passage.
Throughout the chapter the Servant is set apart from
all men besides. He and we are put in sharp contrast.
He is not the prophet, nor is he numbered among those
whom the prophet represents. He is not one of us.
(2) he is distinguished in character. The people
Israel have turned away from God, and suffer the just
penalty of then- sin. None among them is found right-
eous. This is expressly affirmed in Ixiv. 6: "For we
are become as one that is unclean, and all our right-
eousnesses are as a polluted garment: and we all do
fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, take us
away. For there is none that calleth upon thy name,
that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee." It is
everywhere taught that the sufferings of Israel are the
just penalty of their sin, and in that sin everyone of
them has a part. The fifty-third chapter makes this
very clear: "All we like sheep have gone astray; we
have turned everyone to his own way." 89 We
embraces the prophet and all his people, righteous and
unrighteous alike, and stretches further to include all
mankind. For if the chosen people are sinners, how
much more the heathen. All we Jews, all we men,
have gone astray. It is the confession of Israel, of the
race. The prophet anticipates the word of the apostle:
"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of
God." 8T
But the Servant is without sin. The Spirit of God
rests upon him. As he is represented under the figure
88 Vs. 6. 8T Rom. iii. 23.
44 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
of the Branch, his delight shall be in the fear of Jeho-
vah, and righteousness shall be the girdle of his waist,
and faithfulness the girdle of his loins. 88 He suffers,
but not for his own sins. "He was wounded for our
transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities." 89
Of him alone it may be said that he had no sins for
which he must answer to God, and suffered no punish-
ment for his own transgressions.
That a certain relative righteousness may be imputed
to the godly in Israel, in comparison with the ungodly,
is true; but it is relative only, while the righteousness
of the Servant is perfect. "All our righteousnesses are
as a polluted garment." 90 It is contrary to the whole
tenor of Old Testament teaching to call men holy
except in a limited sense by comparison with others.
If the Servant is perfect in righteousness, he is more
than man.
(3) he is distinguished in office. The righteousness
ascribed to the Servant is not relative merely, in con-
trast with the wickedness of his generation. It is so
absolute, so perfect, that it avails for the redemption
of others. "Surely he hath borne our griefs and car-
ried our sorrows." "He was wounded for our transgres-
sions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastise-
ment of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes
we are healed." "Jehovah hath laid on him the iniquity
of us all." "He bare the sin of many." The Servant
is offered as an atoning and vicarious sacrifice. He
takes upon himself the sin of men, that his righteous-
ness may be imputed and imparted to them. Men
cannot make atonement for the sins of others, nor
even for their own. "None of them can by any means
redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for
him." 91 If this appears to be spoken of the life of the
flesh, how much more is it true of life eternal. Israel
88 xi. 3, 5. 80 lxiv. 6.
8 " liii. 5. ' 1 Ps. xlix. 7. See Delitzsch, in loc.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 45
does not save, but is saved. Salvation ie of God alone,
and the thought that one may bear the sin of another
is contrary to the whole tenor of Old Testament teach-
ing. Israel is a sufferer, righteous Israel a martyr, but
in no sense a saviour. The Servant is not only sufferer
and martyr, he is an atoning sacrifice, and in this he
stands alone.
It is true that men may suffer for the sake of others,
may be afflicted for the sins of others, and through their
sufferings may procure for others benefits and blessings
that they would not otherwise enjoy. In this sense the
principle of vicarious sacrifice plays a large part in the
relations that men sustain toward one another. But
there is another and higher sense in which no man can
suffer vicariously for another. He cannot take upon
himself the burden of his brother's guilt so that his
brother shall go free. He cannot make atonement for
sin. That belongs to God alone. If the Servant makes
atonement for the sins of others, he is more than man.
When Paul affirms "Now I rejoice in my sufferings for
your sake, and fill up on my part that which is lacking
of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's
sake, which is the church," 82 he does not mean that
the atoning work of Calvary would be incomplete with-
out his labours and sufferings; he means that through
his labours and sufferings the benefits of that atoning
work are made known and applied to believers. He
preaches Christ crucified, he bears branded upon his
body the marks of the Lord Jesus, the scars which
attested his devotion to his Master, and through his
preaching and the afflictions which accompany it he
brings the church into a clearer knowledge of Christ
and a more fruitful fellowship with him.
Who is this Servant of Jehovah? Evidently he is not
Israel, nor righteous Israel, nor does any man in Jewish
history answer to the description of the prophet. Is
83 Col. i. 24.
46 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
he the genius of Israel, the ideal which Israel repre-
sented but never attained? Such abstractions are for-
eign to Old Testament modes of thought, in which
ideals are always embodied in persons. The ideals of
God are not barren, nor do they come short of ful-
filment.
The meaning of the term rises from Israel to right-
eous Israel, and from righteous Israel to him whose
character and mission alike fulfil the purpose of God.
The prophet has drawn the portrait of Jesus the Christ.
His character, his work, even the circumstances of his
death and burial, the issue of his sacrifice, as they are
depicted here, answer precisely and point by point to
the representation of the Gospel story. The Servant of
the Old Testament is the Jesus of the New.
It is in accord with the tenor of all Old Testament
teaching to conceive of Israel as embodied in a Person
through whom its divine mission shall be accomplished.
There are various lines of prophecy that terminate in
Jesus the seed of the woman, the seed of Abraham,
the successor of Moses, 98 the son of David. He is fig-
ured by the prophet, priest, and king of the old
economy.
Thus the Old Testament presents two apparently
discordant pictures of the Messiah. In one he appears
as a king, triumphing over his foes and reigning over
the people of God with equity and grace. In the other
he is a righteous sufferer, put to death for the sin of
others. The earlier of these conceptions fills a large
place in the Old Testament, and was more in accord
with the pride and aspiration of the Jewish people, so
that it is not surprising that the sufferer was hidden
behind the king in the thought of the people when
Jesus came. They looked for a royal but not a suffer-
ing and dying Christ. 94 Even the disciples of Jesus
98 Deut. xviii. 18.
a * Matt. xvi. 22; Luke xviii. 34; xxiv. 21; John xii. 34.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 47
never grasped the truth until his death and resurrection
forced it upon them. It was foreign to all their Jewish
habits of thought. The cross was always a stumbling-
block to Israel, whether in prophecy or in history. The
Targum of Jonathan, the pupil of Hillel who was a
contemporary of Jesus, refers Isaiah liii. to the Mes-
siah, but when his sufferings are pictured they are
referred to Israel. 96 That there were Jewish inter-
preters who found in Isaiah liii. the suffering Messiah
is true, but it is equally true that this was not the pre-
vailing opinion in the time of Jesus. 98
The representation of the Servant thus appears to
waver between Israel, righteous Israel and the Messiah.
The picture may be harmonized by regarding the
Servant as embracing both the people and the Christ
of God. Of this complex Person sometimes the body
alone appears, sometimes the Head alone, and again
the whole figure is seen. This thought is suggested
by the Jewish interpreters, and early Christian writers,
and is developed by J. A. Alexander hi his Commen-
tary on Isaiah, ch. xlii. This, as Alexander observes, is
in accordance with the usage of the Old Testament
elsewhere. The seed of the woman, the seed of Abra-
ham, the prophet foretold in Deut. xviii. 18, embrac-
ing the prophetic order and its divine head, have
all this double reference. Of a similar nature is the
representation of the church in the New Testa-
ment. The church is the body of which Christ is the
head. 87
The representation of Christ as the Servant is taken
up by the New Testament. The words of Isaiah xlii.
1 are applied to him: "Behold, my Servant, whom I
96 Jewish Interpreters on Isa. Kit., Driver and Neubauer, ii. 5.
"The subject is treated at length in HBD art. "Messiah,"
vol. Ill, p. 354. Schurer, Hist. Jewish People in Time of Jesus
Christ, II, ii, p. 184. Driver and Neubauer, as above ; see especially
vol. II, p. 61, for various interpretations given by Jewish scholars.
* T See also Delitzsch on Isa. xlii.; G. A. Smith, Isaiah II, ch. xvi.
48 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
have chosen" " Jtate is the term used in the LXX to
represent the Hebrew Servant, and it should be so
rendered in Matt. xii. 18; Acts iii. 13, 26; iv. 27, 30, as
in the Revised Version, not son. The apostles take the
word from the prophet, and with him affirm that the
Servant is anointed of God," that is, endowed with the
gifts of the Holy Spirit. In Acts xvi. 38 it is expressly-
declared that "God anointed him with the Holy Spirit
and with power."
Isaiah has thus portrayed the Messiah as a righteous
king and a suffering Saviour, upon whom God has put
his Spirit. Again he is presented in Ixi. 1, and again
the Spirit of God is seen to rest upon him. "The
Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me; because he has
anointed me" anointing is the rite of consecration by
which priest and king were set apart, and the oil
employed is the symbol of the fitness which God
imparts. The Messiah is anointed, not with oil, but
with the Spirit. His anointing not merely represented
qualification and consecration, but accomplished it.
And those who believe in him are not only followers
of the Anointed One, they are themselves anointed
with the same Spirit. 100
To the Christ the Spirit is given in full measure and
in permanent possession. In this he is distinguished
from the prophets, upon whom the Spirit came in lim-
ited degree, for a special purpose, a particular time.
Their inspiration was occasional and particular, upon
him the Spirit abides continually. When John the
Baptist said, "He whom God hath sent speaketh the
words of God: for he giveth not the Spirit by meas-
ure," 101 though he spoke in general terms the refer-
ence is plainly to the Son, who alone is capable of
receiving the fulness of the Spirit, and upon whom
alone the fulness of the Spirit is bestowed.
98 Matt. xii. 18, 10 II Cor. i. 21; I John ii. 20, 27.
88 Acts iv. 27. - 101 John iii. 34.
SPIRIT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT 49
3 jt is foretold that the Spirit shall be poured out
abundantly in the days of the Messiah upon all Israel.
We have seen that the prophecy has no relation to the
world at large, but is restricted to the chosen people. 102
Thus the Spirit not only equips the Messiah for his
ministry, but follows up and completes his work, pre-
cisely as in the New Testament. In the Old Testa-
ment and in the New, the doctrine of the Spirit keeps
pace with the doctrine of the Son. Side by side they
appear in the story of the creation, for God called the
world into being by his Word, and quickened it by his
Spirit; side by side they appear in the visions of the
prophet. So closely are they related that the same
offices of creation, providence, redemption are ascribed
to each of them. In the New Testament the Son and
the Spirit are so nearly related that at times they are
identified. In Rom. yiii. 9, 11 the terms Spirit of God,
Spirit of Christ, Christ, are used interchangeably. In
II Cor. iii. 17 it is written, "The Lord is the Spirit." loa
Later Jewish writers add nothing to the Old Testa-
ment conception of the Spirit, not even Philo, who in
many respects represents the highest type of Jewish
thought in the time of Christ. 104
This, then, is the teaching of the Old Testament
regarding the Spirit of God, which moulded the
thought of Jesus. The Spirit appears as the divine
influence or energy, rather than a Person. He is the
manifestation or representation of God. But there are
intimations of a profounder truth, hints and sugges-
tions of his Personality, of a Trinity of Persons in the
Godhead. Jesus and his disciples brought out into
102 Isa. xxxii. 15; Ezek. xxxvi. 27; Joel ii. 28.
108 See Meyer and Plummer in loc.
104 See "Holy Ghost" and "Philo" in Diet. Chr. Biog.; "Holy
Spirit" in HBD, p. 304. Schurer II, iii., 369 ff.; art. "Use of
Words for God in Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphical Literature of
the Jews," by R. D. Wilson, Princeton Theol. Review, Jan. 1920,
PP. 103 ff.
50 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
clear light the truth thus obscurely intimated. The
Spirit is no longer represented as a personification, but
as a Person, one with God in nature, yet distinct from
him in Person and office.
The teaching of the Gospels we now proceed to
consider.
PART TWO
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS
A IN THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS
CHAPTER II
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I.
The story of the virgin birth is told by Matthew and
Luke. Neither narrative is complete, for each of them
records various details which the other omits; and
while they agree upon the essential facts, they differ
in many particulars. The simplest explanation of
the relation which they sustain to each other, of the
points of resemblance and difference between them, is
that they were written independently, and that Luke
had at his command ampler stores of material than
Matthew. If that be true, the narratives were prob-
ably written about the same time, for otherwise the
later writer would have made use of the work of his
predecessor.
A thorough examination of the historical and critical
questions involved in the gospel story would carry us
too far from our theme; and it must suffice to trace in
outline the course of the argument by which the trust-
worthiness of the record may be put to the test, with
references sufficient to guide the student who may wish
to pursue the inquiry further.
There is no good reason to doubt that the verses
containing the account of the virgin birth belong to
the original text of the Gospels. They are found in
all Greek manuscripts, and in all the early versions,
Syriac, Latin, Coptic, Armenian. The Syriac manu-
script discovered by Mrs. Lewis and Mrs. Gibson at
53
54 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Mt. Sinai in 1892 is probably of the fourth or fifth
century, of the same age, approximately, as the oldest
Greek manuscripts that we have, and like them repre-
sents a much earlier text. In this version Matthew i.
16 reads: "Joseph, to whom was betrothed Mary the
Virgin, begat Jesus, who is called the Christ." In his
commentary on Matthew., Allen holds that this is prob-
ably "the nearest approach now extant to the original
Greek." x But even if we should set aside all other
authorities in favour of this single manuscript, the
reading must be regarded as interesting rather than
important; for the virgin birth is explicitly affirmed
in vs. 18 of the same chapter: "And the birth of the
Christ was on this wise: When Mary, his mother, was
espoused to Joseph, when they had not come near one
to the other, she was found with child of the Holy
Ghost." It is obvious therefore, as Allen recognizes,*
that begat in the passage cited expresses a legal rela-
tion and not actual paternity. The exception which
this manuscript seems to present is therefore apparent
only, and the virgin birth is attested by every authority
that we possess. 8
There is, moreover, abundant evidence that the
virgin birth was embraced hi the creed of the church
from a very early date. Near the close of the second
century we have the testimony of Clement of Alex-
andria * and Irenseus, who includes "the birth from a
virgin" among the articles of the creed which the church
had received from the Apostles. 6 About the middle of
the century similar witness is borne by the Diatessaron
of Tatian, the earliest harmony of the Gospels known
1 Page 8.
* So also Moffatt, Int. Lit. N. T., p. 251.
* On the Sinaitic Ms. see Mrs. Lewis' The Four Gospels, trans-
lated from the Sinaitic Palimpsest. Burkitt's Evangelion Da
Mepharreshe, where various questions of textual criticism are treated.
Zahn, Introd. N. T., II, p. 565.
* Strom, vi. 15; vii. 16.
" Her. i. 10; iii., xxi. 4.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 55
to us, which contains the narratives of both evangelists,
except the genealogies; by Justin Martyr " and some-
what earlier, perhaps as early as 125, by the Apology
of Aristides/ In the Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephe-
sians, written about 110, we read, "Now the virginity
of Mary was hidden from the prince of this world, as
was also her offspring, and the death of the Lord;
three mysteries of renown, which were wrought in
silence." 8 "This passage," says Bishop Lightfoot, "is
more frequently quoted by the fathers than any other
in the Ignatian Epistles." " 10
To these witnesses must be added the so-called
Apostles' Creed, which for substance of doctrine may
be traced as far back at least as the middle of the
second century. 11
This witness is drawn from all parts of the church,
from Syria and Gaul and Egypt and Rome. And these
men affirm that they do not speak for themselves alone
but express the faith of the holy Catholic Church
throughout the world.
Within the church the doctrine of the virgin birth
was rejected only by a section of the Ebionites, a Jew-
ish party, who maintained the perpetual validity of
the Mosaic law and held that Jesus, though he was
the promised Messiah, was yet a mere man, the son
of Joseph and Mary. 18 Origen says that there were
two opinions among the Ebionites, some affirming and
others denying the virgin birth. 18 This division among
them is attested also by Eusebius. 1 * The whole sect
soon came to be regarded by the church as heretical.
'/ Apol., 46; Dial, 43, 66, 85. 7 Syriac, ch. ii.; Greek, ch. xv.
8 19. 9 Apost. Fas., II, ii, p. 76.
1 See also, Ep. to Smyrneans i.
"Hamack, SchaffHerzog Ency., I, 242. McGiffert's Euseb.,
Ch. H., VII, 8, note 3. Machen, "Virgin Birth in Second Century,"
Princeton Theol Rev., 1912, p. 529.
ia McGiffert's Euseb., Ch. H. t III, 27 and notes. Machen, p. 547.
Lightfoot on Galatians, "St. Paul and the Three," p. 159 ff.
* Agt. Celsus, vs. 61. " Ch. H., Ill, xxvii. 3.
56 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
The Gnostics, like the Ebionites, were divided upon
the doctrine of the virgin birth. Gnosticism was not
an outgrowth of Christianity, but an independent
speculative and philosophical system, which absorbed
certain elements of Christian truth. 18 All sects of
Gnostics, even though they assumed the name of
Christian, were repudiated by the church. Of those
who rejected the virgin birth were Cerinthus, probably
a contemporary of the apostle John, 18 17 and Carpoc-
rates; ls ie while it was accepted by the ablest and most
distinguished of their teachers, of whom were Valen-
tinus, if we may judge from the fragments of his writ-
ings which survive, and the teaching of his follow-
ers, 20 21 and Basilides, 22 23 though they interpreted
it of course in their own peculiar fashion. The doctrine
is so obviously incongruous with their views of the
essential evil of matter and the docetic or phantasmal
nature of the body of Jesus that their acceptance of
it in any form bears striking witness to the strength
of the evidence that compelled belief.
Marcion also may be cited as a witness against the
virgin birth. He received as Scripture only ten epistles
of Paul and the Gospel of Luke; and the Gospel he
mutilated, omitting among other portions of it the
first and second chapters. There was no place in his
system for the story of Jesus' birth, since he held with
the Gnostics the inherent evil of matter, distinguished
"McGiffert's Euseb., Ch. H., II, 13, note 17, IV, 7. Lightfoot
on Colossiang, "The Colossian Heresy." Machen, Virgin Birth,
p. 541. Moffatt, Int. Lit. N. T., pp. 353, 408, 586. See Index.
16 Irenaeus, Her., I, xxvi. 1. Hippolytus, Her., VII, 21.
17 McGiffert's Euseb., Ch. H., Ill, 28.
18 Irenaeus, Her., I, xxv. 1. Hippolytus, Her., VII, 20.
19 McGiffert's Euseb., Ch. H., IV, 7, note 17.
20 Tertullian Agt. Valent., 27. Hippolytus, Her., VI, 30.
21 McGiffert's Euseb., Ch. H., IV, 11.
22 Hippolytus, Her., VI, 30.
23 McGiffert's Euseb., Ch. H., IV, 7, n. 7. Art. "Basilides" in
Diet. Chr. Biog.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 57
the God of the Old Testament from the God of the
New, and was therefore repelled by the Jewish cast of
the narrative. 24
From this brief review it appears that the doctrine
of the virgin birth was so generally held and so firmly
established in the church that it was denied only by
those who were counted heretical. And it is also evi-
dent that those who rejected it, whether bearing the
Christian name or not, were led by philosophical
and dogmatic rather than critical or historical
considerations.
The question now arises whether the text has been
interpolated. .The most serious attack is made upon
Luke i. 34, 35. The matter is treated at length by
Prof. Machen in the Princeton Theological Review for
1906, p. 50 ff., and the ten reasons adduced by Harnack
for rejecting these verses are sufficiently refuted. 26
Here it is enough to say that there is no manuscript
authority for the omission; that to omit them requires
changes elsewhere in the text, i. 27 and ii. 5, which are
wholly unwarranted; that Luke's record here is sup-
ported by Matthew; and that the verses in question
are in harmony with the fact, serve indeed to explain
the fact, that throughout his narrative Luke gives the
foremost place to Mary.
Assuming then the authenticity and integrity of the
Gospel narratives, may we regard them as trustworthy?
Is the record true? Those who reject the supernatural
and aver that miracles dp not happen, of course cannot
accept the account as historical; for the supernatural,
the miraculous, is the very soul and substance of the
story. But those who find room anywhere in history
for the immediate activity of God will readily recog-
2i Tertullian Agt. Mardon, IV, 7; Hippolytus, Her., X, 15;
Irenaeus, Her., I, 27.
28 Moffatt, Int. Lit. N. T., p. 268, leaves the matter in doubt.
Burton favours the theory of interpolation. Galatians, p. 413, note 4.
58 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
nize that here is a supreme and unique occasion for
the exercise of a divine power transcending the ordi-
nary laws and forces of nature.
Certain inconsistencies and contradictions appear in
the record, it is affirmed, of which the most important
may claim our attention. A valid theory of inspira-
tion must rest upon historical and critical rather than
dogmatic grounds. If errors are found in Scripture it
is idle to contend that Scripture cannot err. Argu-
ments of an a priori kind will convince none but those
who are already persuaded. When errors are alleged,
we cannot take refuge in theories of inspiration, but
the case must be examined and determined by the laws
of evidence. The Scripture invites, challenges, investi-
gations at every point. To inquiry, to doubt, to unbe-
lief, the response is always, Come and see.
With this hi mind we may proceed to examine the
most serious objections which are proposed to the
Scripture story.
(1) In Luke Nazareth is the home of Joseph and
Mary, while Matthew regards Bethlehem as their
home, to which they would have returned from Egypt
if they had not been afraid of Archelaus. Joseph
"came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth." " The
evangelist evidently looks upon Nazareth not as the
home to which they naturally returned, but as a place
of refuge which was chosen because it was distant
from their home.
It is not credible that Matthew, if, as there is good
reason to believe, he derived his information ultimately
from Joseph, should have been ignorant of the home in
Nazareth, nor is it likely that he refused to name it
because he shared the Jewish contempt for Galilee;
for why then should he call attention to the prophecy,
"He shall be called a Nazarene"?
The answer to the apparent contradiction between
" Matt. ii. 23.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 59
the Gospels here is that the plan of Matthew's work
with its distinctly theocratic and messianic character
did not require the early mention of Nazareth, but
led him to lay great stress on the birth in Bethlehem.
It was of little consequence to him that the home of
Jesus' parents was in Galilee, but it was of the utmost
consequence that the prophecies of the Christ were
fulfilled by the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, and his
later abode in Nazareth.
(2) Luke's account of the census under Quirinius is
called in question on various grounds.
(a) History knows nothing of a general census of
the empire hi the reign of Augustus.
The attempt has been made to meet the objection by
limiting all the world to Palestine. But the Roman
Empire is plainly indicated by the phrase itself and
by the reference to the Emperor.
Is this statement of Luke in accord with the facts of
history?
As we enter upon our inquiry we must bear hi mind
the obscurity that broods over this period of Roman
history. Prof. Ramsay tells us that "the reign of
Augustus, as is -well known, is enveloped in the deepest
obscurity. While we are usually well informed
about the immediately preceding period of Roman
history, and for part of the reign of his successor,
Tiberius, we possess the elaborate and accurate, though
in some respects strongly prejudiced account of Taci-
tus, the facts of Augustus' reign have to be pieced
together from scanty, incomplete, and disjointed
authorities." 2T "Evidence about the details of the
Augustan system of provincial administration had
almost completely perished, until inscriptions began
to reveal a few isolated facts." a8 And again, "The
latter part of the reign of Augustus, in fact, the whole
period from about 15 B. c. to the beginning of the reign
87 Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?, p. 49. 8 Id., p. 166.
60 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
of Tiberius in 14 A. D., is almost completely hidden from
our knowledge." a *
And Mommsen speaks to the same effect:
The history of Rome under the Empire presents
problems similar to those encountered in the his-
tory of the earlier Republic. Such information as
may be directly obtained from literary tradition is
not merely without form and color, but in fact
for the most part without substance. . . . The
internal development of the commonwealth is per-
haps exhibited in the traditional accounts more
fully for the earlier republic than for the imperial
period; in the former case there is preserved a
picture however bedimmed and falsified of the
changes of political order that were brought at
least to their ultimate issue in the open Forum of
Rome; in the latter case the arrangements are
settled in the imperial cabinet, and come before
the public, as a rule, merely in unimportant mat-
ters of form. . . . Anyone who has recourse to
the so-called authorities for the history of this
period even the better among them finds diffi-
culty in controlling his indignation at the telling
of what deserved to be suppressed, and at the
suppression of what there was need to tell. 80
We need not be surprised, then, if we find state-
ments in the Gospels which are not confirmed by the
historians of the time; and we shall be slow to impute
error to honest and intelligent writers who treated of
matters which happened under their own observation
or within the range of contemporary inquiry.
There is no mention of a general census under Augus-
tus in Tacitus or Suetonius; or in Josephus, though he
records the later census of 6 A. D;, and though, as
28 Expositor, Series 8, Vol. 4, p. 387.
80 Provinces of the Roman Empire, i, pp. 3-5.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 61
Schiirer affirms, "In regard to no other period is Jose-
phus so well informed, in regard to none is his narra-
tive so full, as in regard to the last years of Herod." 21
Yet Schiirer also observes that the Antiquities was
evidently much more carelessly prepared than the
History of the Wars of the Jews.
This is specially true about the last books, of
which it has been remarked that when writing
them the author must have been utterly wearied.
And not only is the work carelessly done, but
also the sources are often used with great free-
dom and the utmost arbitrariness, at least where
we are in a position to criticize them. This is
not calculated to produce much confidence in the
use of those sources that we can no longer verify. 32
If this be true, the silence of the Antiquities will not
outweigh the affirmation of the Gospel. It is true,
however, that the more accurate Wars of the Jews
contains no reference to the enrolment which Luke
records.
Nor again does Augustus make mention of it in the
Monumentum Ancyranum, the records of those acts
and achievements of his reign which he deemed most
worthy of commemoration. 88
We have no explicit confirmation of Luke's record
from any source. Yet there are various indications
that a census of this kind would have been in harmony
with the policy of the sagacious ruler to whom Luke
ascribes it. After speaking of Julius Caesar's ordi-
nance providing for a census of Italy Mommsen adds:
81 HJP., I, 2, 129.
32 Id., I, 1, 98. In Schaft-Herzog Encycl. Schurer indicates that
"the last books" referred to are particularly books 18-20, which treat
of the period following the death of Herod. Cj. Edersheim Diet.
Chr. Biog., art. "Josephus," p. 449, pp. 455 ff.
83 The text of this inscription as restored by Mommsen is given
in Wieseler's Chron. of the Gospels, p. 88. See also Schiirer, I. 1,
115, 354.
62 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
That it was Caesar's intention to introduce
similar institutions also in the provinces is attested
partly by the measurement and survey of the
whole empire ordered by him, partly by the nature
of the arrangement itself; for it in fact furnished
the general instrument appropriate for procuring,
as well in the Italian as in the non-Italian com-
munities of the state, the information requisite
for the central administration. Evidently here
too it was Caesar's intention to revert to the tra-
ditions of the earlier republican times, and to
reintroduce the census of the empirej which the
earlier republic had effected. . . . This had
been one of the first institutions which the torpid
aristocracy allowed to drop, and in this way
deprived the supreme government authority of
any general view of the resources in men and
taxation at its disposal, and consequently of all
possibility of an effective control. 34 The indica-
tions still extant, and the /vetfy connection of
things, show irrefragably that Caesar made prepa-
rations to renew the general census that had been
obsolete for centuries. 3 B
Augustus followed in the footsteps of his uncle.
Suetonius tells us that he thrice took a census of the
Roman citizens; s8 and that in the third codicil of his
will "he had drawn up a concise account of the state
of the empire; the number of troops enrolled, what
money there was in the treasury, the revenues, and
arrears of taxes." 8T In 27 B. c. he made a census of
Gaul. 88 Papyri have recently been brought to light
in Egypt which show that a census was taken there in
the early days of the empire at intervals of fourteen
84 II, 402. 87 /d., 101.
86 Hist. Rome, IV, 653, 4. s8 Mommsen, Prov. R. Emp., 1, 91.
"Aug. 27.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 63
years, and the evidence upon this point goes as far
back as 20 A. D. 89
There are also indications that enrolments were made
from time to time in Syria. That a census was taken
in 6 A. D. is attested by Josephus, 10 as well as by Luke. 41
Tertullian affirms that "there is historical proof that at
this very time" during the life of Jesus "a census
had been taken in Judea by Sentius Saturninus, which
might have satisfied their inquiry respecting the family
and descent of Christ." 4Z That he names Saturninus
instead of Quirinius suggests that he did not rely upon
Luke in this matter, but drew his information from
other ource)s. ; An inscription has been ^preserved
which relates that a Roman officer made an enrolment
of the inhabitants of Apamea, in Syria, by order of
Quirinius, but no date is given/ 8 In 35 A. D. the order
to take a census of the Clitae, a people subject to
Archelaus, King of Cappodocia, provoked resistance; **
and the Clitae were of Cilicia, which formed part of
the province of Syria." Justin Martyr, about 150,
affirms that the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem may be
ascertained "from the registers of the taxing made
under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judea." **
Cyrenius and Quirinius are different forms of the same
name. Justin thus appeals to public records still pre-
served and accessible, which demonstrate the truth of
Luke's account. Clement of Alexandria, about 195,
says that "our Lord was born in the twenty-eighth
year" (of Augustus) "when first the census was ordered
to be taken in the reign of Augustus"; * T but he appeals
88 Art. "Papyri," HBD., extra vol. 356. Ramsay, Was Christ
Born at Bethlehem f, Pref. x note, pp. 131, 166, 7.
40 Ant., XVIII, 1, 1. 41 Acts v. 37. * 3 Agt. Afarcion, 4, 19.
* 8 Ramsay, p. 150, Expositor, series 8, vol. 4, p. 406. Schiirer I,
1, 357.
"Tacitus Ann., 6, 4. Schiirer I, 2, 123.
"Schiirer I, 1, 352. * Apol. 1, 34. " Strom, i. 21.
64 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
to the authority of Luke and cannot be cited as an
independent witness.
From such facts as these it is not a long or difficult
step to infer that a general census of the empire was
decreed by Augustus, though it may not have been
taken everywhere at the same time or in the same
manner. Schurer holds that Luke was mistaken, yet
reaches the conclusion "that in the time of Augustus
valuation censuses had been made in many
provinces." * 8 There is no reason why these enrol-
ments should not have been made in pursuance of a
general comprehensive plan, and Luke might well
have gathered them up in a single phrase, as the local
famines that occurred in the days of Claudius are
described as the famine.* 9 Luke does not affirm that
a census was taken at the time throughout the empire,
or even that a general census was taken at all. The
decree was issued, but circumstances may have delayed
or prevented the execution of it in certain districts.
He simply affirms that a census was taken in Syria in
obedience to the edict of the emperor. Whether the
imperial order was actually carried out elsewhere he
is not concerned to inquire. He, is primarily an evan-
gelist, not a historian, and is interested in the history
only as it is related to the gospel. We shall never
understand the Gospels if we endeavour to impose
upon them the aims and methods of the modern
historian.
The judgments of men will always differ in weighing
evidence of this kind, which is not demonstrative, but
yields only a balance of probabilities, for judgment is
swayed by prepossession and prejudice, from which no
man is wholly free. But in the case before us it should
not be difficult to recognize that while the facts pre-
sented do not establish the taking of a general census
under Augustus, yet they show that such a census was
48 HJP., I, 2, 120. 49 Acts xi, 28.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 65
not impossible, or even improbable, in view of the
established policy of the empire. And if we add to
this probability the general accuracy of Luke regard-
ing matters in which he may be put to the test, we
need have no hesitation in following his guidance here.
The word of the Evangelist may reasonably be held
to outweigh the silence of Josephus, who may have
recorded the second census because of the disorders
to which it gave rise, while no such consequences
attended the first census, for reasons which will here-
after appear.
(b) If such a census had been taken it would not
have extended to Judea, which was at that time an
independent kingdom.
It is true that Judea was not formally incorporated
with the empire until 6 A. D., but to speak of it as
independent in the days of Herod is altogether mis-
leading. He received the kingdom by decree of the
Senate through the good will of Marc Antony, 50 and
after the battle of Actium his authority was confirmed
by Augustus, and the boundaries of his kingdom were
enlarged. 61 From time to time he sent ambassadors
to Rome and three times went there in person, to
avert the anger or win the favour of the emperor. He
sought and obtained the permission of Augustus to
put his sons to death, and to dispose of his kingdom
by will. 62 Near the close of his reign he made war
upon the Arabians without asking leave, and incurred
the displeasure of the emperor, who wrote to him that
whereas he had used him as a friend he should now
use him as his subject. 5 " About the same time Herod
exacted of the Jews an oath of allegiance to Caesar,
which some of them refused to take, and were pun-
ished for their disobedience." When the kingdom was
60 Josephus Ant. XIV, 14, 4, 5. 81 Id., XV, 6, 6, 7; 7, 3.
BB Id., Wars XXVII, II, 23; Ant. XVII, 11, 4.
68 Id., Ant. XVI, 9, 3.
Bt ld., XVII, 2, 4; Schurer HJP., I, 1, 445, note 94.
66 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
divided between the sons of Herod, soon after the birth
of Christ, Augustus ordered that the taxes of Idumea,
Judea, and Samaria should be reduced by one-fourth,
because they had taken no part in the revolt against
Varus, the Roman governor. 66
While this review does not show of course that a
census was taken in Judea by order of Augustus in
the days of Herod, it does show that Herod enjoyed no
real independence and that a decree of the emperor
would be as effective in Judea as in any province of
the empire.
The position indeed of Herod as an Idumean, hated
and feared by the Jews, compelled him to rely upon the
support of Rome:
From the Roman standpoint the conduct of the
new dynasty appears correct . . . the fulfil-
ment of duty such as the Roman commonwealth
claimed from its subjects, had been satisfied by
King Herod to an extent of which nobler and
greater natures would certainly not have been
capable. 88
Schurer impugns the accuracy of Luke, chiefly upon
the ground that "Josephus characterizes the census
of 7 A. D. as something entirely new and previously
unheard of among the Jews," and he concludes that
"Roman taxes could not possibly have been raised in
Palestine in the time of Herod." 87 But the force of
the argument is greatly weakened, if not destroyed, by
the natural supposition that the census was conducted
not by Roman officials after the Roman method, but
by Herod according to the custom of the Jews. That
is implied in Luke's statement that "all went to enrol
**Ant. XVII, 11, 4.
6(1 Mommsen Prous. II, p. 195. See also Schurer HJP., I., 1,
pp. 448 ff.
5 ''HJP., I, 2, 131, 132.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 67
themselves, every one to his own city," will account
for the absence of such disorders as accompanied the
later census, and is in harmony with the imperial
policy in dealing with the Jews.
(c) The most serious difficulty that Luke's narra-
tive presents at this point is the reference to Quirinius.
"This was the first enrolment made when Quirinius
was governor of Syria." History seems to allow no
room for Quirinius as governor of Syria before the
death of Herod in the spring of 4 B. c. Saturninus
was governor from 9 to 6 B. c., and Varus from 6 until
after Herod's death. 68 B " In 6 A. D. Quirinius ao was
governor, and under him the census was taken which
is recorded in Acts v. 37 and Josephus Ant. XVIII,
1,1. Of the interval between 4 B. c. and 6 A. D. little
is known, but it is generally agreed that during part
of this time Quirinius was governor of Syria. 61 Yet
if this be granted it does not remove the difficulty, for
there appears to be no place for Quirinius within the
time indicated by Luke. Nor does it avail to throw
back the date of Jesus' birth to 8 B. c., as Ramsay
does, 82 for then we>are confronted by Saturninus.
It is interesting to note in passing that the same
volume of the Expositor in which this article of Prof.
Ramsay's appears contains also a paper by Prof. Kir-
sopp Lake, in which he suggests 6 A. D. as the probable
date of the birth. That such a wide diversity of opin-
ion is possible indicates the obscurity which envelopes
the whole period, and suggests that we should be slow
to impute error to a writer who was removed at the
68 Josephus Ant. XVII, 9, 3; 10, 1.
6 B The list of Roman governors of Syria is given in Schurer.
HJP., I, 1, pp, 328 ff.
80 The career of Quirinius is sketched by Tacitus Ann. Ill, 48.
81 The famous argument of Zumpt is given in outline in Wieseler,
Chron. Gospels, pp. 143 ff.
8S Expositor, 8th series, vol. TV, p. 386.
68 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
utmost by a single generation from the events which
he relates, and who had at his command sources of
information which have long since perished.
In view of this historical situation is it possible to
maintain the accuracy of the Evangelist?
We may set aside without hesitation the conjecture
that Luke confuses the census taken under Herod with
the census of Acts v. 37, as Eusebius does. 63 On the
contrary, he expressly distinguishes them "this was
the first." It is simply incredible that he should allude
to a census before the death of Herod and to another
ten years later, and confound them.
Nor, on the other hand, may we resort to the exeget-
ical shift employed by some scholars, which gives to
jtQc&trj a comparative sense; and reads, "The cutoyQacpTi
took place as the first, and before Quirinius was gov-
ernor of Syria." 64 It is obviously true that jtQtotog
may be used in this sense when it is followed simply
by a noun or a pronoun; 6B but no instance has been
adduced to show that it may be so used when it is fol-
lowed by a clause. 68 And if the construction should
be admitted Luke has chosen a curiously awkward
mode of dating the census. Was Quirinius of such
importance from the evangelist's point of view that
the name of the governor by whom the census was
actually taken should be set aside for his? Luke has
not elsewhere shown himself so obtuse as to go out of
his way to create a needless difficulty.
Two other methods of meeting the objection are
proposed. (1) The census may have been begun under
an earlier governor, interrupted by the disorders that
followed the death of Herod, 67 and taken up and com-
pleted by Quirinius when he assumed office. But again
98 Ch. H., I, i, 5.
'* Wieseler, Chron. Gospels, p. 116.
"John i. 15, 30.
88 Winer Gram., p. 244; Robertson Gram, of Greek N. T., p. 669.
87 Josephus Wars II, 1-6; Ant. XVII, 9.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 69
we ask, why should Luke pass over the governor under
whose rule Jesus was born, and name Quirinius, who
came into office after his birth? The fact that the
second census was taken during his administration
gives no sufficient reason to refer the first census to
him, when that census is recorded simply because it
gave occasion for the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem.
Again it appears that to name Quirinius is to involve
the narrative in needless confusion. This solution
therefore has little to commend it. (2) The terms
govern (fiyEjAovEVQ)), governor, government are used
in various senses, referring to officers of different rank,
proconsuls, propraetors, that is, governors of senatorial
and imperial provinces, and even to the emperor him-
self. 88 Syria was an imperial province, and the legate
through whom the emperor administered the govern-
ment was the governor. In addition to this officer a
legate might be dispatched to perform certain specific
duties, such as the conduct of military operations, or
the care of the finances of the province. While Varus
held the office of governor, Quirinius may have been
sent upon a particular mission, and might also be
termed governor as the personal representative of him
to whom the government belonged.
We learn from Tacitus 8t> that Quirinius waged war
against the Homonadenses, a barbarous people on the
frontier of Galatia. The date cannot be precisely fixed,
but it was during the administration of Varus, who was
without military skill, while Quirinius was a trained
soldier. With the conduct of the campaign the taking
of the census may have been entrusted to him, and that
would furnish sufficient reason to fix the date by refer-
ence to him rather than to Varus.
That the administration of the province should thus
be divided is in accord with Roman custom. Examples
are given by Ramsay. 70 We may add to the instances
88 Luke iii. 1. " 9 Ann. 3, 48.
70 Was Christ born at Bethlehem?, pp. 238 ff.
70 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
there adduced that according to Josephus the second
census, in 6 A. D., was taken by Quirinius as governor
of Syria, while Coponius was governor of Judea, which
had been added to the province of Syria.* 1 And again
he speaks of Saturninus and Volumnius as "the gov-
ernors (fiY^veg) of Syria." 78 Here is sufficient
warrant for Luke's ascription of the title governor to
Quirinius even if he discharged simply the duties of a
special legate, and in this double office we may find
the explanation of Tertullian's statement that the cen-
sus was taken by Saturninus, 78 if we may suppose that
Quirinius began the work under Saturninus and com-
pleted it under Varus.
No certainty can be obtained in dealing with matters
embraced in this obscure period of history; but if a
final solution of the difficulty has not been found, yet
it appears that there are ways of solving it which are
possible, even probable, in the light of such knowledge
as we possess.
(d) It is objected that even if a census were taken
in Judea at the time alleged, Joseph and Mary would
not have been required to journey to Bethlehem. But
there is good reason to believe that the census was
taken not according to the Roman but according to the
Jewish mode. Augustus and Herod might well respect
the prejudices of a people so stubborn as the Jews in
order not to provoke such an outbreak as attended the
second census. That all should be required to go to
their own cities was not strange either to the Roman,
since the citizens from all parts of Italy must journey
to Rome in order to vote; or to the Jew, who was
commanded by the law of Moses to present himself
three times every year in the appointed place. 74 And
it was in accord with the policy of the emperors to
71 Ant. xvm, i, l.
78 Id., XVI, 9, 1.
7a Agt. Mar don IV, 19.
7 *Deut. xvi.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 71
conform to local customs in matters of this kind. 75
Mary as well as Joseph was of the house and family
of David, and whether women were required to present
themselves or not, her condition would lead her to
accompany her husband. Moreover she was familiar
with the prophecy that the child of whom she was
soon to be delivered should be born in Bethlehem.
Here are surely sufficient reasons for her journey.
(3) The objection is also raised that the slaughter
of the children in Bethlehem by order of Herod is
nowhere recorded in secular history. That is true.
But the number of children of two years old and under
in a village like Bethlehem was very small; and the
deed ascribed to Herod is in entire accord with his
character.
There is probably no royal house of any age in
which blood feuds raged in an equal degree
between parents and children, between husbands
and wives, and between brothers and sisters; the
emperor Augustus and his governors in Syria
turned away with horror from the share in the
work of murder which was suggested to them;
not the least revolting trait in this picture of
horrors is the utter want of object in most of the
persecutions. 78
In this orgy of crime is it strange that the death of a
few children in a little town should pass unnoticed by
the historians of the period?
How precarious is the argument from silence, how
an event which attracts world-wide attention in later
days may pass unnoted at the time, is illustrated by
the massacre of Glencoe, Scotland, in 1692.
It may be thought strange that these events
should not have been instantly followed by a
78 Ramsay, Was Christ born at Bethlehem? , pp. 185 ff. Expositor,
8th Series, vol. IV, pp. 484 ff.
" Mpmmse Provs. R. E., 2, 190.
72 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
burst of execration from every part of the civilized
world. The fact, however, is that years elapsed
before the public indignation was thoroughly
awakened and that months elapsed before the
blackest part of the story found credit even among
the enemies of the government. That the massa-
cre should not have been mentioned in the London
Gazettes, in the Monthly Mercuries, which were
scarcely less courtly than the Gazettes, or in
pamphlets licensed by official censors, is perfectly
intelligible. But that no allusion should be found
in private journals and letters, written by persons
free from all restraint, may seem extraordinary.
There is not a word on the subject in Evelyn's
Diary. In Narcissus Luttrell's Diary is a remark-
able entry made five weeks after the butchery.
The letters from Scotland, he says, described that
kingdom as perfectly tranquil, except that there
was still some grumbling about ecclesiastical ques-
tions. The Dutch ministers regularly reported
all the Scotch news to their government. They
thought it worth while, about this time, to men-
tion that a collier had been taken by a privateer
near Berwick, that the Edinburgh mail had been
robbed, that a whale with a tongue seventeen feet
long, and seven feet broad, had been stranded near
Aberdeen. But it is not hinted in any of their
dispatches that there was any rumor of an ex-
traordinary occurrence in the Highlands. ... At
length, near a year after the crime had been com-
mitted, it was published to the world."
(4) The genealogies of Matthew and Luke are said
to be hopelessly at variance with each other.
We need not stop to inquire whether both Gospels
give the genealogy of Joseph or Luke traces the line of
Mary. The fathers generally believed that Mary too
71 Macaulay's Hist, of Eng., Ch. xvii.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 73
was of the family of David. 78 The Syriac Sinaitic
manuscript expressly affirms it; 79 and it is clearly im-
plied in such passages as Ps. cxxxii. 11; Acts ii. 30;
xiii. 23; Rom. i. 3. Taken in connexion with the
promise on which they are based "I will set up thy
seed after thee, that shall proceed out of thy bowels" 80
these passages may fairly be termed conclusive.
Mary's kinship to Elisabeth, who was of the tribe of
Levi, 81 presents no difficulty, for marriage between
the tribes was not forbidden, as Eusebius affirms. 89
There is no antecedent objection to the view that
Luke records the genealogy of Mary, and thus the
descent of Jesus from David is traced through both
father and mother. Whether this is actually the case
must be determined by a careful examination of the
genealogies, upon which we cannot enter. For our
present purpose the inquiry is unnecessary, for even
if both genealogies should be referred to Joseph there
is no difficulty in supposing that Matthew pursued
the line of legal and Luke of actual descent; one re-
cords the succession of legal heirs to the throne of
David, through whom the title was transmitted to
Jesus, and the other traces the line of the actual pro-
genitors of Joseph, his reputed father. 83 For Matthew
is chiefly concerned to present Jesus as the Christ, the
heir of David, and Luke to portray him as the Son
of man: Matthew therefore traces his descent from
Abraham through David, that he may appear to be
the heir of the covenant with Abraham and the prom-
ise to David ; while Luke follows the line of his descent
to Adam, father of the race, and beyond Adam to God.
"Justin Martyr Dial, 45, 100; Iren. Her. Ill, 21, 5; Warfield
Pres. Rev., 1881, p. 388.
78 Luke ii. 5.
80 II Sam. vii. 12.
81 Luke i. 5.
82 Gh. H. } I, 7; McGiffert's note 35.
83 Andrews' Life of Christ, p. 55.
74 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Both evangelists are careful to note that Joseph was
not the actual father of Jesus. Matthew .breaks the
chain of the genealogy when he comes to him, not
affirming as in every other case that Jesus was begot-
ten by Joseph, but that he was born of Mary. And
Luke calls him the son, as was supposed, of Joseph.
Whether then both Gospels furnish the genealogy of
Joseph, or Luke records the genealogy of Mary, in
neither cas.e can a contradiction be shown. The
genealogies differ because, whichever theory be
adopted, they employ different methods and pursue
different roads.
(5) The most weighty objection to the truth of
the narrative is drawn from the silence of the re-
mainder of the New Testament. Neither in the other
Gospels, it is asserted, nor in the Acts, the Epistles,
the Revelation, may a single clear allusion to the vir-
gin birth be found. Yet if Jesus was really born of
the virgin Mary the fact must have been known to
many in the early church; certainly to Paul through
his intimacy with Luke, and to John through his ac-
quaintance with the earlier Gospels and his filial rela-
tion to Mary. Why then does an event of such tran-
scendent importance find no place in their teaching?
Let us first seek to ascertain the facts of the case
and then inquire what is the bearing of those facts
upon the truth of the narrative.
Certain references to the virgin birth are adduced
from various parts of the New Testament, but none
of them will bear examination. Mark begins his Gos-
pel with the ministry of John the Baptist. John at-
tests the fact, but says nothing of the mode of the in-
carnation. "The word became flesh" how, we are not
told. It is in accord with his usual method to omit
what has been sufficiently related by the earlier evan-
gelists. It is not surprising therefore that the virgin
is not reported in the Second pr Fourth Gospel.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 75
Certain passages indeed are cited from John's Gospel
as alluding to the virgin birth, but without sufficient
warrant. In i. 13 some of the fathers substitute the
singular for the plural, reading, "Who was born" in-
stead of "who were born," and refer the passage to the
incarnation. 84 Though this reading is accepted by
Zahn 8B the evidence against it is so overwhelming
that it may be dismissed without further considera-
tion. But it is said that even though we cannot
accept the reading yet
it is on the track of a right idea. It is the mode
of Christ's birth which is in view, and which fur-
nishes the type of the (spiritual) new birth of
believers. As Paul in Ephes. i. 19 takes God's
mighty power in raising Christ from the dead as
the type of the quickening of believers ... so
John takes as a pattern the divine begetting of
Christ in his conception by the Holy Spirit. 88
"John described the birth of the children of God ac-
cording to the analogy of the birth of the only begot-
ten Son of God." 87
But the thought of Christ's birth as the pattern
of the new birth of believers is obviously imposed upon
the text rather than drawn from it. The doctrine is
beset with difficulties enough without compelling it
to bear the burden of a forced and artificial exegesis.
The passage simply expresses in another form the truth
which Nicodemus learned from the lips of Jesus, "Ex-
cept one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot
8 * Iren. Her. Ill, 16, 2; 19, 2. Tertullian affirms that the singular
was changed to the plural by heretics: On the Flesh of Christ. 19.
86 N. T. Intro., Ill, p. 266.
8e Orr, Virgin Birth, p. 112. G. H. Box, Virgin Birth, p. 146.
See in opposition Prof. Machen, Princeton Theol. Rev., 1905, p. 660.
His treatment of the silence of Scripture is judicious and satisfactory
throughout.
87 Zahn Int. N. T. Ill, p. 266. See also Allen. Comm. on Matthew,
p. 20.
76 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born
of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the
Spirit is spirit." 88 John's words are in harmony with
the doctrine of the virgin birth, but they do not sug-
gest it or lend it substantial support.
In John i. 14 "We beheld his glory, glory as of
the only-begotten from the Father" the word only-
begotten (^ovoyevovg) is referred by some scholars
to the miraculous birth of Jesus, but it properly re-
lates to his eternal generation. Jesus did not become
the only-begotten Son at his incarnation, for he was
in the beginning with God. He is identified with
men through the incarnation, distinguished from them
by his eternal sonship.
When we turn to Paul we discover nowhere in his
Epistles a clear and distinct allusion to the virgin
birth. It must be borne in mind that the emphasis
of apostolic preaching and teaching was laid upon three
supreme facts, the incarnation, the atoning death and
the resurrection of Jesus.
In Romans i. 3, 4 "concerning his Son, who was
born of the seed of David according to the flesh, who
was declared to be the Son of God with power, accord-
ing to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from
the dead" Paul has in mind the human and divine
natures of Christ, but gives no indication of the nature
of his birth. If we read, Spirit of holiness, the refer-
ence is obviously to the power of the Holy Spirit not
in conceiving Jesus, but in raising him from the dead.
But the antithesis of flesh and spirit shows that the
proper rendering is that which is given by both the
Authorized and the Revised Versions spirit of holi-
ness signifying the divine nature of the Son, as crAp?
denotes his humanity. Nor may an allusion to the
virgin birth be found in the representation of Christ
as the second Adam, 80 where Adam and Christ, the
88 John iii. 5, 6. 8fl I Cor. xv. 45.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. . 77
heads and representatives of mankind as created and
redeemed, are contrasted as created "a living soul"
and creator "a life-giving spirit." Here again the
phrase is in harmony with the doctrine of the virgin
birth, but does not of itself suggest it or indicate that
it was known.
In Galatians iv. 4 Jesus is said to have been born
of a woman. Similar phrases are used in Job xiv. 1;
Mat. xi. 11; Luke vii. 28, and may be applied to every
human being. It is true that Matthew and Luke
have YEWTITOI? while Paul has ywopsvov, but to find
in this difference an allusion to the virgin birth, as
Orr does, 80 is wholly unwarranted. The ablest com-
mentators recognize that Paul here affirms the true
humanity of Christ, but gives no intimation of the
way by which he entered human life. 91
I Tim. ii. 14, 15 "the woman being beguiled hath
fallen into transgression: but she shall be saved
through her child bearing; if they continue in faith
and love and sanctification with sobriety" is inter-
preted by Ellicott and others as referring to the primal
promise that the seed of the woman shall bruise the
serpent's head; 92 by most scholars as referring to the
obedience of woman to the divine law through the
discharge of the proper function of her sex, a view
which is sustained by the closing words of the verse.
But in neither case is there an allusion to the virgin
birth.
In the vision of Rev. xii. 1 the woman represents
the church, and there is no hint of her virginity.
From this review which embraces the chief pas-
sages adduced from all portions of the New Testament
to support the narrative of the Evangelists, it appears
that beyond the First and Third Gospels there is
not a single passage in any New Testament writing
80 Virgin Birth, p. 118. Ba Gen. iii. 15.
81 So Lightfoot, Ellicott, Meyer, Burton.
78 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
which affirms or even distinctly implies the virgin
birth.
We proceed to inquire what is the bearing of this
fact upon the credibility of the Gospel story.
(1) While there is no passage elsewhere in the
New Testament which directly confirms the narra-
tive of Matthew and Luke, it is equally true that
there is none which contradicts it or is inconsistent
with it.
Upon several occasions Jesus is termed the son of
Joseph. In Luke iv. 22 the men of Nazareth inquire,
"Is not this Joseph's son?" In John i. 45 Philip tells
Nathanael, "We have found him, of whom Moses in
the law, and the prophets, wrote, Jesus of Nazareth,
the son of Joseph." In Matt. xiii. 55 the men of his
own country ask, "Is not this the carpenter's son?"
While the parallel passage in Mark vi. 3 reads, "Is
not this the carpenter?" Both expressions no doubt
were used as the people questioned one with another.
Joseph was of course regarded as the father of
Jesus by those who were ignorant of his supernatural
birth, but their ignorance throws no discredit upon
the narrative. It appears moreover that Joseph was
called his father even by those who were acquainted
with the circumstances of his birth. When Jesus was
brought into the temple, Simeon took him in his arms,
and blessed God; and Luke adds that "his father and
his mother were marvelling at the things which were
spoken concerning him." 9S Several times he speaks
of the parents of Jesus. 8 * And Mary herself said to
Jesus when she found him in the temple, "Thy father
and I sought thee sorrowing." 8B Joseph is properly
called the father of Jesus on the ground of his legal
relationship, and the term throws no doubt upon the
virgin birth.
(2) How easily the story of Jesus' birth gave rise
88 Luke ii. 33. >* Luke il 27, 41, 43. 8B Luke ii. 48.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 79
to scandal appears very early in the history of the
church in the coarse slander which Celsus puts in the
mouth of a Jew. 98 And how even a Christian, with
the Gospel narrative to guide him, could profane the
chaste mystery of the holy birth is shown by the
Protevangelium of James, which is perhaps as old as
the second century, with its gross and sensual details.
The matter was of such a nature that it must be
treated with the utmost delicacy and reserve, lest it
should become a scandal and an offence. This phase
of the subject is well treated by Allen, International
Critical Commentary, on Matthew, p. 20. The same
difficulty confronts the missionary today. Rev. G. G.
Warren, for thirty-five years engaged in mission work
in China, writes in the Biblical Review, Jan., 1922,
p. 49:
I have intentionally avoided the slightest refer-
ence to the doctrine of the virgin birth in all my
addresses to non-Christians. One early experience
of the unclean reasonings of an unclean .hearer
who retorted on a Chinese preacher's allusions to
the doctrine made an unfaded impression upon
me. General church history confirms the indi-
vidual experience that unbelievers are more likely
to blaspheme than to be converted by allusions
to the virginity of the mother of our Lord.
(3) The virgin birth could not be established, like
the resurrection, by the testimony of eye witnesses.
It rested upon the unsupported word of Mary, and by
its very nature was incapable of proof. Until the gen-
eral truthfulness of the Gospel narrative had been
demonstrated, an event lying so far beyond the limits
of experience might easily become a stumbling-block
in the way of faith. The apostles were eye witnesses
of the resurrection, but who save Mary could bear
98 Origen Agt. Celsus, I, 28, 32.
80 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
personal testimony to the manner of the birth in
Bethlehem?
(4) Evidently the New Testament writers did not
hold the virgin birth to be an essential article of
saving faith, like the incarnation, the death, the
resurrection of Jesus. If they believed that the accept-
ance of it was necessary to life and godliness, their
silence is inexplicable. Paul must have known of it,
if it really occurred, and John; and if it had not been
disclosed to them in other ways, it would have been
communicated to them by special revelation as an
essential part of the Gospel message. Among the
revelations which Paul declares were granted him, how
could this have failed to find a place? In face of all
hindrances and dangers it would have been proclaimed,
as Paul set the cross in the forefront of his preaching,
though it was to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to
the Greeks foolishness. But nowhere does he allude
to the virgin birth: not in the earliest creed contained
in I Cor. xv. 3, 4, which has two articles only, the death
and resurrection of Jesus, nor in the fuller statement
of doctrine found in I Tim. iii. 16, regarding the mys-
tery of godliness. The fact of the incarnation is of
vital importance, the manner of it is not; or Paul,
though he affirmed that he shrank not from declaring
to men the whole counsel of God " 7 has preached a
sadly mutilated gospel. The virgin birth cannot be
placed beside the incarnation, the sacrificial death, the
resurrection of the Son of God as an essential article
of saving faith. Nothing may be deemed essential
which did not find a place in the preaching and teach-
ing of the apostles. 98 But this is not the whole of
the matter.
We must distinguish clearly here, and when we ask
whether a doctrine is essential, we must inquire fur-
97 Acts xx. 27.
88 Sweet, Birth and Infancy oj Jesus Christ, pp. 280, 290.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 81
ther, essential to what? A doctrine may not be essen-
tial to saving faith, so that none may be saved without
the knowledge of it; and yet may be essential to the
full exhibition of the truth as it is in Jesus. And that
is exactly the position of the doctrine of the virgin
birth. It is not essential to saving faith, like the
incarnation and the atonement of the Son of God;
but it is essential to any system of theology which
professes to be based upon the teaching of the Scrip-
ture. Those who have never heard of the virgin birth
may be saved through the grace of Christ, as is abund-
antly attested by the whole history of the church from
the day of Pentecost to our own tune; but once the
truth has been made known it cannot be rejected with-
out repudiating the clear teaching of the Word. Fun-
damentally the question at issue is simply the author-
ity of the Word of God. Are we bound as Christians
to accept the teaching of the Scripture, or are we at
liberty to sit in judgement upon the Word, and reject
whatever does not comport with our preferences and
opinions? The doctrine of the virgin birth is essential
to a thorough Biblical theology; it is not essential to
saving faith.
(5) The virgin birth is as fully attested historically
as the nature of the case admits, is in harmony with
the whole course of New Testament teaching, has held
a place in the faith of the church from the beginning,
and is therefore to be accepted as an integral part of
the gospel record. We may conjecture that this was
not the only way in which the Son of God might have
taken upon himself our nature; that as he was born
without sin of a human mother, so he might have
been born without sin of a human father and mother."
This too lay within the power of God. In either case
_ ""Turrettin notes four ways in which men are made: Adam
immediately by God; Eve from the man without woman; all men
since from man and woman; Jesua from woman without man.
Theol. Loc., 13. Qu. 16:19.
8a THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
his birth would be supernatural, for the sinless cannot
proceed from the sinful without the direct interposition
of the Almighty. We cannot affirm that only in this
way could the Son of God become the Son of man.
But this was the way divinely chosen and ordained,
and it accords with the dignity of his Person and the
unique nature of his work that he should enter into
human life by a new way, a way which distinguishes
him from all men besides. He is at once identified with
men through his mother, and set apart from them
by his conception through the Spirit.
As we could not apprehend from the Old Testament
the personality of the Spirit, yet when that truth is
brought to light all the earlier teaching is seen to be
in harmony with it; so there is in the New Testament,
apart from Matthew and Luke, no clear intimation of
the mystery of the birth in Bethlehem: yet when
the truth has been revealed the teaching of all the
evangelists and apostles is found to be in full accord
with it.
Accepting then the authenticity and integrity of
the narratives, and haying considered the contradic-
tions and inconsistencies which they are alleged to
contain, we are prepared to inquire from what sources
they have been derived.
There are those who ascribe to them a mythical or
legendary origin. The question at once arises, Where
shall room be found for the growth of myth or legend?
The Gospels were written before the close of the cen-
tury, and the traditions from which they drew their
material, whether oral or written, go back to the time
of the events which they relate. But the chronologi-
cal argument against the mythical theory, whatever
weight we may attach to it, cannot be regarded as
decisive. The stories of the divine birth of Augustus
and the return of Nero indicate how quickly legends
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 83
may arise and how rapidly they may spread. 100 And
it is also true that legends relating to the birth of
Jesus arose at an early date. The Gospel of Thomas
as well as the Protevangelium of James is referred
by some scholars to the middle of the second cen-
tury; 101 and if a later date be assigned to these works
they bear witness to early traditions. The argument
sometimes advanced, therefore, that myth or legend
could not have arisen so quickly is too precarious to
furnish a foundation for faith. The utmost that may
be claimed is that the balance of probability at this
point is somewhat in favour of the Gospel story.
There are two forms in which this mythical theory
is held:
(1) the myth was of Jewish origin, and the germ
of it is the passage which Matthew quotes from Isaiah
vii. 14 "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and
shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name
Immanuel." 102 The precise meaning of these words
will be considered hereafter. It may suffice here to
observe that there is no reason to believe that the
passage was ever interpreted by the Jews in a Mes-
sianic sense. It is not named in Schiirer's representa-
tion of the Messianic doctrine of the Jews, 108 nor in
Edersheim's list of Old Testament passages Messiani-
cally applied in ancient Rabbinic writings. 104 Dai-
man assures us that "no trace is to be found among
the Jews of any Messianic application of Isaiah's
words 10S concerning the virgin's son, from which by
any possibility as some have maintained the whole
100 Swete on Revelation, p. cii. Charles, Intern, Crit. Comm. on
Rev., 2, 76. Add. note on ch. XVII.
101 On these writings see Lipsius DCB., art. "Gospels Apoc."
108 Matt. i. 23.
108 #/P., II, 2, p. 283.
10 *Li/e oj Christ, Appen. 9. See also Hastings DCGs., II,
pp. 806, 7. Orr, Virgin Birth, p. 288,
1OB T ? 44
105 Isa. vii. 14.
84 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
account of the miraculous birth of Jesus could have
derived its origin." 106 It may also be noted that the
Jews were accustomed to exalt the married state above
virginity, which was commonly considered a reproach,
as Hannah and Elisabeth attest. There was nothing
in Jewish modes of thought or methods of Scripture
interpretation to suggest the virgin birth.
So decisive are these considerations that the theory
of a Jewish origin has little support among scholars
today.
(2) it is affirmed that the myth is of heathen
origin, and analogies are sought in pagan mythology,
Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Babylonian. Justin Martyr
represents Trypho as comparing the story of the birth
of Jesus with the Greek fable that Perseus was born
of the virgin Danae. 107
There are two insuperable objections to the theory
in whatever form it may be held:
(a) There is no real analogy between the pagan
myths which are adduced and the story of the Gos-
pels. In every instance the resemblance alleged breaks
down at the decisive point.
There are many tales of men who sprang from the
gods, but the gods are conceived as having the parts
and passions of men ; and they beget children as men be-
get them. Whatever form the god may assume, some
mode of physical contact is required for generation.
No comparison can be drawn between the pure chaste
narrative of the Gospels and the filthy stories of
heathen mythology. The word holy fixes an impas-
sable gulf between them. What likeness may be found
between the sensual lust of a Greek or Roman or
Oriental divinity and the work of the Holy Spirit?
What is there to answer to the unsullied virginity of
108 Words of Jesus, X, 2, p. 276.
107 Dial, 67. See also I Apol, 54.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 85
Mary, or to the child who is called holy? "Who can
bring a clean thing out of an unclean?"
(b) It is incredible that the gross and polytheistic
myths of heathenism should have taken root in that
Jewish soil from which the Gospels sprang. The spir-
ituality and holiness of God were the first principles
of the Jewish creed, and chastity held a foremost place
among the virtues. By these conceptions the Jew was
distinguished from the pagan world; and they were
carried over to the Christian church in their highest
and purest form. No part of the New Testament is
more thoroughly impregnated with the thought and
spirit of Palestinian .Judaism in its noblest aspect than
the stories of the virgin birth, and the conception of
holiness dominates them throughout. How could the
church suffer legends of the vilest character, degrad-
ing alike to God and man, to profane the very sanc-
tuary of Christian truth, and give shape and colour
to the representation of him who was adored as Saviour
and Lord? How the church in fact regarded these
heathen myths is shown in a striking way by the pas-
sages which Bishop Lightfoot has gathered from early
Christian writers. 108
Further objections to all forms of the mythical
theory may be drawn from the character of the Gospel
records, their historical temper, the precise notes of
time and place and person and circumstance, the sober
and unadorned style, the freedom from puerile con-
ceits and silly superstitions, the elevated tone, the
chaste dignity, the celestial atmosphere. And when
we consider further their conformity to all that is
afterward related of the character and life of Jesus,
their aptness as the introduction to the Gospel story,
we need have no hesitation in accepting the narrative
108 Apost. Fas., II, 2, 505, note 4. See G. H. Box, Virgin Birth of
Jesus, ch. VIII.
86 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
of Matthew and Luke as a truthful record of the
facts. 109
The only reasonable explanation of the Gospel nar-
rative is that the events here set forth actually
occurred. How they came to the knowledge of the
evangelists we are not told, but it is quite clear, as
is generally recognized by those who accept the truth-
fulness of the Gospels, that Matthew derived his
information ultimately from Joseph and Luke from
Mary; for Joseph's point of view is given by one, and
Mary's by the other. What is related of the thoughts
and feelings of the father and mother must have been
derived originally from them. This will appear pres-
ently in the clearest way when we set the Gospels
side by side, and mark the points of resemblance and
divergence which they present.
How the facts communicated by Joseph came to the
knowledge of Matthew we can only surmise. Little
weight may be attached to the tradition that Joseph
was an old man at the time of his marriage to Mary, 11 "
but as he does not appear in the Gospels after the
visit to Jerusalem when Jesus was twelve years old
we may presume that he dies before Jesus entered upon
his public ministry, and that Matthew did not learn
the facts directly from him. It is possible, as some
have supposed, that Joseph prepared a document set-
ting forth the facts of the case in order to guard the
good name of Mary, and that this in some way came
into the hands of the evangelist. Or it may be that
Matthew heard the story from some member of the
family, to whom Joseph had imparted it, from Mary,
from Jesus, from one of the brothers or sisters. We
10 "For further treatment of the various mythical theories see
Weiss, Life of Christ, I, 2, 2. Gore, Dissertations, p. 6, App. Note A;
HDC. Gs., Art. "Virgin Birth"; Machen, Princeton Theol Rev.,
1906, p. 66. Orr, Virgin Birth, Lect. VI; Allen, Matthew, pp. 18 ff.;
Scott, Spirit in N. T., p. 68.
110 History oj Joseph the Carpenter, Antenic. Fas,, VIII, p. 390.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 87
are left to conjecture, for neither history nor tradition
offers us a guide.
If we turn to Luke, the same uncertainty confronts
us. It is evident that the primary source of his infor-
mation was Mary. From whom else could he have
learned of the visit of Gabriel, or obtained the key to
the heart of the virgin mother? "His mother kept
all these sayings in her heart." X11 It is the voice of
Mary that speaks in these words, which express at
once the awe and the tenderness that filled her soul.
Through what channels her knowledge was conveyed
to Luke is not disclosed. He may have met her when
he visited Jerusalem, 112 if she was still living there
at that time; or he may have heard the story from
James, the brother of Jesus, whom he knew. 118 It is
probable, however, that Luke made use here of writ-
ten sources such as he indicates in the preface to his
Gospel. The facts were made known by Mary, we may
suppose, to Elisabeth, to Joseph, perhaps to others,
and through them would reach a wider circle. A nar-
rative or narratives prepared by a writer or writers
to whom we have no clue preserved the story as Mary
related it, and furnished the source from which Luke
drew his material. The striking contrast between the
preface of the Gospel, which is composed in Greek
as classic as any which the New Testament presents,
and the narrative in chapters i. and ii. suggests at
once a Hebrew or Aramaic original for the narrative. 11 *
Luke may not have been acquainted with either of
these languages, 115 but the documents could be readily
rendered into Greek. That the peculiar cast of these
chapters, which move in the sphere of Old Testament
111 Luke ii. 51.
112 Acts xxi. 17.
118 Acts xxi. 17, 18.
114 Comm. of Godet and Plummer; Machen, Princeton Theol.
Rev., 1906, pp. 47 ff.; Robertson, Grammar Greek N. T., pp. 106 ff.
Orr, Virgin Birth, p. 78.
116 Zahn, Int. N. T., Ill, pp. 14, 27.
88 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
thought and clothe themselves in Old Testament forms
of speech, was due to conscious imitation of the style
of the Old Testament by Luke, is highly improbable.
For Luke was a Gentile, and his Gospel was written
when the old covenant had been superseded by the
new. It is hardly credible that under such conditions
he should have been able to reproduce, or should have
cared to reproduce, with such fidelity the thoughts
and aspirations of pious Jews, and should have con-
fined himself within the limits of Old Testament
teaching. It is far more reasonable to suppose that
this intensely Jewish story was drawn by the Gentile
evangelist from Jewish sources.
How thoroughly Jewish it is, even a cursory glance
will disclose. Apart from the words of Simeon, which
will be examined hereafter, nowhere is a distinctively
Christian note struck except in the recognition of the
fact that the promised Christ has come. In every other
respect the thought is bounded by Old Testament
conceptions, and the universality characteristic of the
Third Gospel nowhere appears, except in the words of
Simeon. A similar difference, it may be noted, appears
in the Acts, where the Hebrew character of the open-
ing chapters is conspicuous. 116 The hymns contained
in these opening chapters are thoroughly Jewish in
style and spirit, and are couched largely in the lan-
guage of the Old Testament, as a glance at Burton
and Goodspeed's Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels
will show. The Canticles of Mary and Zacharias
indeed are in form and substance Old Testament
Psalms, and might readily take their place in the
Psalter, to which in fact they are appended in the
Codex Alexandrinus. ii>l When the song of Mary and
the song of Hannah are set side by side in parallel
118 Meyer on Acts. Introd., Sec. II; HBD., I, 34, 2.
117 Swete, LXX Int., 253, II, VIII. See Warfield, "Messianic
Psalms of N. T." Expositor, 3rd Series, II, pp. 301, 321; Machen,
Princeton TheoL Rev., 1912, p. 1.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH I. 89
columns, as in Plummer's Commentary, the resem-
blance indicates how thoroughly Mary was imbued
with the conceptions and the language of the Old
Scripture. As her spirit was profoundly moved, her
emotions clothed themselves in the familiar garb of
Old Testament speech.
A fuller discussion of the relation of the gospel
narratives to the earlier revelation is reserved for the
following chapter. We are concerned with it here
only as it may throw light upon the sources from which
Luke drew his information. It is probable that he
made use of documents which enshrined the memories
of Mary, and were written in her mother tongue. We
may believe that to the mother of Jesus we owe this
exquisite story of such delicacy and grace, even as we
may believe that through her communion with the
beloved disciple she bore a part in weaving the Fourth
Gospel. Who but a mother would have remarked
that the coat of Jesus was without seam, woven from
the top throughout (John xix. 23) the mother who
had woven the garment with her own hands?
CHAPTER III
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II.
With this preliminary discussion we are prepared
to enter upon a detailed study of the narratives. While
our immediate concern is with the operation of the
Holy Spirit, the story is so closely woven that his
work cannot be even partially understood without the
knowledge of the circumstances and conditions of his
activity. And if the Gospels are not trustworthy in
their history how can we accept their witness in the
realm of the supernatural? If they have told us
earthly things, and we believe not, how shall we believe
if they tell us of heavenly things? But if it may be
shown that they are accurate in all matters in which
we can put them to the test, we may be prepared to
believe them when they testify of events which lie
beyond the range of our experience.
We shall set the narratives together and note the
points of resemblance and difference which they pre-
sent. A glance at the Harmony discloses how widely
they differ. Nowhere are they parallel, except in the
genealogies, and there, too, points of divergence are
more striking than the points of agreement. The rec-
ords must be woven together before the picture is
complete, for each supplies much that is lacking in
the other.
This will appear most plainly if we set side by side
the order of events in the Gospels.
90
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 91
Matthew Luke
1 the betrothal 1 the annunciation to Zacharias
2 the conception 2 Elisabeth's conception
3 the purpose of Joseph 3 the annunciation to Mary
4 the message of the angel 4 Mary's visit to Elisabeth
5 the marriage 5 the magnificat
6 the birth in Bethlehem 6 the birth of John
7 the visit of the wise men 7 the benedictus
8 the conduct of Herod 8 the decree of Caesar
9 the flight into Egypt 9 the journey to Bethlehem
10 the slaughter of the children 10 the birth of Jesus
11 the return from Egypt 11 the message of the angel to
12 the home in Nazareth the shepherds
12 the song of the angels
13 the visit of the shepherds
14 the circumcision of Jesus
15 the presentation in the
temple
16 the return to Nazareth
When the narratives are combined, this is the order
of events as they are arranged in Burton & Goodspeed's
Harmony, an order in which scholars generally occur:
1 the genealogy
2 the birth of John promised
3 the annunciation to Mary
4 the annunciation to Joseph
5 Mary'a visit to Elisabeth
6 the birth of John the Baptist
7 the birth of Jesus
8 the angels and the shepherds
9 the circumcision
10 the presentation in the temple
11 the wise men from the east
12 the flight into Egypt, and the home in Nazareth.
The points noted by Matthew and not by Luke are
these:
1 Joseph's knowledge of Mary's condition and his purpose
to put her away secretly
2 the visit of the angel to Joseph
3 the journey of the wise men
4 the trouble of Herod and Jerusalem
5 the assembling of the chief priests and scribes
6 Herod's question and the answer
7 Herod's interview with the wise men
8 the adoration of the wise men
\
92 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
9 their return to their own country
10 the flight into Egypt
11 the slaughter of the children.
12 the return from Egypt
These are the points noted by Luke and not by
Matthew:
1 the birth of John the Baptist, which is related in great
detail
2 the home of Joseph and Mary in Nazareth
3 the annunciation to Mary
4 Mary's visit to Elisabeth
5 the decree of Caesar Augustus
6 the journey of Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem
7 the circumstances of the birth of Jesus
8 the appearance of the angel to the shepherds
9 the song of the angel host
10 the visit of the shepherds
11 the circumcision
12 the presentation in the temple.
The story of the virgin birth itself is told with great
modesty and reserve. Matthew does not, properly
speaking, relate the birth at all. He anticipates it,
refers to it, he does not relate it. Contrast the meagre-
ness of his narrative with the particularity of Luke.
He conducts us to Bethlehem indeed, but says noth-
ing of the inn and the manger. He places the birth
in the days of Herod, the king, but tells us nothing
of Caesar Augustus, and the decree that all the world
should be enrolled. In time and place and circum-
stance his story is meagre in the extreme, and the
greatest event in history is disposed of with scarcely
an intimation of how it came to pass.
Certain characteristic features of the narratives are
brought to light by this review.
1 Luke's account is far more copious and detailed.
Apart from the genealogies Matthew's narrative com-
prises thirty-one verses and Luke's one hundred and
fifteen. Matthew tells us nothing of the birth of John,
but introduces him abruptly as Elijah appeared to
Ahab; while Luke devotes to him a long chapter.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 93
Luke sets the story in the framework of Roman his-
tory. He is indeed pre-eminently the historian of the
New Testament, making use of all available sources
of information, as he affirms in the preface to the
Gospel, and using his material with rare accuracy and
skill. Modern scholarship which long looked upon
him with suspicion and distrust is coming to recog-
nize his gifts as a historian of the first rank accurate,
vivid, systematic, with firm grasp of details and the
ability to marshal facts in the most striking and im-
pressive fashion.
The most surprising feature of Matthew's Gospel
is, as we have seen, that it contains in fact no account
of the birth of Jesus, which is rather assumed than
related. He seems indeed to promise a full account
of it -"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this
wise;" 1 but when we turn to the narrative this is all
we find: Joseph "knew her not till she had brought
forth a son; and he called his name Jesus"; 8 "Now
when Jesus was born in Bethlehem in the days of
Herod the king." 3 He points forward to the birth,
he looks back to it as an accomplished fact; but he
does not relate it. How striking is the contrast be-
tween these meagre references and the copious account
of Luke. Evidently the third evangelist had ampler
sources at his command and drew upon the memories
of a mother.
2 Not only does Luke far surpass Matthew in the
breadth and fulness of his narrative, but the accounts
move in different spheres. The essential facts are the
same, but they are presented in different settings and
from different points of view. It is evident that Mat-
thew derived his information ultimately from Joseph,
and Luke from Mary. Joseph holds the place of pre-
eminence in the First Gospel and Mary in the Third.
This appears immediately in the genealogies, if we
1 Matt. i. 18. * Matt. i. 25. Matt. ii. 1.
94 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
may refer the second to Mary. It must be said, how-
ever, that the matter remains in doubt in spite of all
the learning and labour that have been expended on
it. The wording of Luke seems to point rather to
Joseph than to Mary; and if Matthew could intro-
duce into his list of names Tamar and Ruth and Bath-
sheba no reason appears why Luke should not have
named Mary, if indeed he was tracing the line of
descent through her. And why should the name of
Mary appear in the genealogy of Joseph given by
Matthew, while it is not found in her own recorded
by Luke?
Apart from this, however, the place accorded to
Joseph by Matthew and to Mary by Luke is clearly
marked. In Matthew the angel announces the ap-
proaching birth to Joseph, in Luke to Mary; in .Mat-
thew the name of Jesus is given by the father, in
Luke by the mother: in one Gospel it is the thoughts
and feelings of Joseph that are disclosed, his knowledge
of Mary's condition, his purpose to put her away
secretly; in the other Gospel the emotions of the
virgin mother are portrayed. In Matthew the divine
visions and revelations are all granted to Joseph,* to
vindicate Mary, to send him to Egypt, to bid him
return to the land of Israel, to warn him to withdraw
into Galilee. It is the experience, the conduct of
Joseph with which the First Gospel is mainly con-
cerned. The single instance in which Mary assumes
greater prominence is in the account of the visit of
the wise men who "came into the house and saw the
young child with Mary his mother," B where Joseph
is not named.
In Matthew Joseph is named seven times and Mary
four; while in Luke the name of Mary occurs thirteen
* See art. "Dreams," by B. B. Warfield, in HDCGs., which shows
with abundant illustrations how large a part dreams have played in
history and experience.
6 Matt. ii. 11.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 95
times and that of Joseph only three. Joseph plays no
independent part in Luke's account. When the shep-
herds visit the holy family the order is "Mary and
Joseph, and the babe lying in the manger." It is the
emotions, the experiences, the conduct of Mary with
which Luke is concerned, and Joseph is barely men-
tioned and only when the course of events requires
it. This difference lies upon the face of the narrative,
and needs no further illustration. Evidently the ulti-
mate source of Matthew's narrative was Joseph, while
Luke drew upon the memories of Mary.
3 Luke's narrative is radiant with light and joy,
while Matthew's is overshadowed by sorrow and dan-
ger. Matthew alone relates the suspicions of Joseph,
and his purpose to put Mary away. The child Jesus
is beset with perils from his birth, and the shadow
of the cross falls upon the manger. The attempt of
Herod to kill him, the slaughter of the children, the
mourning of the mothers of Bethlehem, the flight into
Egypt, the fear of Archelaus which drove them to
Galilee : it is a gloomy picture which Matthew paints,
relieved only by the visit of the wise men and their
adoration of the new-born child. These Gentiles
accorded him the only welcome that he received, while
his own received him not, and their king sought to
destroy him.
When we turn to Luke, we enter a new world. It
is an idyllic scene that he depicts. The voice of joy
and praise is heard on every side. Elisabeth and
Zacharias rejoice in the promise of a son; the unborn
babe leaps for joy; Elisabeth and Mary and Zacharias
lift to God the song of praise; the angel brings to the
shepherds good tidings of great joy; the multitude of
the heavenly host raise the strain of rapturousf adora-
tion, Glory to God and peace on earth ; the shepherds
return from the manger glorifying and praising God
for all the things that they have heard and seen, and
96 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
as they tell the story the people hear with wonder.
The child is welcomed by Simeon in the temple as
the promised Christ. And when the requirements of
the law have been fulfilled the family return to Naza-
reth in peace. We are no longer under the shadow
of the cross, but in the full sunshine of the divine grace
which abode upon him who grew in favour with God
and men. If we had only Luke to guide us here, we
might readily infer that his own people were prepared
to receive him with gladness as their Saviour and
Lord.
In this chorus of joy and praise a single discordant
note is heard; one small cloud appears in the bright-
ness of the sky that bends above the infant Jesus.
Simeon foresees that "this child is set for the falling
and the rising of many in Israel; and for a sign which
is spoken against," and the heart of his mother shall
be pierced with sorrow. 6
The calmness, the peace, the beauty, the holy joy of
Luke's narrative furnish a striking contrast to Mat-
thew's dark and troubled tale. Jesus is acknowledged
by all to whom he is made known. Matthew's picture
is dark, relieved by a single ray of light; Luke's is
radiant, darkened by a single cloud.
Thus the strangely contrary aspects of Jesus' life
are thrown into bold relief at his birth. He is a man
of sorrows, he is the King of Glory; and this double
representation of the opening scenes of his life fore-
shadows the character and work of him who was to
be both sufferer and saviour.
4 The narrative of Luke the Gentile is more thor-
oughly Jewish in form and spirit than the story of
Matthew the Jew. It moves wholly within the sphere
of Palestinian Judaism. Not only is the scene laid
in Nazareth and Bethlehem and Jerusalem, but the
world of thought and feeling to which we are intro-
6 Luke ii. 34, 35.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 97
duced is the world of the Old Scripture. David would
have felt at home here. The only Gentiles who appear
upon the scene are Augustus and Quirinius, and they
are named simply because the course of history re-
quired it. The birth of the forerunner of the Christ
is related at length. Zacharias, Elisabeth, Mary,
Joseph, the shepherds, Simeon, Anna, all are Jews,
devout Jews, who breathe the air of the Old Testament,
cherish the hope of the Christ, look for the redemp-
tion of Israel, and express their emotions in the lan-
guage of Psalmist and Prophet. It is Luke who con-
ducts us to the temple, where Zacharias ministers, and
Simeon prays, and Anna worships. He alone records
the observance of the law of Moses, the circumcision
of Jesus, the purification of Mary, the presentation in
the Temple, the offering of the sacrifice. Thus they
"accomplished all things that were according to the
law of the Lord." 7
Of all this Matthew has nothing. Instead of the
shepherds he tells us of the wise men from the east.
Herod the Idurnean King is a conspicuous figure. John
the Baptist does not appear until Jesus was almost
thirty years of age. In place of the visit to the temple
he relates the flight into Egypt. And while direct
citations from the Scripture are more frequent in his
narrative, it is not saturated like Luke's with the
thought and language of the Old Testament. Evi-
dently the early documents or traditions upon which
Luke relies laid stress upon the keeping of the law,
and he follows them with scrupulous fidelity; while
Matthew's chief interest is in the fulfilment of the
predictions regarding the Christ. 8
The copious use of the Scripture in Luke is not due
to the evangelist but to the sources from which his
7 Luke ii. 39.
81 On the familiarity with Jewish laws and customs which Luke's
narrative displays see Machen, Princeton Theol. Rev., 1912, pp. 258
ff.
98 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
account is drawn. With the single exception of the
reference to the law in ii. 23, we are indebted for this
rich store of Old Testament citations to the pious
Jews, Mary and Zacharias and Simeon, and not to the
Gentile historian. In Matthew, on the other hand,
every reference to the Old Testament is due to the
evangelist himself, with the single exception of the
answer of the chief priests and scribes to Herod's
question where the Christ should be born. 9
Moreover references to Scripture in Luke are gen-
eral, while those in Matthew are specific. There is no
direct quotation from the Old Testament in Luke
except the reference to the law of Moses in ii. 23 ; and
the only direct allusion to the prophets is couched hi
general terms by Zacharias "Blessed be the Lord, the
God of Israel; for he hath visited and wrought re-
demption for his people, and hath raised up a horn
of salvation for us in the house of his servant David ;
as he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets that
have been of old." 10 There seems to be no good rea-
son to regard the last verse as a parenthesis, though
it is so treated in the Revised Versions, both American
and English. Matthew, on the other hand, cites four
specific prophecies which were fulfilled in the circum-
stances of Jesus' birth, and records another which was
quoted by the chief priests and scribes in answer to
the question of Herod regarding the birthplace of the
Christ.
The prophecies cited by Matthew are:
1 Isaiah vii. 14: "Behold, the virgin shall be with
child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call
his name Immanuel." " Matthew's use of the proph-
ecy raises two questions (a) What was the original
meaning of the prophecy, and how may it be applied
to Jesus? It is evident that the primary reference of
the prediction was to an event in the immediate
* Matt. ii. 5, 6. 10 Luke i. 68-70. " Matt. i. 23.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 99
future. 12 The Old Testament points unmistakably to
a contemporary event; the New Testament with equal
clearness refers the prediction to the birth of Jesus.
Obviously the words are regarded as having a double
meaning, foretelling at once a near and a remote event,
which are so related that one is the type and prophecy
of the other. The principle of double reference is
amply illustrated throughout the whole course of Mes-
sianic prophecy, which presents various f oreshadowings
of the Christ, as in Melchisedec and Moses and David
and Israel and the high priests, each of whom repre-
sents some feature of the life and character of the
Christ. What was true of them in certain particulars
is true in immeasurably higher degree of him. The
reference of this passage to the Messiah was not appre-
hended by the Jews, perhaps not even by the prophet;
but lay in the mind of the Spirit, and in the fulness
of time was brought to light in the Gospel. Now the
question arises, Is the Hebrew Almah properly ren-
dered by JtapttEvog, virgin? The word occurs nine
tunes in the Old Testament: Gen. xxiv. 43; Exod. ii. 8;
Psalms Ixviii. 25; Prov. xx. 19; Song of Sol. i. 3, vi. 8;
Isa. vii. 14; and the plural occurs twice in musical
notation I Chron. xv. 20; Ps. xlvi. 1. The American
Revision reads virgins in Song of Sol. and virgin in
Isa. vii. 14; with maiden or maidens in the margin;
maiden in Genesis, Exodus and Proverbs; damsels in
Psalm Ixviii. 25. The English Revisers agree with the
American in translating the word by virgin or virgins
only in the three passages noted above, and in placing
maiden or maidens in the margin. The LXX ren-
ders by Jtapdevog only in Genesis and Isaiah. The
word signifies properly a maiden of marriageable age
but not yet married. In every instance of its use in
the Old Testament this is the natural meaning of the
12 For the history of the interpretation of the passage see Gray,
Int. Crit. Com., on Isaiah, in loc.
100 THE -HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
term. There is another Hebrew word, bethulah, which
apparently always denotes a virgin, even in Joel i. 8
"Lament like a virgin clothed with sack cloth for the
husband of her youth" where by husband is probably
meant betrothed. 13 In Genesis xxiv. 16 the word is
further defined: "a virgin, neither had any man known
her."
The evangelist uses the word, therefore, in its ordi-
nary significance when he renders it by virgin. But
this difference appears: in Isaiah the word denotes a
woman who was a virgin when the promise was given;
in its application to Mary it denotes a woman who
was a virgin when the promise was fulfilled. The sign
promised Ahaz was not the miraculous birth of the
promised child, but his character and fortune. The
New Testament, according to its custom, takes up the
prophecy and translates it to a higher sphere. 14 In a
similar way the name Immanuel, which occurs in the
New Testament only here, is used in a lower and a
higher sense. In the mouth of the prophet it signified,
God is with us: in the mouth of the evangelist, God
with us.
2 Micah v. 2: "And thou Bethlehem, land of
Judah, Art in no wise least among the princes of
Judah: For out of thee shall come forth a governor.
Who shall be shepherd of my people Israel." 15 The
quotation follows neither the Hebrew nor the LXX
exactly, and the last clause of the original is omitted
"Whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting."
These differences do not concern us here, and it is suffi-
cient to note that the passage was commonly inter-
preted of the Messiah by the Jews.
3 Hosea xi. 1: "When Israel was a child, then I
18 See Intern. Crit. Comm., in loc.
14 On the interpretation of this verse see Johnson, Quotations of
N. T. from Q. T., p. 276; Forbes, Pres. Rev. 7, p. 700. Comm.,
in loc.
16 Matt. ii. 6.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 101
loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." ia Mat-
thew cites the last clause of the verse, and applies it
to the return of the child Jesus from Egypt to his own
country. Various textual and exegetical difficulties
of the passage are treated by Prof. Harper in his Com-
mentary. Some of them are purely gratuitous: as
when doubt is cast upon the text because elsewhere
Hosea always speaks of God as the husband and not
the father of Israel. Yet in the immediate context, as
Prof. Harper observes, God is represented as teaching
Israel to walk, taking him in his arms. If he is
depicted as performing the offices of a father, why may
he not be called father? Isaiah calls him the father, 17
the mother, 18 and the husband 18 of his people. The
LXX reads, "Out of Egypt I called my children" where
the plural conveys the collective sense of the term son.
Israel is the son of God in the Old Testament, Christ
is the Son of God in the New; and what is said of
Israel as the object of God's love and care is pre-
eminently true of him. In a similar fashion the title
Servant of Jehovah is applied by Isaiah first to the
Jewish people, then to the Messiah in whom the cov-
enant and promises are fulfilled. Here again there is
no reason to suppose that this application of the word
was in the mind of Hosea, for the Spirit often spoke
by the mouth of the prophets words far beyond their
reach or their understanding. As Egypt was to Israel
a place of safety in the infancy of the race, so was it
a refuge to the infant Jesus: and like Israel he must
leave Egypt to find in Canaan a home.
4 Jeremiah xxxi. 15: "A voice was heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her
children: and she would not be comforted, because
they are not." ao The captives of Judah and Jerusalem
were assembled by Nebuzarada, captain of the guard
16 Matt. ii. 15. 17 Isa. Ixiii. 16. 18 Isa. Ixvi. 13.
19 Isa. Ixv. 5. 20 Matt. ii. 18.
102 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
of King Nebuchadrezzar, at Ramah, 21 and Rachel is
represented as the mother of the chosen people mourn-
ing for her children about to be carried into exile. In
like manner there was mourning in Bethlehem when
the children were slaughtered by Herod. And the
comparison is particularly apt and striking because
Rachel died and was buried near Bethlehem. 22 Thus
again the fortunes of Israel are seen to prefigure the
life of the Christ.
5 When Joseph returned from Egypt after the
death of Herod, he "came and dewlt in a city called
Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled that was spoken
through the prophets, that he should be called a
Nazarene." Z3 The phrase through the prophets indi-
cates that the evangelist has no specific prediction in
mind, but rather the general trend of prophecy. Pre-
cisely what he had in view cannot be determined, for
the words occur nowhere in the Old Scripture. The
various explanations which have been proposed are set
forth in the Commentaries of Meyer and Broadus and
Allen. The most plausible are these: (1) Matthew
refers to Isaiah xi. 1 "And there shall come forth a
shoot out of the stock of Jesse, and a branch out of
his roots shall bear fruit." Branch is in the Hebrew
netzer, and from this Nazareth is perhaps derived.
Similar prophecies are found in Isa. iv. 2; Jer. xxiii. 5,
xxxiii. 15; Zech. iii. 8, vi. 12; though in all these cases
the Hebrew term is a different word of kindred signifi-
cation. (2) Nazarene is taken as a term of contempt,
and denotes the lowly and despised condition of the
Messiah, as foretold in Isa. liii. That Galilean and
Nazarene were used in this sense is evident from the
Gospels and the Acts. 24
The attempt to connect the word Nazarene with
Nazirite has nothing to recommend it, for Jesus was
21 Jer. xl. 1. a3 Matt. ii. 23.
82 Gen. xxxv. 19. z * Joha i. 46; vii. 41; Acts xxiv. 5,
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 103
not a Nazirite, nor is there reason to believe that the
name was ever applied to him.
No interpretation of the passage has won general
assent, and it presents one of the unsolved problems
of New Testament exegesis.
In citations 1, 3 and 5 it is affirmed that the corre-
spondence between the prophecy and the event was
not a mere coincidence, but was ordained of God.
The Old Testament is regarded as in its essential
nature a preparation for the coming of the Christ;
and not only the general course of his life but par-
ticular incidents of it are foreshadowed by divine direc-
tion in the unfolding of the history of Israel and the
predictions of the prophets. Bacon says that every
work treating of the history of prophecy should be of
such a nature
that every prophecy of the Scripture be sorted
with the event fulfilling the same, throughout the
ages of the world; both for the better confirmation
of faith, and for the better illumination of the
church, touching those parts of prophecies which
are yet unfulfilled; allowing nevertheless that
latitude which is agreeable and familiar unto
divine prophecies; being of the nature of their
author, with whom a thousand years are but as
one day; and therefore are not fulfilled punctually
at once, but have springing and germinant accom-
plishment -throughout many ages, though the
height or fulness of them may refer to some one
age. 85
We turn from the prophecies of Matthew to the
canticles of Luke.
(1) The song of Elisabeth. 26 There is no apparent
reason why the passage should not be treated as poetry,
and thrown into metrical form, though it is not so
26 Advancement of Learning, Book II. 26 Luke i. 42-45.
104 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
given in our English versions. In Plummer's Com-
mentary the Greek is arranged in two strophes of
four lines each. Prof . Warfield affirms that the saluta-
tion of Elisabeth
is unmistakably verse, even elaborately and
artistically verse. Beginning with short lines of
three beats of the accent each, the first strophe
closes with a longer line of four, while the second
strophe continues with this longer line, to close,
itself, with a still longer line of five tones. 27
He is speaking of the English translation, and presents
it in the form of poetry.
Elisabeth pronounces a blessing upon Mary and her
unborn child; expresses her sense of un worthiness in
receiving a visit from the mother of her Lord; tells
of the joy of the babe in her womb; and again pro-
nounces Mary blessed because of her faith.
(2) The Magnificat. 28 This is ascribed to Elisabeth
by Harnack and others. 29 The textual argument may
be briefly stated. All Greek manuscripts read Mary,
and the great preponderance of patristic testimony is
in accord with them, from the days of Tertullian 80
and Irenaeus. 81 Origin intimates that some codices
referred the words to Mary and others to Elisabeth, 33
but it is doubtful whether the passage should be
ascribed to Origen or to his translator, Jerome. Three
Latin manuscripts of the fourth, fifth and seventh
centuries read Elisabeth. 88 The external evidence is
^ "Messianic Psalms of the N. T.," Expositor, 3rd Series, Vol. II,
p. 303.
2 8 Luke i. 46-55.
39 So Moffatt, Int. Lit. N. T., p. 271.
30 On the Soul, 26.
81 Her. 3, 10, 2. In 4, 7, 1 some mss. read Elisabeth, but in view
of the other passage cited this should be regarded as an error of
the translator or scribe.
82 5th Horn, on Luke v.
**HDC & Gs., Vol. II, p. 101.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 105
thus overwhelmingly in favour of Mary, and Elisabeth
may be rejected without hesitation.
The alternative remains, however, which is accepted
by many scholars, that the original text read simply
Elirev, without specif ying the subject. 3 * Then we
are compelled to determine the speaker from the
nature of the speech. If we accept this suggestion
Mary is to be preferred on the evidence which the
words themselves present. That immediately after
addressing the mother of her Lord and pronouncing a
blessing upon her in such glowing terms, Elisabeth
should have proceeded to say of herself, "Behold, from
henceforth all, generations shall call me blessed" is
hardly credible, while the words fall naturally from
the lips of Mary. The low estate of verse 48 is not
the barrenness from which Elisabeth had been deliv-
ered, but a natural expression of humility on the part
of one who had been chosen to be the mother of the
Christ. The handmaid of verse 48 recalls Mary's use
of the word in verse 38. Elisabeth pronounced her
blessed, and she takes up the word and recognizes
that through God's grace she shall be blessed in the
eyes of all coming generations. 36
The correspondence between the Magnificat and
the Song of Hannah se is very close and intimate. 87
In Plummer's Commentary the Greek text of the LXX
and of Luke are set in parallel columns, and the like-
ness between them is strikingly apparent. It should
also be observed that Mary makes large use of the
Psalms and the Prophets. The mother of Jesus, like
every pious Jew, was acquainted with the thoughts,
the imagery, the language of the Scripture. When
84 Moffatt, Int. Lit. N. T., p. 271.
8 5 See "Hymns of first two Chapters of Luke" by J. G. Machen,
Princeton Theol. Rev., 1912.
88 1 Sam. ii.
87 The parallel passages are noted in Burton & Goodspeed's Har-
mony of the Synoptic Gospek; HDC. and Gs. Vol. II, p. 102.
106 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
her feelings were deeply moved, they clothed them-
selves in the familiar forms of Old Testament speech.
The Song is a mosaic of Old Testament passages.
Of the one hundred and two words which it contains
fifty-four are marked as quotations in Burton & Good-
speed's Harmony. Even where there is no direct cita-
tion the thought moves entirely within the sphere of
the Old Scripture. The only conspicuous difference
between the Songs of Mary and Hannah is that Mary
recognizes the greater blessing that is hers. Hannah
praises God that the reproach of her barrenness is taken
away; Mary praises him for the honour which shall
win for her the benediction of all coming generations.
When this is said, she turns at once to praise him in
general terms for his goodness to his people. There
is no direct allusion to the approaching birth, though
it is presupposed in verse 48. Mary did not yet fully
comprehend the greatness of her child who should be
born of her, or she shrank from putting into words a
conception so sublime. There is nothing indeed in
the Magnificat, except verse 48, that might not be put
with equal propriety in the mouth of Hannah. In
form it displays the characteristic features of Hebrew
poetry; it is God's mercy to his people that is cele-
brated; and his covenant is with Israel alone. Nowhere
does the thought of Mary stray beyond the Old Scrip-
ture, except in the implication of verse 48 that the
redemption long promised is at hand.
(3) The Benedictus of Zacharias 88 is also drawn
from the Scripture. Of the one hundred thirty-seven
words which it contains forty-eight are marked by
Burton & Goodspeed as direct citations, while the
thought moves throughout in the realm of Old Testa-
ment conceptions. This is shown by the use of paral-
lel columns in Plummer's Commentary. But again it
is plainly declared that the salvation long foretold by
3 8 Luke i. 68-79,
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 107
the prophets is about to be revealed. His own son
John he recognizes as the immediate forerunner of
the Christ. Here too the work of the Messiah is
limited to Israel. The phrase "Them that sit in dark-
ness and the shadow of death" S9 is borrowed from
Isaiah, and is used in the same sense, to designate
the northern part of the promised land, as is suggested
by us and our in the immediate context. In none of
these songs does the thought travel beyond the bounds
of Israel.
The divinity of the Messiah is acknowledged by
Elisabeth and Zacharias in the use of the term Lord;
but appears only by remote implication in the Song
of Mary. Both Mary and Zacharias follow that line
of Old Testament teaching which appears to associate
the coming and the triumph of the Christ as if one
followed directly upon the other. There is no con-
ception of the suffering which he must endure, of the
conflict between good and evil, prolonged for centuries
before the victory is won.
The word redemption MTQGHTIV in the Benedictus
"Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath
visited and redeemed (literally, made redemption for)
his people" 40 should not be pressed to its specific
New Testament sense, as involving a purchase price,
and therefore implying a sacrifice by which God's
people shall be delivered. Alike in the LXX and the
New Testament the thought of a ransom is often for-
gotten, and the word is used in the general sense of
release; and the same is true of the corresponding
term in Hebrew. Thus the word is employed to repre-
sent the deliverance from Egypt, 41 so that Moses is
called by Stephen a redeemer (MJTQCOTTJV);*" the re-
lease from Babylon; 43 and the escape of individuals
8 "vs. 79. *vs. 68.
41 Exod. vi. 6; Deut. ix. 6; Nek i. 10; Pa. Ixxvii. 15, 16; tea. 1. 2.
* 2 Acts vii. 35.
* a lsa. li. 11; Jer. 1. 33, 34; Lam. v. 8.
108 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
from the hands of their enemies or from their afflic-
tions.* 4 * 5 There is no reason to attribute to Zacha-
rias the thought of redemption by the death of the
Christ, a truth clearly taught indeed in the Old Scrip-
ture, but foreign to the thought of the Jews when
Jesus was born. They were looking for a conquering
king, not a suffering saviour; for release from the
dominion of Rome rather than from the bondage of
sin.
(4) The Nunc Dimittis of Simeon *" is of the same
character. Of the thirty-six words which it contains
fifteen are enclosed in quotation marks by Burton &
Goodspeed. In two respects, however, this song taken
in connexion with the words that follow represents a
marked advance: (1) in placing the Gentiles side by
side with the Jews "A light for revelation to the
Gentiles, And the glory of thy people Israel." Here
for the first time hi the narrative the breadth of the
Messiah's mission is disclosed. (2) To Simeon alone
is granted the vision of the sufferings of the Messiah.
To Mary he said, "This child is set for the falling and
the rising of many in Israel; and for a sign which
is spoken against; yea, and a sword shall pierce
through thine own soul." 4T And the conception is
the more remarkable because it found no place in
the current Jewish thought of the tune,* 8 though it
was taught with the utmost clearness by Isaiah. In
his representation of the calling of the Gentiles and
of the suffering Christ Simeon goes far beyond the
thought of his day; and shows how firmly and clearly
he had grasped those fundamental teachings of the
prophets which were apprehended neither by the Jews,
nor by Jesus' disciples until they were interpreted by
** I Sam. xiv. 45; II Sam. iv. 9; Ps. cxliv. 10.
45 See Westcott on Hebrews, add. note on ix. 5, and especially the
thorough discussion of the term by Warfield, Princeton Theol. Rev.,
1917.
* 6 Luke ii. 29-32. " vs. 34. * 8 Schurer, HJP. II, 2, 184-7.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 109
his resurrection. Three times in the brief story of
Simeon the Holy Spirit appears, "The Holy Spirit
was upon him"; "It had been revealed unto him
by the Holy Spirit, that he should not see death
before he had seen the Lord's Christ"; "He came
in the Spirit into the temple." His life was ruled
by the Spirit, his thoughts were inspired by the
Spirit.
If these canticles were found by Luke in documents
which he has incorporated with his narrative, they
form the earliest literature of the Christian church,
and show how it sprang from the bosom of Judaism.
The work of the Holy Spirit is more fully brought
to light in Luke. Twice only is he named in Mat-
thew's account of the birth, as we have seen. We
do not read of him again until John declares that
the Christ "shall baptize you in -the Holy Spirit and
in fire." *" In Luke, on the other hand, the operation
of the Spirit is conspicuous throughout the whole
course of the narrative. Zacharias is told by the angel
that the son promised him shall be filled with the Holy
Spirit. To Mary the angel declares "The Holy Spirit
shall come upon thee." Elisabeth was filled with the
Holy Spirit when Mary came to her, and so was
Zacharias. The Spirit came upon Simeon, and revealed
to him not only the coming of the Christ but his
world-wide ministry, and the suffering that lay before
him.
The angels fill a large place in Scripture as the mes-
sengers and ministers of God. Their number is vast B0
so that Bildad may well inquire, "Is there any number
of his armies?" B1 Their power is great. 53 They bore
a part in giving the law to Israel. 58 They execute
*" Matt. iii. 11.
60 Dan. yii. 10; Heb. xii. 23; Rev. 5. 11.
61 Job xxv. 3.
62 Ps. ciii. 22.
68 Acts vii. 53, 38; Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii. 2.
110 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
God's judgments upon the wicked, and comfort and
strengthen the righteous. 5 *
In the consciousness of the Protestant world today
they find scanty recognition, for the abuses of angel
worship have provoked a strong reaction. And as Jesus
taught so clearly the fatherly care and goodness of
God, and brought men into such immediate relation
to him, that there seems to remain no room for the
intermediate ministry of angels. In days when God
seemed remote and inaccessible, and his face was hid
from men, the guardian care exercised by the angels
was a cherished truth; but now that we have seen
God face to face in his Son, what need have we of
other ministry than that of Christ and the Holy
Spirit? The interest in angels among Protestants
today is almost entirely historical or dogmatic, and
we do not feel that they concern us nearly. And
though the doctrine of angels is essential to a com-
plete theology, it cannot be said that there has been
material loss in virtually eliminating them from Chris-
tian experience. We believe in them, we are no longer
conscious of their presence or their power.
Of this innumerable host two only are named in
Scripture, Gabriel and Michael, Michael is repre-
sented in Dan. x. 13 and xii. 1 as the champion of
the people of God. "In the days of tribulation which
shall come upon Israel shall Michael stand up, the
great prince who standeth for the children of thy
people." He executes the same office in the New
Testament; for Jude pictures him defending the body
of Moses against Satan, 65 and in the Apocalypse he
appears as the captain of the army of God which
wages war in heaven against the apostate and rebel-
lious angels. 66 He alone bears the title of archangel, 67
64 Matt. xiii. 41; xviii. 10; Heb. i. 14. B8 Her. xii. 7.
155 Jude vs. 9. * 7 Jude ix.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. Ill
and we naturally infer that it is his voice which shall
summon the dead to rise from their graves and pre-
sent themselves before the judgment seat of God. BS
The common belief that Gabriel is meant has no war-
rant in Scripture, though it is in accord with Jewish
tradition.
Gabriel too is sent to Daniel, but he comes not like
Michael to battle, but to interpret the visions that
perplex the prophet. 69 He is the angel of revelation
as Michael is the angel of judgement. The distinction
is plainly drawn both in the Old Testament and in
the New. It is Gabriel who announces to Zacharias
the birth of John, and to Mary the birth of Jesus; it
is he also, we presume, though he is not named, who
appears three times in a dream to Joseph, and who
brought the shepherds good tidings of great joy on
the plains of Bethlehem. In Matthew he appears
always in a dream, never in Luke.
Angels often ministered to Jesus during his earthly
life. Continually they ascended and descended upon
him; 60 they waited upon him in the wilderness after
his temptation. 81 And if the verse which affirms that
an angel from heaven strengthened him in Gethse-
mane has no place in the original text of Luke xxii. 43,
yet we may believe that it preserves an early and
trustworthy tradition. Westcott and Hort reject
verses 43 and 44, but affirm that "These verses and
the first sentence of xxiii. 34 ; 62 may be safely called
the most precious among the remains of this evangelic
tradition, which were rescued from oblivion by the
scribes of the second century. 98 An angel rolled away
the stone from the door of Joseph's sepulchre; within
68 1 Thess. iv. 16. " John i. 51; Matt. xxvi. 53.
89 Dan. viii. 16; ix. 21. 61 Matt. iv. 11.
' 2 "And Jesus said, Father, forgive them ; for they know not
what they do."
83 Notes on Sel. Readings, p. 67.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
the tomb the women and a little later Mary Magdalene
had a vision of angels. 64
Three times Scripture speaks of the joy of the angels:
When the work of creation was finished, "the morn-
ing stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted
for joy"; 65 when Jesus was born in Bethlehem the
choir of angels raised the chorus of exultant praise;
when a penitent sinner turns to God "there is joy in
the presence of the angels of God." a8
Gabriel thus performs a preliminary and preparatory
work in connexion with the birth of Jesus, announcing
it to Mary and to Joseph, and proclaiming it when it
has taken place.
The actual conception was the work of the Holy
Spirit alone without human or celestial agent. The
birth of Isaac, of John the Baptist, were supernatural
in that they transcended the ordinary course of nature;
the birth of Jesus was divine, for he was begotten by
the immediate operation of the Spirit of God.
Although the Spirit assumed the place of the earthly
father, the Scripture never calls him the father of
Jesus, for the eternal generation of the Son is always
kept in view. Turrettin says that the Spirit was not
the Father of Jesus because he was not generated of
the substance of the Spirit, but by his creative power;
nor did the Spirit impart to him a nature like his own."
The Gospel of the Hebrews, dating from the second
century, reports Jesus as saying, "Just now, my
mother, the Holy Spirit, took me by one of my hairs
and bore me away to the great mountain, Thabor."
This singular tradition is apparently of Hebrew origin,
for Spirit, ruach, is feminine in Hebrew. Origeri's
explanation is as curious as the passage itself: "If
he who does the will of the Father in heaven is Christ's
mother and sister and brother, and if the name of
84 Matt, xxviii. 2; John xx. 11. ae Luke xv. 10.
66 Job xxxviii. 7. 87 Theol. Loc. XIII Qn. 11, 4, 5.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 113
brother of Christ may be applied, not only to the race
of men, but to beings of diviner rank than they, then
there is nothing absurd in the Holy Spirit's being his
mother, every one being his mother who does the will
of the Father in heaven." 68 The same Gospel referring
to the baptism of Jesus tells us that "When the Lord
had come up out of the water the Holy Spirit with
full stream came down and rested upon him, and said
to him, My son, in all the prophets I was waiting for
thee, that thou shouldest come, and I might rest in
thee. For thou art my rest; thou art my first-born
son, who reignest forever." 6t>
The birth of Ishmael 70 and of Samson 71 was fore-
told by an angel, and the birth of Isaac was announced
to Abraham by God himself; in what way we are not
told. 72 Gabriel foretells the birth of John and of
Jesus. In Matthew he speaks to Joseph only, affirm-
ing that Mary's conception was by the Holy Spirit,
and that the son whom she is about to bear shall be
called Jesus, because he shall save his people from
their sins. Matthew sees in the promise the fulfilment
of Isaiah's prophecy, and applies to Jesus the name
Immanuel. God alone is the saviour of his people,
and he only may be called Jesus who is also called
Immanuel.
Luke records the annunciation to Mary. She was
amazed and troubled, yet the words were gracious:
"Hail, thou that are highly favoured, the Lord is with
thee." For highly favoured the margin of the Revised
Version reads, endued with grace! But the words
that follow, "Thou hast found favour with God," and
the whole tone of the passage are decisive in favour
of the reading of the text. It is not Mary's worthiness
but God's grace that is magnified. "The Lord is with
88 Com. on John, Bk. II, 6.
88 Quoted in Westcott Int. Study Gs., p. 456. See Turrettin,
Theol. Locus XIII Qn 11.
70 Gen. xvi. 10. 71 Judg. xiii. 3. 7a Gen. xvii. 15.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
thee," that was Mary's Immanuel. She was troubled,
for she knew that the angel's visit portended some new
and strange experience of which she might deem her-
self incapable or unworthy. All those whom God calls
in extraordinary ways to extraordinary service are dis-
turbed and alarmed. As Mary was perturbed by the
news of Jesus' birth, so was another Mary by the
tidings of his resurrection. 73 Man is never at ease in
presence of the supernatural, the divine. Her agita-
tion and perplexity were heightened by the words that
followed: "Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favour
with God. And behold thou shalt conceive in thy
womb and bring forth a son." The name that the
child shall bear, Jesus, is given, but it is not inter-
preted as in Matthew. For he is not now represented
as a saviour but as a king: "He shall be great, and
shall be called the Son of the Most High: and the
Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father
David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob
forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end."
The promise is confined to Israel, and again it is mani-
fest how thoroughly Jewish are the authorities upon
which Luke depends. The prediction is based upon
God's covenant with David, 7 * but the promise then
given to the house of David here becomes personal
he shall reign. For he shall be not only a king, but a
divine king, the Son of the Most High. This title is
frequently ascribed to God in the Old Testament,
especially in the Psalms and Daniel, but is rarely em-
ployed in the New. In the Gospels it is confined to
Luke 7B with the exception of the cry of the demoniac
in Mark v. 7. Jesus uses it only once "Ye shall be
sons of the Most High. 79 Beyond the Gospels it is
found only in the Acts, 77 and in Heb. vii. 1.
73 Matt, xviii. 5, 8. 7 " Luke vi. 35.
74 II Sam. vii. 13-16. " Acts vii. 48; xvi. 17.
75 Luke i. 32, 35, 76; vi. 35.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 115
Mary's first thought was not of the honour that was
about to befall her, nor of the greatness of the son
whom she should bear; but in sheer bewilderment she
asks, "How shall this be?" For she saw that this child
should not be born in the ordinary course of wedlock.
Abraham was incredulous when Isaac was promised,
and Zacharias when the birth of John was foretold.
The question of Mary sprang not from unbelief or
distrust, but from pure perplexity, as Nicodemus in-
quired about the new birth. How could she under-
stand without further revelation? To this birth there
was no parallel in all the history of mankind. As
soon as the manner of the conception was made known
to her, she replied in humility and faith, "Be it unto
me according to thy word." 78
The mode of the conception is disclosed as clearly
as it could be expressed in human speech. "The Holy
Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the
Most High shall overshadow thee." The Holy Spirit
revealed in the Old Scripture as the creative energy
of God shall accomplish in her the mystery of the
incarnation. This is the way in which the Word
became flesh, by the immediate operation of the Spirit
of God. "The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee"
the phrase is drawn from the Old Testament, where
it is often used. The Spirit came upon judges and
kings and prophets, taking possession of them, endow-
ing them with supernatural gifts of wisdom and
strength, and working through them his own gracious
purposes. God put his Spirit upon men. 78 In a strik-
ing figure the Spirit is said to have clothed himself
with Gideon. 80 According to the Hebrew and the
LXX the Spirit leaped upon Samson 81 and upon
Saul. 82 The word expresses the forcible, even violent,
78 Luke i. 38. 81 Judg. xiv. 6, 19; xiv. 14.
79 Num. xi. 25. 82 1 Sam. x. 10.
80 Judg. vi. 34.
116 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
overpowering and taking possession of men. Isaiah
prophesied that the Spirit should rest upon the
Christ. 88 The Spirit entered into Ezekiel," fell upon
him; 85 Joel foretold that the Spirit should be poured
out on all the people of Israel. 86 The coming of the
Spirit is always significant of some new and extraor-
dinary experience and endowment.
After the Hebrew manner this clause is followed by
another which serves to define it: "The power of the
Most High shall overshadow thee." The term over-
shadow suggests the luminous cloud, representing the
divine glory, which lead the children of Israel through
the wilderness; 87 and abode upon Mt. Sinai, where
Moses communed with God 8S and upon the taber-
nacle. 89 This the rabbis named the Shekinah, the
visible and glorious manifestation of the presence of
Jehovah with his people. 80 Upon Jesus the divine
glory rested throughout his earthly life. "The Word
became flesh and tabernacled among us, and we beheld
his glory." 91 His body was a temple, 92 and wher-
ever God establishes his temple there his glory abides.
When Jesus was transfigured a bright cloud over-
shadowed him. 93 When he parted from his disciples
on Mount Olivet, "A cloud received him out of their
sight." "*
As the conception is of God the child is divine.
The Spirit is the power of the Most High by whom
the Son of the Most High shall be begotten. The
Authorized Version followed substantially by the
American Revisers, reads, "That holy thing which
8S Isa. xi. 2. 8e Joel ii. 29; c/. Isa. xliv. 3.
8 *Ezek. iii. 24. 8T Exod. xiii. 21, 22; vi. 10.
85 Ezek. xi. 5. 88 Exod. xxiv. 16.
89 Exod. 3d. 34, 38; Num. ix. 15, 16.
60 See Sanday & Headlam on Rom. iii. 23 and ix. 4. Art.
"Shekinah," HBD.
81 John i. 14. 9S Matt. xvii. 5.
98 John ii. 21. "*Actsi. 9.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 117
shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." 8B
The English Revisers render: "That which is to be
born shall be called holy, the Son of God"; and this
is given in the margin of the American Revision. Both
renderings are grammatically tenable and appropri-
ate, but it is better to take holy as a predicate, because
in this way the reference to the law of Moses is more
clearly brought out. This does not of course exhaust
the meaning in the case of Jesus, but it is noted by
the evangelist and should not be overlooked. "They
brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the
Lord, as it is written in the law of the Lord, Every
male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to
the Lord" " And Luke follows the phraseology
of the law as if he had this in view. The law
reads, "Sanctify unto me all the first-born, what-
soever openeth the womb among the children of Israel,
both of man and of beast: it is mine." 87 Luke reads
shall be called holy, as though to illustrate how per-
fectly the law was fulfilled in Jesus. "Every male
that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the
Lord" "That which is to be born shall be called
holy." So exact is the correspondence that this read-
ing should by all means be preferred. As man Jesus
was holy in that he was set apart, consecrated by
obedience to the commandment; as Son of God, con-
ceived by the Holy Spirit, he partakes of the holiness
of God.
He shall be called the Son of God. The term is of
frequent occurrence in the scripture, and is used in
various senses in both singular and plural.
In the Old Testament it is applied OB :
86 Luke i. 35.
88 Luke ii. 22, 23. There is no reason to make of this a paren-
thesis.
9T Exod. xiii. 2, 12; Num. viii. 17.
88 Stevens Theol. N, T., Ch. V; Burton on Galatians 404-17.
HBD. IV 570.
118 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
(a) to the angels. 88 In Gen. vi. 2 some codices of
the LXX read angels for sons of God. And this was
the common interpretation of the phrase among both
Jewish and Christian writers until the time of Augus-
tine, who interpreted sons of God to signify the godly
race of Seth, while the daughters of men were of the
family of Cain. In this he was anticipated by Julius
Africanus. 100 The earlier interpretation is retained by
most modern scholars. 101 This is then the earliest
meaning attached to the word.
When the term is used of angels, they are always
called sons of Elohim, the Creator, never sons of
Jehovah, the God of the covenant.
(b) to the chosen people. Collectively they are
termed the son of God; 102 and individual members of
the theocracy are called his sons. 103 The ground of
the relation is God's choice of Israel to be a people
peculiar to himself, and the special love and care which
he manifested toward them. It was essentially, there-
fore, a national relation. Men were sons of God
as they were members of the commonwealth of
Israel. 10 *
(c) to the king of Israel, as the head and represen-
tative of the covenant people, particularly David, 108
and to Solomon. 109
(d) to the Messiah, in whom the covenant and
99 Job i. 6; ii. 1; xxxviii. 7; Ps. xxix. 1; Ixxxix. 7; Ixxxii. 6 ''sons
of the Most High."
100 Ante-Nicene Fas., VI, p. 131; Routh, Rel Sac., ii, 241.
101 Delitzsch, Dillmann, Driver, Skinner. For the later view see
Keil and Delitzsch, and Prof. W. H. Green, Pres. and Ref. Rev.,
Vol. V, 654. Prof. R. D. Wilson says, "Sons of God is used in
Gen. vi. 2 to denote the angels" (Princeton Theol. Rev., 1923, p.
564). I am glad to find my own opinion confirmed by such high
authority.
108 Exod. iv. 22, 23; Jer. xxxi. 9, 20.
108 Deut. xiv. 1; Isa. i. 2, 4; xxx. 1; xliii. 6; Ixiii. 16; Jer. iii. 14,
22; Ezek. xvi. 21; Mai. i. 6; ii. 10.
10 * Riehm, Mess. Prey., p. 69.
105 Ps. Ixxxix. 20, 26, 27.
108 II Sam. vii. 14; I Chron. xxii. 9, 10.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 119
promises are fulfilled. 107 "Jehovah said unto me,
Thou art my son; this day have I begotten
thee." 108 109 The assurance given to David of an
eternal kingdom requires for its fulfilment a king ever-
living and divine.
In the New Testament also the word is used in
different senses.
(a) Adam is termed the son of God, 110 since he was
created by God in his own image. There is a sense
in which all men are by nature, like Adam, sons of
God, because he has imparted to them a nature kin-
dred to his own, which is the essential note of father-
hood. Paul cites and approves the words of the
heathen poet, "For we are also his offspring." lia This
is the truth which underlies the incarnation and in-
spires the appeal which the Gospel makes to men, and
is vividly illustrated in the parable of the Prodigal
Son. 112
But though this natural relation is recognized in
the New Testament, it is so completely overshadowed
by the gracious relation into which God enters with
men through Christ that after the fall no man is
termed directly a son of God unless he has been re-
newed by the Spirit of God. Augustine in a striking
passage shows how the name may at the same time
be granted and denied to men, as the Jews were and
were not the children of Abraham. 118 "* They are
children of God by origin, but not by character; have
the nature but not the spirit of sons.
107 Dalmann, Words of Jesus, 268, ff; Westcott, Eps. of John, 27-
34; Sanday & Headlam on Rom. i. 4.
108 Ps. ii. 7, 12.
109 Briggs, in loc.
110 Luke iii. 38.
111 Acts xvii. 28.
112 Salmond, "Homiletie Aspects Fatherhood of God," Pres. & Ref.
Rev., Vol. 4. Burton on Gal. p. 390. Cf. my Teaching of the Gospel
of John, p. 70.
113 John viii. 37,39.
114 Tract, on John. xlji. 10-15.
120 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
(b) Jesus is called pre-eminently the Son of God. 118
Like Adam, he was a son because he entered human
life through the immediate act of the Almighty; 118
but he did not derive his sonship from the incarnation.
His birth was simply the manifestation of the Eternal
Son.
In the Synoptic Gospels the title is ordinarily equiv-
alent to the Messiah, the head and representative of
the people to whom the name was first given; and
the term first born which belongs to Israel in the
earlier Scripture is transferred to Jesus. But the word
sometimes conveys a profounder meaning, and desig-
nates him as the Son of God in a sense transcendent
and unique, which distinguishes him from mankind,
gives him a place beside the Most High. Between
these senses of the term it is at times difficult to dis-
tinguish; and when the term is evidently employed
in a Messianic significance, we must inquire whether
the speaker or writer conceived of the Messiah as
divine. >
The title was given to Jesus by evil spirits. 117 In
Mark i. 34 and Luke iv. 41 Son of God and Christ are
convertible terms; by his disciples when he calmed the
storm; 118 by the centurion who stood beside the
cross 119 where Luke has "a righteous man." lao Either
the centurion used both phrases, or Luke regarded the
terms as equivalent. In none of these instances does
the thought appear to go beyond the conception of
the Messiah which prevailed among the Jews. They
seem to have commonly thought of him as a descend-
116 List of passages in Westcott, Introd. to Study of Gospels, 145,
note 4. Warfield, Lord of Glory: Synoptic use of the term, p. 137,
ff. John's use of term, p. 195, ff. Dalmann, Words of Jesus, p. 268-
89. Schiirer, HJP. II, 2, p. 159, 5.
116 Luke i. 35.
117 Matt. viii. 29; Mark iii. 11, v. 7; Luke viii. 28.
118 Matt. xiv. 33.
119 Matt, xxvii. 54; Mark xv. 39.
120 Luke xxiii. 47.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II.
ant of David who should establish an earthly kingdom
of surpassing power and glory. He was not divine,
but enjoyed the special favour of God, and was en-
dowed with supernatural powers. 121
There are other instances in which the higher sense
of the title is probable, is even required. Gabriel tells
Mary that Jesus shall be called the Son of the Most
High, the Son of God, and also the Son of David.
Thus the contrast is drawn before his birth which
Paul presents in Rom. i. 3, 4: "born of the seed of
David according to the flesh, who was declared to be
the Son of God with power, according to the spirit
of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead." Both
Luke and Paul attest at once the human and the divine
nature of Jesus, though Luke refers the title Son of
God to his miraculous birth and Paul to his resurrec-
tion.
At his baptism a voice from heaven declared, "This
is my beloved son" 12a or "Thou art my beloved
Son." 1Z3 Satan caught up the word when he tempted
Jesus in the wilderness. 12 * Again the heavenly voice
was heard when Jesus was transfigured; "This is my
beloved Son," 126 or as Luke reads, "My Son, my
chosen." 128
There are three moments to each of which are
applied with variations the words of Psalm ii. 7,
"Thou art my Son: this day have I begotten
thee." They are: (1) the Baptism; 127 (2) the
Transfiguration; 128 (3) the Resurrection. 139 . . .
The moments in question are so many steps in
the passage through an earthly life of One who
came forth from God and returned to God, not
* '
121 Machen, Origin Paul's Religion, 181 ff.
122 Matt. Hi. 17. 13e Luke ix. 35.
128 Mark i. 11; Luke iii. 21. 12T Mark i. 11.
124 Matt. iv. 3, 6; Luke iv. 3, 9. v128 Mark ix. 7.
125 Matt. xvii. 5; Mark ix. 7. 128 Acts xiii. 33.
122 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
stages in the gradual deification of one who began
his career as
In the light of what has just been said we may prefix
to this list of moments another, the incarnation.
The Revised Version renders Mark i. 1, "The begin-
ning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God,"
but the text is uncertain, and, as is indicated in a
marginal note, some ancient authorities omit the final
clause. So evenly balanced is the evidence that West-
cott and Hort, while they incline to regard the words
as an early interpolation, yet add that neither reading
can be safely rejected. 181 If the words are retained
the whole character of the Gospel will not only war-
rant but constrain us to interpret them in the highest
sense.
We cannot determine precisely the bounds of Peter's
thought when he made his great confession at Caesarea
Philippi: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God;" lsa where Mark has simply the Christ, 138 and
Luke reads the Christ of God. 184 It is true that Jesus
discovers in his words a special revelation from God:
"Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but
my Father who is in heaven" ; and that this is not the
first occasion on which his Messiahship had been
acknowledged by his disciples. 135 But his manner of
life and his teaching had so contravened their concep-
tions of the Messianic king that they might easily
begin, like John the Baptist in his prison, to waver
in their minds, and question whether he were indeed
the Christ; so that a divine revelation was required
to confirm and establish their faith. The utmost that
we may affirm is that while Peter's words in them-
selves are capable of a higher meaning, yet in view
130 Sanday & Headlam on Rom. i. 4.
131 Notes on Selected Readings, p. 23.
132 Matt. xvi. 16. I3i Luke ix. 21.
1 8 * Mark viii. 30. 1SB John i. 41, 49 ; Matt. xiv. 43.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 123
of the form in which they are recorded by Mark and
Luke, it is probable that his thought did not extend
beyond the Messianic significance of the term. 136
When we turn to the Gospel of John we find the
same distinction in the meaning of the phrase. On
the lips of Nathaniel: "Rabbi, thou art the Son of
God; thou art the king of Israel," 137 and of Martha:
"I have believed that thou art the Christ, the Son of
God," 138 it seems to be used in the ordinary Messianic
sense. John the Baptist evidently gives to it the high-
est possible significance, for he ascribes to Jesus divine
attributes, pre-existence, the taking away of sin, and
baptizing with the Holy Spirit. 139 The evangelist
himself expressly distinguishes Jesus from men, as the
only begotten Son. 140 141 The reading only begotten
God in i. 18 is too precarious to sustain an argument
If only begotten Son is retained, the transcendental
sense of the term again appears. 1 * 2 The Gospel was
written "that ye may believe that Jesus is Christ, the
son of God ; and that believing ye may have life in his
name." lta He is thus presented as the object of faith
and the source of eternal life. In Peter's confession 14 *
the better reading is "The Holy One of God."
It is apparent from this review that the statement
of Dalman that "Jesus was not called the Son of God
by any contemporary" (Words of Jesus, p. 275) can-
not be maintained without doing violence to the text
of the Gospels.
Jesus rarely applied the title to himself, never in
18 * See the judicious note of Broadus on Matt. xvi. 16.
137 John i. 49.
188 John xi. 27.
139 John i. 29,30, 33,34.
140 John i. 14, cf. I John iy. 9.
141 See Westcott, Eps. of John, p. 162.
142 For the reading fteog see W. & H. Notes on Select Readings;
Hort, Two Dissertations; Warfield, Textual Criticism, N. T., p. 189.
For uldg see Godet in loc., and arts, by Ezra Abbot there cited.
143 John xx. 32, cf. I John v. 1 and iv. 15.
1 4 * Peter vi. 69.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
the Synoptic Gospels. But he spoke of the Father
and the Son in a manner which is precisely equivalent,
representing himself in the clearest and most unequiv-
ocal manner as the Son of God, even though he does
not use the exact term. "All things have been deliv-
ered unto me of my Father: and no one knoweth the
Son save the Father; neither doth any know the
Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son
willeth to reveal him." 14B Here he claims virtual
equality in knowledge and in power with the Father,
whom he had just addressed as Lord of heaven and
earth. Speaking of his final coming he says, "But
of that day or that hour knoweth no one, not even
the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the
Father." "" There is some doubt whether the words
neither the Son are properly retained in the parallel
passage, Matt. xxiv. 36, but Westcott and Hort hold
that "the documentary evidence in their favor is over-
whelming" (Notes on Select Readings, p. 18). Here
Jesus exalts himself as the Son above men and angels;
and as the angels are uniformly represented in Scrip-
ture as the highest of all creatures he exalts himself
above the whole creation, even while in this particular
he confesses his inferiority to his Father. To the
question how he is at once above the created universe
yet lower than God, the only answer is furnished by
the union of the divine and human natures in the
person of the incarnate Son. In the parable of the
wicked husbandman 14T he represents himself in dis-
tinction from the servants as the Son, the only and
beloved Son of the owner of the vineyard. The. vine-
yard is Israel, the owner is God, and the Son is sharply
distinguished from lawgivers, rulers and prophets, as
in Heb. i. 1, 2. In the baptismal formula he associates
Father, Son and Spirit, and in connexion with it
146 Matt. xi. 27; Luke x. 22.
146 Mark xiii. 32.
147 Matt. xxi. 33-35; Mark xii. 1-12; Luke xx. 9-19.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH H. 125
asserts that all authority hath been given unto him
in heaven and on earth, and that he will be with his
disciples always, even unto the end of the world, the
consummation of the age. 1 * 8 There is no reason to
doubt that these are the words of Jesus, for they con-
tain nothing essentially new, but simply bring together
various elements of his previous teaching. The doc-
trine of the Trinity which here finds clear expression
underlies his whole representation of the divine nature.
Moreover, while he nowhere in the Synoptic Gos-
pels directly appropriates the title Son of God, yet he
accepted it from others. When the high priest adjured
him by the living God "that thou tell us whether
thou be the Christ, the Son of God," 149 or as Mark
has it, "Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" 1BO
he answered, "Thou hast said," or as Mark reads, "I
am." And when in the course of his trial before the
Sanhedrin they all said, "Art thou then the Son of
God?", he replied, "Ye say that I am." This they
understood to be an affirmative answer to their ques-
tion, for they cried, "What further need have we of
witness? For we ourselves have heard from his own
mouth." IBI As he hung upon the cross they that
passed by railed on him, crying, "If. thou art the Son
of God, come down from the cross." And the rulers
mocked him, saying, "He trusteth on God; let him
deliver him now, if he desireth him; for he said, I
am the Son of God." 1B2
It must also be observed that Jesus always distin-
guishes himself from other men in his relation to God.
He taught his disciples to say "Our Father," but he
always said "My Father." To Mary Magdelene he
said, "I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and
my God and your God." 1Ba God is not his Father
in the same sense that he is the Father of men. He
148 Matt, xxviii. 18, 20. 1B1 Luke xii. 70, 71.
149 Matt. xxvi. 63. lsa Matt, xxvii. 40, 43.
160 Mark xiv. 61. 188 John xx. 17.
126 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
is Son of God by nature, they become sons of God by
grace through him. And though he taught his disciples
to pray Our Father who art in heaven, he never
addressed God in that way, so far as the record indi-
cates; for the added clause suggests the thought of
elevation and remoteness which is not appropriate
upon the lips of him who is always in the bosom of
the Father. 164
In the Fourth Gospel Jesus several times called him-
self the Son of God. To Nicodemus he spoke of
himself as the only begotten Son. 165 There is no
sufficient reason to ascribe these words to the evan-
gelist, for the flow of thought is unbroken, and the
arguments adduced by Westcott in favour of such
reference are drawn mainly from certain peculiarities
of expression which may be otherwise explained, as
Godet has well shown. In the picture of the general
resurrection in v. 25-29 he declares that the dead shall
hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear
shall live. The question that he addressed to the
blind man whom he had healed, 156 which reads in the
Authorized and Revised Versions, "Dost thou believe
on the Son of God?" should rather be rendered in
accordance with the decided weight of manuscript
authority as in the margin of the Revised Version,
"Dost thou believe on the Son of man?" When the
Jews charged him with blasphemy because he said,
"I, and the Father are one," and thereby being a man
made himself God, he answered them in the words of
Ps, Ixxxii. 6: "I said, ye are gods." If this name is
given to earthly rulers as representatives of the Al-
mighty, how can it be denied to him. whom the Father
hath sanctified and sent into the world? 1BT The
sequence of the words does not of itself imply that
his sanctification or consecration was exceptional, for
15 * John i. 18. 1B6 John ix. 35.
165 John iii. 16. 1ST John x. 34-36.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II.
Jeremiah too was sanctified before his birth, 158 and so
was John the Baptist ls9 and Paul. 100 The consecra-
tion indeed must always precede the sending. But in
view of the uniform teaching of the Gospel regarding
his pre-existence there is no reason to doubt that he
has in mind here his consecration in the counsels of
eternity. In xi. 4 he tells his disciples that the sick-
ness of Lazarus "Is not unto death, but for the glory
of God that the Son of God may be glorified thereby."
The glory of the Father and the glory of the Son are
one.
Thus it appears that only in four instances, which
are recorded in John alone, did Jesus apply to himself
directly the title Son of God. But constantly through-
out the Fourth Gospel he speaks of himself as the Son
and of God as his Father. The Jews recognized that
by this mode of speech he claimed equality with God,
and accused him therefore of blasphemy. 161 To Pilate
they said, "We have a law, and by that law he ought
to die, because he made himself the Son of God." 18a
It is evident that in the Gospel of John the term Son,
or Son of God, upon the lips of Jesus bears not merely
a Messianic sense, but expresses a relation of intimacy
and affection, a community of nature which he had
with the Father before the world was. 188 He was not
the Son because he was the Messiah, he was the Mes-
siah because he was the Son. Ordinarily it is the
personal and not the official relation that he has in
mind.
The question arises here whether Son of God was
commonly regarded by the Jews in the time of Jesus
as a Messianic title. Extra-canonical literature throws
little light upon the matter, and the only trustworthy
evidence that we possess is derived from the New
188 Jer. i. 5. iai John v. 25.
18 "Luke i. 15. l92 John xix. 7.
160 Gal. i. 15. 188 Johnxvii. 5.
128 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Testament. The natural conclusion to be drawn from
the passages cited is that the title was recognized as
a designation of the Messiah when it was employed
by Jesus, but was not in common use at the time.
This would naturally follow from the strict monotheism
of the Jews. The Messiah seems to have been regarded
as a man supernaturally endowed for his high mission,
but in no sense divine. 164
(d) The term is applied to those who through faith
in Christ are born again of the Spirit; 186 imitate the
character and conduct of God. 166 "Be ye therefore
imitators of God, as beloved children" and do the will
of God. 167 John reserves 59ia for Jesus alone, and
calls mentExva, while Paul applies both terms to men.
Thus the Holy Spirit prepares the way for the com-
ing of Christ through the ministry of John the Baptist,
who was filled with the Spirit even from his mother's
womb ; conceived him in the womb of the virgin Mary,
and equipped him for the ministry to which he was
appointed of God. It is not said of him indeed, as of
John the Baptist, that he was filled with the Spirit,
nor is the Spirit said to have descended upon him until
his baptism. Upon Elisabeth and Zacharias, upon
Simeon and Anna, the Spirit came; upon Jesus the
Spirit always abode according to the prophecy of
Isaiah, 188 as is implied in the statement that the grace
of God was upon him. 169
The question remains whether the representation
of the Holy Spirit in the story of the infancy goes
beyond the teaching of the Old Testament. Do Mat-
thew and Luke throw new light upon the personality
of the Spirit? The term Spirit as employed by Mat-
thew may signify simply the creative power of God,
16 *Schiirer, HJP. II, 2, p. 160 ff. Edersheim, Lije of Christ I
p. 171.
165 John i. 13; iii. 3.
198 Matt. v. 9, 44, 45; cj. Ephes. v. 1.
197 Mark iii. 35. 188 Isa. xi. 2; ki. 1. 169 Luke ii. 40.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH II. 129
as in the Old Testament, and in this sense no doubt
Joseph understood it. Every phrase that Luke em-
ploys to denote the work of the Spirit is used in a
similar sense in the Old Scripture. Elisabeth and
Zacharias and John the Baptist were filled with the
Spirit; 170 so was Bezalel. 171 The Spirit came upon
Mary and Simeon; he came upon judges and kings
and prophets under the old economy. 172 The Spirit
disclosed to Simeon the coming of the Christ; to
Balaam he unveiled the future and gave him to see
the star that shall come out of Jacob, and the sceptre
that shall rise out of Israel. 173 In the Spirit Simeon
came into the Temple; by the Spirit Ezekiel was
brought into the Temple, 174 into the inner court of
the Temple. 175 Point by point the New Testament
representation of the Spirit answers to the Old. There
is nothing of course in the early record which corre-
sponds to the work of the Spirit in the conception of
Jesus, but in Luke i. 35 "the Holy Spirit shall come
upon thee" is parallel with "the power of the Most
High shall overshadow thee." The Holy Spirit and
the power of the Most High, if no further light were
given us, would readily be taken as equivalent terms.
In the same way we read that John the Baptist was
filled with the Holy Spirit and that the hand of the
Lord was with him.
It cannot be said therefore that the Gospel narra-
tives of the birth when taken alone lead us beyond the
sphere of Old Testament thought. The personality of
the Spirit was not yet clearly revealed, and was prob-
ably not apprehended by those in whom he wrought.
The truth trembles upon the verge of disclosure, but
is not plainly declared. Nothing is ascribed to him
that may not be referred simply to the power of God.
170 On this phrase see Plummer on Luke i. 15.
171 Exod. xxxi. 3; xxxv. 31.
178 Judg. vi. 31; I Sam. xi. 6; Ezek. xi. 5.
178 Num. xxiv. 17. 174 Ezek. xi. 1. 17B Ezek. xliii. 5.
ISO THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Luke is true to the traditions from which his narra-
tive is drawn, and records the facts as they appeared
to those by whom they were attested. When the per-
sonality of the Spirit is disclosed by Jesus it is seen
to be in harmony with all earlier representations
whether in the Old Scripture or the New. As it is
the peculiar office of the Spirit under the new dispen-
sation to reveal and apply to men the atoning work
of the Son, he was not given in the full sense of the
term, was not fully imparted or fully made known to
men, until Jesus was glorified. 179 Throughout the
Scripture the revelation of the Spirit follows the reve-
lation of the Son.
178 John vii. 39.
CHAPTER IV
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS
The Holy Spirit in the life of Jesus and the Holy
Spirit in the teaching of Jesus are themes which though
closely related are yet distinct, and require separate
consideration. And a distinction must also be drawn
between the record of the Synoptic Gospels and the
record of the Fourth Gospel; not because the Fourth
Gospel is less trustworthy and authoritative, but be-
cause of the peculiar form in which the narrative is
cast. We have no hesitation in accepting it as the work
of John the son of Zebedee, bosom friend of Jesus, 1
and we believe that the style of mingled majesty and
grace which marks this Gospel was caught from the
lips of the Master. The earlier evangelists report,
John interprets; and we may call the Gospel an inter-
pretation of the life and teaching of Jesus in the light
of more than half a century of Christian history and
experience. Matthew, Mark, and Luke present no
such exposition of the words and even the thoughts
of Jesus as is contained in John ii. 21, 23-25; vii. 39;
xii. 33, except in Mark vii. 19, which will presently
engage our attention.
The theme of the present chapter is the place of
the Holy Spirit in the life of Jesus according to the
Synoptic Gospels, and the chapter following will treat
of the place of the Spirit in the life of Jesus according
to John.
1 The reasons for this judgement are given in my articles on "The
Authorship of the Fourth Gospel," Princeton Theol. Ray., July, 1912,
and Jan., 1913.
131 ,
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
I indeed baptize
you in water unto
repentance; but he
that cometh after
me is mightier than
I, whose shoes I
am not worthy to
bear: he shall bap-
tize you in the
Holy Spirit and in
fire.
Matt. iii. 11.
And he preached,
saying, There com-
eth after me he
that is mightier
than I, the latchet
of whose shoes I
am not worthy to
stoop down and
unloose. I bap-
tized you in water;
but he shall baptize
you in the Holy
Spirit.
Mark i. 7, 8.
References to the place and work of the Spirit in
the life of Jesus are not numerous in the earlier Gos-
pels, and are all examined below, except those relat-
ing to his birth, which have already been considered. 2
I. THE WITNESS OF JOHN THE BAPTIST
And as the people were
in expectation, and all
men reasoned in their
hearts concerning John,
whether haply he were
the Christ; John an-
swered saying unto them
all, I indeed baptize you
with water; but there
cometh he that is might-
ier than I, the latchet of
whose shoes I am not
worthy to unloose: he
shall baptize you in the
Holy Spirit and in fire:
whose fan is in his hand,
thoroughly to cleanse his
threshing-floor, and to
gather the wheat into the
garner; but the chaff he
will burn up with un-
quenchable fire.
Luke iii. 15-17.
It may be noted at the beginning of our study that
no distinction can be drawn between the use of the
term Holy Spirit with and without the article. Upon
Mark i. 8 Swete remarks that "mm^a ayiov j g the Holy
Spirit in his operations; contrast TO 3tv. TO ay-, 8 the
Holy Spirit regarded as a Divine Person." But
obviously Holy Spirit in the Greek as in the English
is a proper name, and may be used indifferently
with or without the article, like ^eos and Kv^iog and
XQUJTOC.* Meyer says correctly that in the New Testa-
ment "Jtvjtfua aytov with and without the article is
2 On the New Testament use of nveupia see Burton on Galatians,
pp. 486-92, and literature there cited.
8 Mark vs. 29.
* Robertson's Grammar Greek N. T., p. 761, 794-5. Ellicott on
Gal v. 5. Meyer on Gal. v. 16. Swete, Holy Spirit in N. T., note P.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I.
ever the Holy Spirit in the ordinary Biblical dogmatic
sense." B
John contrasts his baptism with the baptism which
Jesus shall administer. One symbolizes the cleansing
and renewing of the heart, which is accomplished by
the other. The Spirit effects what the water repre-
sents. "I baptize you," ev flScrri,' or fibcm. 7 The
dative with or without the preposition may have
either a local or an instrumental sense in or with. 8
There is no reason here to forsake the ordinary local
sense of the word. John baptized in water, probably
by immersion, as we naturally infer from the phrase;
Jesus was baptized into (si?) the Jordan by John. 8
The American Revisers in Matthew and Mark read
in water, and place with in the margin; while in Luke
they render with water, and give no alternative read-
ing. Why this distinction is made between Mark and
Luke, both of whom use the simple dative, does not
appear. 10 The English Revisers read with in every
case, with in as a marginal reading in Matthew and
Mark. Water may obviously be regarded either as the
element or the instrument of baptism.
The immediate occasion of John's witness accord-
ing to Luke X1 was the questioning that arose among
the people whether haply he were the Christ. So
great was the interest excited by his preaching that
"the Jews sent unto him from Jerusalem priests and
Levites to ask him, Who art thou? And he confessed,
and denied not; and he confessed, I am not the
6 Com. on John xx. 22. ' Matt. 7 Mark and Luke.
8 On the use of sv in the N. T. see Moulton, Gram N. T. Grk. 1,
61. Plummer on Luke iii. 16. Charles on Rev. i., p. cxxx. Robert-
son, Gram. Grk. N. T., pp. 520, 525, 568 ff. He goes too far in
affirming that "all the N. T. examples of ev can be explained from
the point of view of the locative" (p. 590). Elsewhere he remarks
"as a practical matter this use of &v with the locative was nearly
equivalent to the instrumental case" (Id., p. 524).
8 Mark i. 9.
10 Some mss. read v S8cm in Mark, but the decisive weight of
authority is in favour of the simple dative.
11 Luke iii. 15.
134 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Christ," 12 and turned the thoughts of men from him-
self to the Christ who shall soon appear.
The origin of John's baptism is sought in various
directions. 18
(a) As outward defilement is cleansed by water, it
is the natural means of ceremonial purification, and
has been so employed among all races of men. 1 * The
law of Moses gave a large place to ceremonial wash-
ings, which symbolized the cleansing of the heart. 16
So Pilate washed his hands before the multitude, say-
ing, "I am innocent of the blood of this righteous
man; see ye to it." lfl
(b) The initiation of proselytes into the fold of
Judaism was accomplished by a threefold ceremony;
circumcision, washing, sacrifice. Meyer 17 and
Broadus 18 maintain that the baptism of proselytes was
not in use so early as the tune of Christ, but the weight
of evidence appears to be on the other side.
Strange to say, with regard to one of the things
here in question, namely, the baptism or washing
with water, the view has prevailed among Chris-
tian scholars since the beginning of the eighteenth
century, that it was not observed as yet in our
Lord's time. Originally it was for dogmatic rea-
sons that this was maintained, while in modern
times nothing but an imperfect acquaintance with
the facts of the case can account for the way in
which the once dominant prejudice has been
allowed to linger on. Surely everyone in the least
acquainted with Pharisaic Judaism must know
12 John i. 19.
13 See art. "Baptism" in HBD.
14 See for example the use of water in the Eleusinian mysteries,
Machen, Origin of Paul's Religion, p. 218.
15 0ehler, O. T. Theol, sec. 142. Art. "Water" in HBD. For
refinements of later Judaism in the time of Christ see Schurer,
HJP. II, 2, pp. 106 ff.
18 Matt, xxvii. 24.
17 Matt. iii. 5.
"Matt. iii. 6.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 135
how frequently a native Jew was compelled in
accordance with the enactments of Lev. xi.-xv.
apd Num. xix. to take a bath with a view to
Leyitical purification. . . . But a Gentile, not
being in the habit of observing those regulations
with regard to Levitical purity, would as such be
unclean and that as a simple matter of course.
In that case how was it possible that he could be
admitted into Jewish communion without his
having first of all subjected himself to a ~^"3Q
(a Levitical bath of purification) ? This general
consideration is of itself so conclusive that it is
needless to lay much stress upon individual testi-
monies.
References follow to the Mishua, Arrian, and the
Sibylline oracles. 19 ao .
Both of these washings are distinguished from the
baptism of John in that they were merely ceremonial.
They accomplished the purifying of the flesh and ful-
filled the requirements of the ceremonial law, while
his baptism not only represented but required the
cleansing of the heart. He administered baptism as
a rite acceptable to God, "supposing still," as Josephus
says, "that^ the soul was thoroughly purified before-
hand by righteousness" (Ant. XVII, 5, 2). ai
And further, this difference in the form of the ordi-
nance appears: in general the Jew who was unclean
according to the Levitical law and the proselyte who
was admitted to the fold of Judaism applied the water
to himself; while John baptized those who came to
him. So distinctive and peculiar was the office which
he exercised that it gave him the title of the Baptist.
Again his baptism differed from the washing of the
proselyte because it was required of Jews as well as
19 Schiirer, HJP. II, 2, pp. 321 ff.
80 See also HDCGs. 1, p. 863. Edersheim, Life of Christ, App. 12.
App. 12.
81 See Schurer, HJP. H, 2, p. 324, note 308.
136 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Gentiles. The Jews are not birthright members of the
kingdom of God "think not to say within yourselves,
We have Abraham to our father for I say unto you
that God is able of these stones to raise up children
unto Abraham"; 22 but must enter the kingdom by
the narrow gate of repentance. Thus Jesus said to
Nicodemus, Ye, ye Jews too, must be born again.
(c) Much nearer in spirit to the baptism of John
are the references of Psalmist and Prophet to the
cleansing of the heart under the figure of washing
with water. "Wash me thoroughly from mine
iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. . . . Wash me
and I shall be whiter than snow." S3 "Wash you, make
you clean." 2i "0 Jerusalem, wash thy heart from
wickedness, that thou mayest be saved." aB "And I
will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be
clean : from all your filthiness, and from all your idols,
will I cleanse you." 2 " "In that day there shall be a
fountain opened to the house of David and to the
inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for unclean-
ness." 27 With the teaching of the Old Scripture John
was familiar, and his baptism was according to the
form of the law and the spirit of the prophets. It is
closely related to these high conceptions in that it
was not ceremonial but moral and spiritual in pur-
pose; it is distinguished from them in that it is brought
into immediate relation to the coming of the king-
dom. "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." What
they foretold is near, and this gives weight and power
to his message; the case is urgent. To these figurative
expressions of the Old Scripture he gives concrete
reality in his ministry.
The spiritual significance of John's baptism appears
in the phrases that are employed to describe it. "John
22 Matt. iii. 9. 2e Jer. iv. 14.
28 Ps. li. 2, 7. 28 Ezek. xxxiii. 25.
a *Isa. i. 16. 87 Zech. xiii. 1.
SPIRIT IN THE LITE OF JESUS I. 137
came, who baptized in the wilderness, and preached
the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins." **
"I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance." "
"They were baptized of him in the river Jordan, con-
fessing their sins." 30 Repentance, confession, bap-
tism is the divine order; and only those who professed
repentance and acknowledged their sins were baptized.
Baptism did not effect an inward cleansing; it attested
that the inward cleansing had already been accom-
plished. It was the sign and seal of repentance, the
outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual
purification.
John's baptism thus marks a great advance over the
washings prescribed by the Levitical law, for it pre-
supposed and required a change of heart in those who
received it. It falls below Christian baptism because
it was not administered in the name of Christ, and did
not involve the distinct recognition of the Holy Spirit
nor the gift in full measure of his gracious power."
John's whole ministry was preparatory to the coming
of Christ, and he sharply distinguishes his baptism
from the baptism of Jesus. "I baptized you in water,
but he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit." sa John
.speaks of his ministry as finished when Christ appears.
In the Holy Spirit answers to the phrase in water. As
water is the element of John's baptism, the element in
which men are immersed, so the Holy Spirit is the
sphere of Jesus' baptism, the new life element of the
believer. Those whom Jesus baptizes are in the
Spirit, 83 and must walk in the Spirit as the sphere of
the new life in Christ. 84 It is better, therefore, to
read in the Holy Spirit than with the Holy Spirit,
giving to the phrase the largest, richest sense that words
2 8 Mark i. 4. 82 Marki. 8.
29 Matt. iii. 11. S8 Bom.' viii. 9.
80 Matt. iii. 6. " Gal. v. 10.
81 Acts xix. 1-6.
138 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
may convey. A striking instance of the use of the
phrase is found in I Cor. xii. 3: "Wherefore I make
known unto you, that no man speaking in the Spirit
of God saith, Jesus is anathema; and no man can
say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit." In both
clauses the English and American Revisers read cor-
rectly, in the (Holy) Spirit; while the Authorized
Version reads by the (Holy) Spirit. The term in the
Spirit is obviously similar to the phrases frequently
employed in the New Testament, in God, in Christ,
in the Lord. They all convey the thought that in
Him, alike in the natural and spiritual sphere, we live
and move and have our being.
The outpouring of the Spirit was foretold as a char-
acteristic feature of the days of the Messiah. "For
I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and streams
upon the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit upon thy
seed." 8S "I will put my Spirit within you." sa "And
it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out
my Spirit upon all flesh." 8T The phrase baptize in
the Spirit is found only twice in the New Testament,
beside the witness of John the Baptist here and in
John i. 33: in Acts i. 5 Jesus said to his disciples,
"John indeed baptized with water, but ye shall be
baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days hence";
and Peter cites this word of the Lord in Acts xi. 16.
The term is evidently peculiar to John the Baptist,
from whom Jesus derived it, and was suggested by his
peculiar office. Baptism is the form which the out-
pouring of the Spirit naturally takes in his mind.
Though the gift of the Spirit is characteristic of
the Messianic Kingdom, in the Old Testament it is
never referred to the Messiah. It is God who pours
forth the Spirit, and he alone. The Messiah receives
the Spirit from God, "I have put my Spirit upon
him," 88 cited in Matt. xii. 18. It is also true that
SB Isa. xliv. 3. 87 Joelii. 28.
89 Ezek. xxxvi. 25-27. Isa. xlii. 1.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 139
nowhere else in the Synoptic Gospels is Jesus said to
bestow the Spirit upon men, and he himself ascribes
the gift of the Spirit to the Father. "But when they
deliver you up, be not anxious how or what ye shall
speak; for it shall be given you in that hour what ye
shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit
of your Father that speaketh in you." 3B "If ye then,
being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your
children, how much more shall your heavenly Father
give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?" * In
one instance, however, we find if not a direct claim, yet
a suggestion on the part of Jesus that he too imparts
the Spirit. Mark xiii. 11 reads: "And when they lead
you to judgment, and deliver you up, be not anxious
beforehand what ye shall speak; but whatsoever shall
be given you in that hour, that speak ye; for it is not
ye that speak, but the Holy Spirit" ; while the parallel
passage in Luke xxi. 14, 15 reads: "Settle it therefore
in your hearts, not to meditate beforehand how to
answer; for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which
all your adversaries shall not be able to withstand or
to gainsay." If the Holy Spirit speaks in the disciples,
and the wisdom with which they answer their adver-
saries is given them by Jesus, there is an evident impli-
cation that the Spirit is imparted by him.
In the Fourth Gospel he explicitly associates him-
self with the Father in the gift of the Spirit. "I will
pray the Father, and he shall give you another Com-
forter, that he may be with you forever, even the
Spirit of truth"; 41 "the Comforter, even the Holy
Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name";* 2
"When the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto
you from the Father";* 8 "If I go not away, the Com-
forter will not come unto you; but if I go, I will send
him unto you." ** These passages will receive further
consideration when we enter upon the study of Jesus'
88 Matt. x. 19, 20. " John xiv. 16. * 8 John xv. 26.
* Luke xi. 13. " John xiv. 26. " John xvi. 7.
140 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
teaching. It is sufficient here to observe how the
Fourth Gospel in this matter, as in so many others,
brings out into clear light what is implicit but obscure
in the earlier Gospels.
Jesus himself did not baptize in water, as John is
careful to inform us, correcting the rumours that had
reached the Pharisees. "Jesus himself baptized not,
but his disciples." 46 Paul affirmed, "Christ sent me
not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel." 48 Peter
commanded Cornelius and those who were with him to
be baptized.* 7 The prophets of the Old Testament
constantly and vehemently insisted that rites and
forms, even though enjoined by the law of God, have
no value in themselves, apart from the spirit of the
worshipper. "To obey is better than sacrifice, and to
hearken than the fat of rams," * 8 is the first principle
of their teaching. Ceremonies and sacrifices as the
expression of righteousness are accepted, as the substi-
tute for righteousness are condemned. "The sacrifice
of the wicked is an abomination to Jehovah." *" The
immeasurable superiority of the moral and spiritual
to the external and formal is fundamental in Old
Testament doctrine. 60 David exclaims, "Thou delight-
est not in sacrifice; else would I give it: Thou hast
no pleasure in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God
are a broken spirit." 61 By the mouth of Jeremiah God
declares, "I spake not unto your fathers, nor com-
manded them in the day that I brought them up out
of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or
sacrifices: but this thing I commanded them, saying,
Hearken unto my voice." 5a Compared with obedi-
ence the law of sacrifice counts for nothing.
The same principle prevails in the New Testament.
Here the outward and formal is always subordinate
to the inward and spiritual. Rites and forms have
"John iv. 1, 2. * 9 Prov. xv. 8; xxi. 27.
6 1 Cor. ii. 17. 8 Isa. i. 10 ; Amos V. 21-24 ; Micah vi, 6-8.
47 Acts x. 48. B1 Ps. li. 16, 17,
48 1 Sam. xv. 22. Ba Jer. vii. 22, 23.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 141
value only as the offering of- a holy heart. While
therefore baptism as a divine ordinance is to be ob-
served, like the prescriptions of the ceremonial law
of Israel, like them, too, it is of value only as the sign
and seal of the covenant relation between God and his
people. If the change of heart which it is appointed
to attest is wanting, the ceremony becomes an empty
show. Jesus committed baptism in water to his dis-
ciples; he alone may baptize in the Holy Spirit. Only
when men have been baptized in the Spirit does the
baptism in water avail; for the water is the outward
sign of the inward cleansing of the Spirit.
To baptize in the Spirit is to confer upon men the
gift of the Spirit in his saving and sanctifying power.
To the witness of John, "He shall baptize you in the
Holy Spirit," Matthew and Luke add, "and fire"
(xalftUQl) which Mark omits. The question is much
debated whether the fire signifies purification or de-
struction. Does it represent one aspect of the work
of the Spirit, or something entirely distinct from it?
That it signifies sanctification is said to be required by
the intimate association of fire with the Spirit which
is indicated by the omission of EV before XVQI. We
read not v nvev\ia.u xal ev Jtupi as two distinct and con-
trasted elements, but EV rtVEvjxati xal KUQI, as two aspects
of the same work. The position is well taken. The
rule is clearly laid down by Winer BS :
When two or more substantives dependent on
the same preposition immediately follow one an-
other joined together by a copula, the preposition
is most naturally repeated, if the substantives in
question denote things which are to be conceived
as distinct and independent . . . ; but not re-
peated if the substantives fall under a single cate-
gory, or (if proper names) under one common
class ... if the substantives are connected dis-
68
Thayer>s ed. Gr. N. T., p. 419.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
junctively or antithetically, the preposition is in
the former case usually, and in the latter case
always repeated. ... In general, there is a greater
tendency to repeat the preposition in the New
Testament than in Greek prose.
Robertson speaks to the same effect " : "With the
antithesis the repetition is the rule," but he recog-
nizes in the same paragraph that the rule is not with-
out exception. It must be admitted that the gram-
matical construction here strongly favours the view
which regards fire as a symbol of the sanctifying power
of the Spirit. In both Matthew and Luke the English
Revisers insert with and the American Revisers in
before fire, both in italics of course; but the addition
is an interpretation of the text. It is better to read
simply, as the original has it, in the Holy Spirit and
fire. Additional support for this view is sought by
some scholars in the tongues of fire which rested upon
the heads of the disciples at Pentecost, 55 but they were
the symbols not of sanctification, but of a particular
gift of the Spirit which was then imparted, a %&QiGna
the gift of prophetic inspiration, of speaking with other
tongues. The arguments in favour of this interpreta-
tion are presented by Godet and Plummer on Luke
iii. 16.
On the other hand, the context, as most expositors
recognize, imperatively requires the penal sense of
the term. Fire is used with this significance in the
verse preceding in Matthew: "And even now the axe
lieth at the root of the trees: every tree therefore that
bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast
into the fire" B8 and in the verse following: "Whose
fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly cleanse his
threshing floor; and he will gather his wheat into the
garner, but the chaff he will burn up with unquench-
8 * Gram. Grk. N. T., p. 566, B6 Matt. iii. 10; c/. Luke iii. 9.
" Acts ii. 3.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I.
able fire." 57 Here are three successive verses treating
of the ministry of Christ. Is it credible that fire should
have one meaning in the first and third verses, and an
entirely different meaning in the second? Moreover
John's whole representation of the work of Christ in
the Synoptic Gospels is dominated by the thought of
judgment; for John came in the spirit and power
of Elijah, the bold reformer and judge of Israel, and
he drew his conception of the Messiah from the Old
Testament where judgment constantly appears as the
purpose of his ministry. In Isaiah iv. 4 he shall cleanse
Jerusalem "by the spirit of justice, and by the spirit
of burning.? "He shall smite the earth with the rod
of his mouth; and with the breath of his lips shall he
slay the wicked." 6S "He is like the refiner's fire, and
like fullers' soap." 6B Fire is the natural symbol and
minister of judgment, 80 and is frequently employed
hi the Gospels to represent the torments of hell; 81 as
well as elsewhere in the New Testament." a The Lord
Jesus shall return from heaven "with the angels of his
power in flaming fire, rendering vengeance to them that
know not God, and to them that obey not the gospel
of our Lord Jesus." 8S Jesus declared that he came to
judge as well as to save, "For judgment came I into
this world." 8 * Elsewhere he said, "God sent not the
Son into the world to judge the world, but that the
world should be saved through him";' 8 "I came not
57 Matt. iii. 12; c/. Luke iii. 17.
58 Isa. xi. 4.
69 Mai. iii. 2.
80 Gen. xix. 24; Exod. ix. 23,^24; Deut. xxxvii. 22; Ps. xxi. 9;
1. 3; xcvii. 3; Isa. xxix. 6; xxx. 27; Jer. iv. 4; v. 14; Ezek. xxi. 31;
Amos vii. 4; Neh. i. 6; iii. 15; Zech. ix. 4; Mai. iv. 1. The list
might be prolonged indefinitely.
81 Matt. v. 22; xiii. 30, 40, 42, 56; xviii. 9; xxiii. 41; Mark ix. 44,
48; Luke xvi. 24.
82 Heb. xv. 27; H Peter iii. 7; Jude vii.; Rev. xiv. 10; xix. 20;
xx. 10, 14, 15; xxi. 8.
""IIThess. i. 7, 8.
9 * John ir. 30.
" John iii. 17.
144 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
to judge the world, but to save the world." aa In one
case he speaks of the purpose, in the other of the result
of his mission; as in Matt. x. 14: "I came not to send
peace, but a sword." The purpose of his coming is to
save, but judgment is forced upon him by the un-
belief and jiisobedience of men.
There are two passages in Jesus' teaching which call
for careful consideration here. The first is Luke xii.
49, 50: "I came to cast fire on the earth; and what do
I desire, if it is already kindled? But I have a baptism
to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it
be accomplished?" Here too baptism and fire are
joined, but the baptism relates to his own personal
experience, the fire to his ministry among men. The
nature of the fire is precisely indicated in the verses
following: "Think ye that I am come to give peace in
the earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: for
there shall be from henceforth five in one house
divided; three against two, and two against three.
They shall be divided, father against son, and son
against father; mother against daughter, and daughter
against her mother; mother-in-law against her daugh-
ter-in-law, and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-
law." In a passage of similar import, though drawn
from a different occasion, Matthew has the sword in-
stead of fire as the minister of judgment. 87 In both
instances the reference is to the divisions which at-
tended the coming of Christ, and which everywhere
accompany the preaching of the gospel. Now this part
of his work has been accomplished: the fire has been
kindled, the line of division has been drawn. What
remains? To what does he look forward? What more
does he desire? His baptism, the sacrificial sufferings
and death which shall fulfil his earthly mission, his
atoning work, so that he may say with dying breath,
It is finished. With that baptism his disciples also
86 Joha xii. 47. "Matt. x. 34.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 145
shall be baptized; 8 not of course that they shall have
a part in that atonement which it is his alone to make,
but that the Kingdom which is established by the
service and sacrifice of the Son of God must be con-
tinued and extended by the service and sacrifice of
his disciples; so that every believer may say in this
sense with Paul, "I fill up on my part that which is
lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his
body's sake, which is the church." a9 The disciple
must be baptized, must be crucified, with his Lord.
Mark ix. 49 is one of the most obscure and difficult
passages in the New Testament. Taking the words
with the context we read, "And if thine eye cause thee
to stumble, cast it out: it is good for thee to enter
into the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than
having two eyes to be cast into hell; where their worm
dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. For every one
shall be salted with fire. Salt is good: but if the salt
have lost its saltness, wherewith will ye season it?
Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace one with an-
other." Meyer notes and rejects fourteen interpreta-
tions of the phrase, salted with fire. His own exposi-
tion assumes the genuineness of the clause, "and every
sacrifice shall be salted with salt," which the best criti-
cal authorities reject.
The first question that confronts the expositor is
the extent of the term every one (jtag) ; does it mean
every man or every disciple? The reference to the fire
of hell in the immediate context renders it impossible
to confine the word to believers; while the description
of salt as good, and the injunction, "Have salt in your-
selves," forbid the exclusive reference of the term to
the wicked. Evidently both the righteous and the
wicked are included. Every man shall be salted with
fire. But the phrase, salted with fire, seems to involve
a contradiction in terms. Salt preserves, fire destroys;
6 8 Mark x. 38. "Col. i. 24.
146 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
what is it then to be salted with fire? To be at once
preserved and destroyed? How may these conceptions
be harmonized? How can fire perform the office of
salt? These are questions hard to answer, and no
interpretation of the words has commanded general
assent. The most satisfactory explanation appears to
be that salting with fire includes both purification and
destruction. The fire both purifies and destroys, and
in both cases the salt indicates the enduring effect of
the fire. The sanctification of the righteous and the
punishment of the wicked are alike eternal. The verse
preceding tells of the fire that consumes the wicked,
and the verse following speaks of the salt that shall
preserve the righteous. This verse unites the two con-
ceptions, and blends them in a single phrase "Every
one shall be salted with fire." This interpretation is
not free from difficulties, but no better has been
suggested.
Thus the double office of fire is indicated, which
Paul has portrayed with such clearness and force in
the picture of the judgment. 70
The sanctifying power of the Spirit of necessity
involves destruction. The individual is purified by
the casting out of evil, the people are purified by the
destruction of the wicked, as precious metal is purged
of its dross. 71 The double work of fire in purifying
and destroying answers to the double office of the
Spirit. Jesus distinguished sharply between the work
of the Spirit in the disciples guiding them into all the
truth as it is in him; and his work in the world
convicting in respect of sin, and of righteousness, and
of judgment. 72 "The word of God is living, and
active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and
piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of
both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the
70 1 Cor. iii. 12-15.
71 Ps. cxix. 119; Prov. xxv. 4; Isa. i. 25; Ezek. xxii. 18, 19.
78 John xvi. 8 3 13.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 147
thoughts and intents of the heart"; 73 and this word
of God is the sword of the Spirit, 74 who searcheth all
things, yea the deep things of God." 7B In Joel ii. 28,
30 the promised outpouring of the Spirit upon a^
Israel is attended by "wonders in the heavens and in
the earth: blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke." And
the thought finds its highest expression in Heb. xii. 29
"for our God is a consuming fire." The phrase our
God designates him as the God of the New Testament,
revealed in Christ, and the whole tenor of the passage
makes it evident that the writer had in mind the at-
titude of God both toward the righteous, whom as fire
he purifies, and toward the wicked, whom as fire he
destroys.
Spirit and fire are not therefore antithetical and
mutually exclusive conceptions, but fire expresses one
feature of the Spirit's work, one aspect of his holy min-
istry. "He shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit," and
in particular in that discriminating and separating and
sanctifying element of the Spirit's work which is
signified by fire.
Objection is taken to this view of the double office
of the Spirit because you (vfxag) refers to a single
definite group, who could not be at once sanctified and
destroyed. But the objection has little weight. Those
to whom John spoke were a motley company Phari-
sees and Sadducees, 76 publicans and soldiers, 77
multitudes from all the regions round about. 78
Surely the Spirit did not perform the same work
in every one to whom John preached. Moreover
you is here to be understood in a generic sense not
simply you who are here, but you men, or at least you
men of Israel. According to the better interpretation
you has the same generic force hi Luke xvii. 21. To
the rendering, the kingdom of God is within you
73 Heb. iv. 17. 7e Matt. iii. 7.
7 * Ephes. vi. 17. " Luke iii. 12, 14.
76 1 Cor. ii. 10. 78 Luke iii. 7, 10.
148 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
(Ivrog fyuov), which is given in the Authorized Ver-
sion and in the English and American Revised Versions,
objection is made that this was not true of the Phari-
sees to whom Jesus spoke. We must therefore render,
as in the margin of the Revised Versions, in the midst
of you. But within you, though apparently rejected
by most modern expositors, accords better with the
context: "The kingdom of God cometh not with ob-
servation" ; and you means not you Pharisees but you
men. This rendering is maintained by Godet, in loc. ;
Robertson, Grammar of the Greek New Testament,
p. 641 ; Dalman, Words of Jesus, p. 145. Plummer is
uncertain. If the thought is that the kingdom was
actually present among them in the Person of Jesus,
what is the meaning of the words, "Neither shall they
say, Lo, here, or there"? That is exactly what would
be said and must be said in such a case. The truth
which Jesus has in mind is that which George Eliot has
finely expressed in Romola: "Who shall put his finger
on justice, and say 'It is here'? Justice is like the
Kingdom of God it is not without us as a fact, it is
within us as a great yearning." That is not the whole
truth, of course, but it is a highly important aspect of
the truth ; which finds a place alike in the Old Testa-
ment and in the New. The kingdom which is righteous-
ness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit 80 must set
up its throne in the individual heart before it can be
established in the world.
There is thus abundant warrant both in the context
and in the general tenor of Scripture teaching, alike in
the Old Testament and the New, to interpret fire as
signifying judgment, the discriminating judgment
which purifies the good and destrovs the evil. Spirit
and fire are not mutually exclusive terms, but fire is
the apt and striking symbol of the Spirit's work among
men. The Spirit and fire are associated here as the
78 See BriggSj Messiah of the Gospels, p. 245. 80 Rom. xiv. 17.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 149
Spirit and water are associated in John iii. 5. There,
too, the preposition is not repeated ( e v'Satog xal
jcvevfAaTos). Water and fire both express aspects of the
Spirit's ministry; in one case his cleansing power, and
in the other, both cleansing and destruction are sig-
nified. The Spirit is both dove and fire; as Jesus is
both lion and lamb.
II. THE BAPTISM OF JESUS
Then cometh Jesus from
Galilee to the Jordan un-
to John, to be baptized
of him. But John would
have hindered him, say-
ing, I have need to be
baptized of thee, and
comest thou to me? But
Jesus answering said unto
him, Suffer it now: for
thus it becometh us to
fulfil all righteousness.
Then he suffered him.
And Jesus, when he was
baptized, went up
straightway from the wa-
ter: and lo, the heavens
were opened unto him;
and he saw the Spirit of
God descending as a
dove, and coming upon
him; and lo, a voice put
of the heavens, saying,
This is my beloved Son,
in whom I am well
pleased.
Matt. iii. 13-17.
"Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan unto
John, to be baptized of him." 81 Mark says specifically
that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee. The scene
of the baptism cannot be precisely fixed. John was
"in the wilderness of Judea," sa the region adjoining the
western shore of the Dead Sea, and of the lower
And it came to
pass in those days,
that Jesus came
from Nazareth of
Galilee, and was
baptized of John
in the Jordan. And
straightway coming
up out of the wa-
ter, he saw the
heavens rent asun-
der, and the Spirit
as a dove descend-
ing upon him: and
a voice came out
of the heavens,
Thou art my be-
loved Son, in thee
I am well pleased.
Mark i. 9-11.
Now it came to
pass, when all the
people were bap-
tized, that, Jesus
also having been
baptized, and pray-
ing, the heaven was
opened, and the
Holy Spirit de-
scended in a bod-
ily form, as a dove,
upon him, and a
voice came out of
heaven, Thou art
my beloved Son;
in thee I am well
pleased.
Luke iii. 21, 22.
83 Matt. iii. 1.
81 Matt. iii. 13.
150 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Jordan. 83 Tradition places the baptism of Jesus near
Jericho, but the tradition is late, and no great weight
may be attached to it. A little later, according to the
Fourth Gospel, John was baptizing at Bethany, not
Bethaharah, 84 as in the Authorized Version. But the
site of Bethany is unknown,; and we are not told
whether Jesus was baptized there. Prof. B. B. War-
field, 86 following Caspari, affirms that "it is capable of
something very like demonstration that Bethany was
situated in the region about Et-Tell, north of the lake
of Galilee. It has been already pointed out that the
nationality of the crowds which surrounded John had
changed to a more northern complexion. That he was
now baptizing, not near Jericho but some three days 7
journey north of it, follows again from the length of
time consumed by Jesus' journey from this place to
the Olivet Bethany." Further argument is .drawn
from a comparison of the Synoptic Gospels with John,
and from John's account of Jesus' movements after his
baptism; and the conclusion is reached that "by the
time our Lord came to his baptism, John had traversed
the whole length of Palestine, preaching repentance
. . . and the king delayed his coming until the
preparation was complete." We may hold that it is
at least probable that Bethany lay to the north of the
Sea of Galilee. Whether Jesus was baptized there re-
mains uncertain, but we may reasonably suppose that
his baptism took place somewhere in the region to
which Bethany belonged. Matthew alone relates that
when Jesus presented himself to be baptized John
would have hindered him, saying, "I have need to be
baptised of thee, and comest thou to me?" "I have
need of the baptism of the Holy Spirit which thou
only canst impart." He recognizes both the personal
83 Luke iii. 3. 8B Expositor, 3rd series, vol. i, p. 267.
8 4 See Origen on John, Bk. vi. 24.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 151
and the official priority of Jesus; and in the record of
the Fourth Gospel he states distinctly the ground on
which it rested: "This was he of whom I said, He
that cometh after me is become before me: for he was
before me." 89 The humility of John is answered by
the greater humility of Jesus: "Suffer it now: for thus
it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness." "Suffer it
now": this is the immediate duty of the hour.
Why did Jesus submit to be baptized of John? Bap-
tism was not to him as to other men, a symbol of cleans-
ing from sin, as John recognized. The precise purport
of the act has given rise to much discussion. Meyer
enumerates various explanations. 87 He was baptized
as the bearer of the guilt of others; because as a mem-
ber of an unclean people he was unclean according to
the Levitical law; because he regarded the collective
guilt of the nation as resting upon him; because he
would separate himself inwardly from the sins of the
nation; because he would honour the baptism of John
by his example; because he would bind himself to the
observance of the law. Other explanations are added,
but these may suffice; for Jesus himself has stated
his purpose in terms which are not obscure. "Thus it
becometh us to fulfil all righteousness." It becometh
us you and me. We have each a duty to perform,
and that duty is to fulfil all righteousness, to obey the
divine law, the law which I am not come to destroy,
but to fulfil.. Jesus recognizes that the office of John
was of divine appointment. It was he whom Malachi
foretold, who came in the spirit and power of Elijah,
and his baptism was from heaven. 88 Jesus as a pious
Jew submitted to every ordinance of the law, and thus
he set an example of obedience. Though he had no
8 6 John i. 15.
87 Matt. iii. 13.
88 Matt. xxi. 25; Mark xi. 30; Luke xx. 4; cj. Matt. xi. 11-14.
152 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
personal need of baptism, by refusing or neglecting it
he would have cast discredit upon the work of John,
and thrown a stumbling-block in the way of others.
In the same spirit though he might claim exemption
from the half-shekel tax as the Son of God, yet he
bade Peter pay it, "lest we cause them to stumble." 89
Moreover, though we may not speak precisely of the
baptism as his ordination to the office of Messiah,
since baptism never appears in Scripture as a rite of
ordination; yet as it was accompanied by the descent
of the Spirit, the divine anointing, 90 and marked the
opening of his public ministry, it was in effect an act of
consecration and ordination. Then he emerged from
the obscurity of thirty years, was recognized by John as
the Christ of God, and entered upon that career which
has made him the foremost man in the history of the
world. He did not then begin to be conscious of his
Messianic office and divine Sonship; for when he was
twelve years of age, Mary found him in the Temple,
sitting in the midst of the teachers, hearing them, and
asking them questions; and when she gently rebuked
him "Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? Behold
thy father and I sought thee sorrowing?" he replied,
"Why did you seek me? Why look elsewhere? Knew
ye not that I must be in my Father's house?" She said,
Thy father Joseph; he answered, My Father God." " 8a
Thus by his baptism Jesus at the same time fulfilled
the law and inaugurated the gospel. John yields to
him, and he assumes the place of prominence and
power which his forerunner had held; and though
John continued to preach and baptize for a considerable
time, his prediction was fulfilled, "He must increase,
but I must decrease." 9S
88 Matt. xvii. 24-27. 82 See art. "Consciousness" in HDCGs.
80 Isa. Ixi. 1. ""John iii. 30.
9 Luke ii. 47-49.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 153
When Jesus was baptized, he prayed. 8 * The nature
of that prayer is not disclosed, but the whole tenor of
his life assures us that he besought his Father to pre-
pare him for the ministry which was opening before
him. The prayer was answered by the gift of the Holy
Spirit, who "descended in a bodily form (ocofxaTtxw EIOEI ).
as a dove, upon him." 9B 9a It was not merely a vision,
an apparition ; the Spirit assumed the form of a dove,
and came visibly upon him. Jesus saw the Spirit, 97 and
John saw him. 98 Whether others saw him we are not
told. It may be that the dove and the voice from
heaven were seen and heard only by those whose eyes
were illumined by the Spirit, and whose ears were
attuned to the speech of heaven. At a later time when
God spoke from heaven the multitude that stood by,
and heard it, said that it had thundered: others said,
an angel hath spoken to him. 98 In the account of
Saul's conversion in Acts ix. it is recorded that "the
men that journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing
the voice, but beholding no man"; 100 and in his
account of the matter Paul says that "they that
were with me beheld indeed the light, but they heard
not the voice of him that spake to me." 101 The
apparent discrepancy is removed by the obvious sup-
position that his companions heard the sound of the
voice but did not distinguish the words. The divine
presence was recognized by all, for they "were all
fallen to the earth"; loa the message was for Saul
alone.
In his baptism the Spirit is associated with Jesus in
the Gospel records for the first time since his birth.
In Gen. i. 2, when the earth was waste and void, the
94 Luke iii. 21. " John xii. 29.
M Luke iii. 22. 10 Acts ix. 7.
86 See Swete on Mark i. 10. 101 Acts. xxii. 9.
8T Matt. iii. 16; Mark i. 10. loa Acts xxvi. 14.
98 John i. 32.
154 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Spirit of God is seen brooding upon the face of the
waters, as a bird upon its nest. At the inauguration
of the Messianic Kingdom the Spirit appears in a
similar form. Without him nothing was accomplished
in the sphere of nature or of grace.
The dove is the symbol of purity and gentleness.
Jesus commanded the twelve, when he sent them forth
as sheep in the midst of wolves, to be "wise as serpents,
and harmless as doves." 10S The word rendered harm-
less by the Authorized and Revised Versions ( dxeQccioi ),
with simple in the margin of the Revised Versions, is
by some derived from nepa?, a horn, signifying
therefore without horns, harmless. But it is properly
derived from XEQCCWUIII, to mix, and means therefore
unmixed, pure; and in the moral sphere urithout guile.
Elsewhere in the New Testament the word is found
only in Phil. ii. 15, where again it is rendered harmless
by the Revised Versions, without marginal note; and
in Rom. xvi. 19, where it is rendered, simple. Simple
is better than harmless, but because it is used in Scrip-
ture at times in an unfavourable sense equivalent to
foolish, it would be well to read guileless or pure.
Augustine aptly remarks that "there are those who are
said to be simple who are only indolent. They are
called simple, but they are only slow." 104 10B The
word is used of wine unmingled with water, of
metals free from alloy, and fitly describes the sim-
plicity which should characterize the Christian life,
the absence of all that is inconsistent with the purity
which should mark the children of God. 108
103 Matt. x. 16.
104 Tract on John yi. 3.
106 On the symbolism of the dove see Lightfoot, Apost. Fas. II,
p. 974. Smith and Cheatham, Diet. Chr. Aut., Art. "Dove." Swete,
Holy Spirit in N. T., note A. Philo sees in the dove the symbol of
the wisdom of God. Quis Rer. Div. Her., sec. 25.
108 On the derivation and meaning of the term see Ellicott on
Phil. ii. 15; Trench, Syn. N. T., LVI.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 155
Possessing such qualities the dove appears in the
Old Testament as a term of affection; 107 and the eyes
of the beloved are compared to doves. 108 Because of
its innocence and gentleness the dove, like the lamb,
was frequently offered in sacrifice: in the burnt offer-
ing; 109 in the trespass offering; 110 in the cleansing of
the leper, 111 and upon other occasions. Of special
interest is the command that after child birth, when
the days of her purifying are fulfilled, the mother
shall offer a lamb for a burnt offering, and a young
pigeon, or a turtle dove, for a sin offering: "And if her
means suffice not for a lamb, she shall take two
turtle doves, or two young pigeons." 112 Joseph
and Mary took advantage of this provision of the
law and offered according to their poverty. 113 The
only birds allowed in sacrifice according to the law of
Moses were the pigeon and the dove. They were
offered for sale in the courts of the Temple at the
passover; and Jesus drove put those who sold them
in the beginning 114 and again at the close of his min-
istry. 115 No reason can be shown why Jesus should
not have performed this natural and significant act
upon both occasions. Like every wise teacher he
frequently repeated his instruction. The assertion
is often made when sayings are found in different con-
nexions in the different evangelists that the various
reports cannot all be correct. And the argument often
proceeds upon the wholly unwarranted assumption
that Jesus never repeated himself. On the contrary
it is incredible that he did not repeat himself often,
for repetition is the primary law of education. And
107 Ps. Ixxiv. 19; Song of Sol. ii. 14; v. 2; vi. 9.
108 Song of Sol. i. 15; iv. 1; v. 12.
109 Lev. i. 14. 113 Luke ii. 24.
110 Lev. v. 7, 11. 114 John ii. 14-16.
111 Lev. xiv. 22, 30. 11E Matt. xxi. 12.
112 Lev. xii. 6-8.
150 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
if he taught the same lessons upon various occasions,
why might he not perform for a second time an act
at once so natural and so significant of the nature of
his ministry? Arguments drawn in particular instances
from the improbability that such teaching would have
been given under such circumstances deserve careful
attention, but arguments which assume that Jesus
could never have spoken the same words or performed
the same act upon different occasions are entitled to
little consideration.
The comment of Augustine upon this passage fur-
nishes a curious example of those strange conceits
which so often disfigure the pages of this great
expositor.
Now if the dove's note is a moaning, as we all
know it to be, and doves moan in love, hear what
the apostle says, and wonder not that the Holy
Ghost willed to be manifested in the form of a
dove: "for what we should pray for as we ought,
says he, we know not; but the Spirit Himself
intercedes for us with groanings which cannot be
uttered." . . . . It is not then in Himself . , .
that the Holy Spirit groans; but in us He groans
because He makes us to groan. 11 '
After the baptism came the descent of the Spirit,
after the descent of the Spirit the voice of God. Thus
Father, Son, and Spirit are associated at the beginning
as at the end of Jesus' earthly ministry, and in both
instances in connection with baptism: when he is
baptized and when he commands his disciples to
baptize all the nations into the name of the Father
and the Son and the Holy Spirit. 117 Nowhere
else in the Synoptic record are the Persons of
the Trinity thus brought together. The baptism
118 Tract on John vii. 2. 117 Matt, xxviii. 19.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 157
designates Jesus as a man, made under the law; the
anointing of the Spirit proclaims him the Messiah;
the voice from heaven declares him to be the Son
of God.
For in the name of Christ is implied, He that
anoints, He that is anointed, and the unction itself
with which He is anointed. And it is the Father
who anoints, but the Son who is anointed by the
Spirit, who is the unction, as the Word declared
by Isaiah, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he hath anointed me" pointing out both
the anointing Father, the anointed Son, and the
unction, which is the Spirit. 118
The dove descends and abides upon the Lamb. The
same personal qualities and sacrificial value belong to
each of them. The purity and gentleness of the
human nature of Jesus spring from the indwelling of
the Spirit of God, the source of all holiness in the life
of man.
Various symbols are employed in the Gospels to
represent the Holy Spirit, each of them setting forth
some aspect of his character and work. In the birth of
Jesus he is signified by the cloud that over-shadows
the virgin mother, 119 the cloud which is the symbol of
the divine presence and here specifically of the pres-
ence of the Spirit; at the baptism of Jesus he assumes
the form of a dove; in his purifying and sanctifying
ministry he appears as fire; in Jesus' words to Nicode-
mus he is figured by the wind in his free self-determina-
tion; by water 120 in his refreshing and life-giving
power. As he is a dove he may be grieved; 121 as he is
fire, he may be quenched. 1 aa
1 * 8 Irenaeus Agt. Her. Ill, 18, 4. 1Z1 Ephes. iv. 30.
119 Luke i. 35. 122 1 Thess. v. 19.
14 "John vii. 38, 39.
158 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
III. THE TEMPTATION
Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit
into the wilderness to be tempted of the
devil. And when he had fasted forty
days and forty nights, he afterward hun-
gered. And the tempter came and said
unto him, If thou art the Son of God,
command that these stones become
bread. But he answered and said, It is
written, Man shall not live by bread
alone, but by every word that proceed-
eth out of the mouth of God. Then
the devil taketh him into the holy city;
and he set him on the pinnacle of the
temple, and saith unto him, If thou art
the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it
is written, He shall give his angels charge
concerning thee: and, On their hands
they shall bear thee up, Lest haply thou
dash thy foot against a stone. Jesus said
unto him, Again it is written, Thou shalt
not make trial of the Lord thy God.
Again, the devil taketh him into an ex-
ceeding high mountain, and showeth him
all the kingdoms of the world, and the
glory of them; and he said unto him,
All these things will I give thee, if thou
wilt fall down and worship me. Then
saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence,
Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt wor-
ship the Lord thy God, and him only
shalt thou serve. Then the devil leave_th
him; and behold, angels came and min-
istered unto him.
Matt. iv. 1-11.
And straightway the
Spirit driveth him
forth into the wilder?
ness. And he was in
the wilderness forty
days tempted of Sa-
tan; and he was with
the wild beasts; and
the angels ministered
unto him.
Mark i. 12, 13.
And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan, and
was led in the Spirit in the wilderness during forty days, being
tempted of the devil. And he did eat nothing in those days: and
when they were completed, he hungered. And the devil said unto
him, If thou art the Son of God, command this stone that it become
bread. And Jesus answered unto him, It is written, Man shall not
live by bread alone. And he led him up, and showed him all the
kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said
unto him, To thee will I give all of this authority, and the glory of
them: for it hath been delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I
will I give it. If thou therefore wilt worship before me, it shall be
thine. And Jesus answered and said unto him, It is written, Thou
shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 159
And he led him to Jerusalem, and set him on the pinnacle of the
temple, and said unto him, If thou art the Son of God, cast thyself
down from hence : for it is written. He shall gi!ve his angels charge
concerning thee, to guard thee : and, On their hands they shall bear
thee up, lest haply thou dash thy foot against a stone. And Jesus
answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not make trial of
the Lord thy God. And when the devil had completed every
temptation, he departed from him for a season.
Luke iv. 1-13.
The Spirit began at once to direct and impel the life
of Jesus, and the first step is indicated by Matthew in
a striking sentence: "Then was Jesus led up of the
Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the
devil." 12S It is a strange combination: "led up of the
Spirit to be tempted of the devil." Satan too is God's
servant; and though for an appointed time and in a
limited degree he is permitted to exercise power over
men, yet his authority is narrowly confined, and he
cannot lay a finger upon God's children until God
gives him leave. That is one of the great lessons of
the Book of Job, which carries us behind the experience
of the sufferer, and exhibits to us at once the malice
of Satan and the controlling and restraining hand of
God. Temptation has two aspects: in the purpose of
Satan it is designed to seduce and destroy, in the pur-
pose of God it is designed to purify and strengthen.
Temptation is opportunity. These two aspects of
temptation often blend in a single act, a single ex-
perience: as Paul's thorn in the flesh was at once
a messenger of Satan to buffet him, and a means
of grace through which the power of Christ was con-
veyed to him. In the very endeavour to thwart the
purpose of God Satan is made the agent of the
divine will.
Luke records that "Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit,
returned from the Jordan, and was led in the Spirit
in the wilderness," la4 portraying thus both the local
123 Matt. iv. 1. 12 *Luke iv. 1.
160 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
aiid the spiritual sphere of the temptation, and indi-
cating that he was directed by the Spirit throughout
the whole period of the forty days. Mark according
to his custom adds to the narrative several graphic
touches. "Straightway" ; immediately upon his bap-
tism followed the temptation. Contrast the glory of
the scene at the Jordan, the open heavens, the anoint-
ing of the Spirit, the voice from heaven, with the
dreary solitude and fierce conflict of the wilderness.
In similar fashion the glory of the transfiguration
mount gave place to the scene of demoniac possession.
"The Spirit driveth him forth into the wilderness."
The word expresses strong compulsion; and though it
is sometimes used in a weakened sense in the New
Testament, yet here there is no reason to forsake the
ordinary meaning of the term. The Spirit took con-
trol of him and impelled him to the wilderness. Is
there in the word a suggestion of the shrinking of
Jesus from the trial that awaited him? We may not
presume to answer a question that penetrates so deeply
into the mystery of his Person; but upon other occa-
sions it is recorded that he did thus recoil from the
suffering that lay before him. When his death drew
near he cried, "Now is my soul troubled; and what
shall I say? Father save me from this hour. 125 But
for this cause came I unto this hour. Father, glorify
thy name." 126 Thus nobly does the Spirit triumph
over the weakness of the flesh. In Gethsemane with
strong crying and tears, with groans and bloody sweat
he prayed that the appointed cup might pass from
him, yet surrendered himself with implicit obedience
to the Father's will. 127
Mark adds also that he was with the wild beasts,
depicting the loneliness of the wilderness in which he
tan Whether this sentence be regarded as a petition or a question
does not materially affect the sense of the passage.
126 John xii. 27, 28.
127 Luke xxii, 42-44; Heb. v, 7.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 161
encountered Satan, like the loneliness of the Garden
and the cross.
The purpose for which the Spirit led him to be
tempted is clearly indicated in the Scripture, though
the Gospels, as their manner is, relate the story with-
out remark or comment.
I Temptation is an essential part of the discipline
of human life, and Jesus as a true man must be tried
as other men are tried. That is the truth plainly and
repeatedly declared in the Epistle to the Hebrews.
"It became him, for whom are all things, and through
whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory,
to make the author of their salvation perfect through
sufferings." 128 "Who in the days of his flesh, having
offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying
and tears unto him that was able to save him from
death, and having been heard for his godly fear, though
he was a son, yet learned obedience by the things which
he suffered, and having been made perfect, he became
unto all them that obey him the author of eternal
salvation." 12B
2 He left us an example, that we should follow his
steps. 180 It is noteworthy that when Jesus is com-
mended to us as an example in the apostolic writ-
ings, it is always his sufferings that the writer has in
mind.
3 Through his temptations he learned to sympa-
thize with men in their temptations. This too the
author of the Hebrews insists upon again and again.
"Wherefore it behooved him in all things to be made
like his brethren, that he might become a merciful
and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God,
to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For
in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is
able to suffer them that are tempted." 1S1 "For we
128 Heb. ii. 10. 180 IPeterii. 21.
129 Heb. v. 7-9. ... , , 181 Heb. ii. 17, 18.
162 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
have not a high priest that cannot be touched with
the feeling of our infirmities; but one that hath
been in all points tempted like as we are, yet without
sin." 132 Here are set forth the range of our Lord's
temptation "in all points"; the reality "like as we
are"; and the result "yet without sin." "Let us
therefore draw near with boldness unto the throne of
grace, that we may receive mercy, and my find grace
to help in time of need."
4 As he came to destroy the devil, 183 it was incum-
bent upon him to meet the adversary face to face.
The Spirit impelled him to the conflict, the Spirit
gave him the victory. For the weapon with which he
repulsed the assaults of the enemy and drove him
beaten from the field was the sword of the Spirit, which
is the Word of God.
The period of temptation was forty days. The three
temptations recorded by Matthew and Luke represent
each the climax of a long continued effort on the
part of Satan, bidding higher or tempting more
adroitly with each refusal of Jesus to give ear to his
seductions; or they gather up in few words the sub-
stance of temptations which were represented in many
forms. The battle with Satan which began in the
wilderness raged without ceasing throughout the whole
life of Jesus. Luke records "the devil departed from
him for a season." ls * Appeal was made continually
to every motive of hope and fear ; and he was tried by
foes and tempted by friends; Peter the rock becomes a
stumbling-block. A rock in place is a foundation, a
rock out of place is a stumbling-block. His life was
one long conflict with the powers of evil. Satan put
forth the utmost of his power to seduce him in the
wilderness; and when he could not lead him astray he
sought to destroy him. He appears most active at the
beginning of our Lord's ministry, and again at its close,
132 Heb. iv. 15-16. 133 Heb. ii. 14. 134 Luke iv. 13.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 163
when he instigated Judas to betray him, 185 and the
Jews to seek his life. 136 When he cannot pervert, he
endeavours to destroy. If he cannot turn Jesus
from the way of the cross, he will crush him by
the cross, not merely putting an end to his life but
loading him with the shame and ignominy of a
felon's death.
IV. JESUS RETURNED IN THE POWER OF THE SPIRIT
TO GALILEE
"And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to
Galilee; and a fame went out concerning him through
all the region round about." 137 Luke assigns no reason
for the return to Galilee, but Matthew and Mark con-
nect it with the imprisonment of John the Baptist.
"Now when he heard that John was delivered up, he
withdrew into Galilee; and leaving Nazareth, he came
and dwelt in Capernaum." 188 "Now after John was de-
livered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the
Gospel of God." 1SO John assigns a different reason.
"When therefore the Lord knew that the Pharisees had
heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more dis-
ciples than John (although Jesus himself baptized not,
but his disciples), he left Judea, and departed again
into Galilee." 14 There is no contradiction here be-
tween John and the earlier Gospels, for the imprison-
ment of the Baptist and the jealousy of the Pharisees
are closely related. Josephus tells us that "When many
came in crowds about him, for they were greatly moved
by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great
influence John had over the people might put it into
his power and inclination to raise a rebellion (for they
seemed ready to do anything he should advise), thought
best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief
136 Luke xxii. 3; John xiii. 27. 138 Matt. iv. 12, 13.
13(5 John viii. 39-44. 139 Mark i. 14.
1 3 7 Luke iv. 14. lto John iv. 1-3.
164 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulty
by sparing a man who might make him repent of it
when it should be too late." *" The motives of a man
are ordinarily complex, and fear of John's influence with
the people might readily combine with personal resent-
ment for his bold rebuke to lead Herod to deal with
him as he did. And the Pharisees in ; like manner
might well be moved by envy of the popularity of
Jesus and fear, of the political consequences which that
popularity might entail: "If we let him thus alone, all
men will believe on him; and the Romans will come
and take away both our place and nation." 142
It was not to escape from Herod that Jesus withdrew
into Galilee, for Galilee too was under his rule, but to
avoid the jealous hatred of the Pharisees. The Gospel
narratives indicate that Judea, and especially Jerusa-
lem, was his chosen field of labour, which he visited as
often and as long as he could, turning to Galilee only
when he was driven out by his enemies. 1 * 8 "0 Jerusa-
lem, Jerusalem . . . how often would I have
gathered thy children together." x " The term withdrew
( dvExo)QT)08v) which Matthew uses, ordinarily carries
with it in the New Testament the thought of avoiding
difficulty or danger. The imprisonment of John turned
the minds of the people and the fears and jealousies
of the Pharisees to his yet more popular and danger-
ous successor. John had at first drawn all eyes to
himself; then he had divided the allegiance of the
people with Jesus : but now Jesus stands alone, a shin-
ing mark for the envy and malice of the rulers.
But there were yet other and profounder influences
at work than the plots of the enemies of Jesus. He
withdrew into Galilee, says Matthew, 146 "that it might
141 Ant. XVIII, 5, 2.
148 John xi. 48.
148 See my Teaching of the Gospel oj John, pp. 25, 26.
"'Luke xiii. 33,34.
** 5 Matt. iv. 14.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 166
be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the
prophet, saying,
"The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali,
Toward the sea, beyond the Jordan,
Galilee of the Gentiles,
The people that sat in darkness
Saw a great light
And to them that sat in the region and shadow of death
To them did light spring up." ""
It was according to the divine purpose that he preached
the gospel in Galilee of the Gentiles. And this is
indicated also by the words of Luke that "he returned
in the power of the Spirit into Galilee." Even when
his conduct was determined by obvious reasons it
was still directed by the Spirit. Beneath all the im-
pulses and motives that swayed his life was the
inspiring and controlling operation of the Spirit of
God.
But more than that is conveyed by the phrase. Not
only under the impulse and guidance of the Spirit but
clothed with the power of the Spirit he came into
Galilee. That power was manifest in his teaching.
"He taught in their synagogues, being glorified of
all." 14T When he spoke to his neighbours in the
synagogue of Nazareth, "all bare him witness, and
wondered at the words of grace which proceeded out
of his mouth." 148 Always he taught "as one having
authority, and not as their scribes." 149 And the power
of the Spirit appeared also in his miracles, especially
in the casting out of evil spirits. The first miracle that
he performed on this visit to Galilee was the healing
of a man with a spirit of an unclean demon in the
synagogue of Capernaum; 150 and this cure was followed
148 Isa. ix. 1,2. 119 Matt. vii. 29.
147 Luke iv. 14. 1BO Mark i. 23; Luke iv. 33.
148 Luke iv. 22.
166 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
161
on the same day by many others of the same kind. 1
It is significant that Jesus refers this form of miracle,
and this only, to the power of the Spirit. "If I by the
Spirit of God cast out demons, then is the kingdom of
God come upon you." 1B3 In the parallel passage Luke
reads, "By the finger of God," 1B3 indicating probably
the impersonal way in which the disciples at the time
conceived of the Holy Spirit as a manifestation or
operation of the divine power. In the same way Ez-
eldel speaks: "The hand of Jehovah was upon me, and
he brought me out in the Spirit of Jehovah." 1B4 De-
moniac possession was the most conspicuous and strik-
ing manifestation of the power of the kingdom of
darkness, and the casting out of demons the supreme
exhibition of the sovereignty of God over the forces
of unrighteousness. Jesus therefore ascribes it directly
to the Spirit of God. Only by the Spirit of God can
the spirits of evil be expelled.
That Jesus believed in evil spirits and in their power
over men is too obvious to be questioned. There are
those who recognize the fact but hold that he was
mistaken; and there are those who maintain that he
knew better but accommodated his teaching to the
prejudices and superstitions of his hearers. Then we
must believe that by word of mouth and by his acts he
deliberately encouraged and fostered a false opinion,
liable to fearful abuse. From such a course no possible
advantage could accrue to truth or to the kingdom of
God; and that Jesus followed it is simply incredible. If
we were forced to choose, it would be better to hold him
ignorant of the truth than careless of the truth. But
no such alternative is thrust upon us. He taught the
reality of demoniac possession simply because it was
a fact. That evil spirits inhabit men is the visible
evidence of the power of sin and in the casting out of
161 Matt. viii. 16, 17; Mark i. 32-34; Luke xiv. 40, 41.
162 Matt. xii. 28. lsa Luke xi. 20. 15 * Ezek. xxxvii. 1.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 167
evil spirits he recognized the token and prophecy of the
overthrow of the kingdom of Satan. 1
156
V. JESUS REJOICED IN THE HOLY SPIRIT
"In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit,
and said, I thank thee, "Father, Lord of heaven and
earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise
and understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes:
yea, Father, for so it was well pleasing in thy sight." 1B8
The passage in which these words occur is found
only in Luke, for it falls within the so-called Perean
section of the Third Gospel, with which Matthew and
Mark have few points of contact. 157 Jesus "appointed
seventy others" in addition to the twelve 1B8 "and
sent them two and two before his face into every city
and place, whither he himself was about to come." 1BB
When they returned, they were filled with joy, ex-
claiming, "Lord, even the demons are subject unto us
in thy name." He did not rebuke their joy, but re-
joiced with them: "I beheld Satan as lightning fall
from heaven." The change of fall to falling in the
English Revised Version and to fallen in the American
Version is in neither case an improvement. "I watched
him fall." 16 At the same tune he reminds them
of a higher and purer joy that is theirs, that their
names are written in heaven. The thought of a book
of life in which God inscribes the names of his people
was familiar to the Jews. 181 There are those who
teach that concern for our personal salvation is purely
selfish, and unworthy of a disciple of Christ; we should
forget ourselves in care for others. However we may
155 Luke x. 17, 18.
156 Luke x. 21.
157 Luke ix. 51 xviii. 14.
168 Luke ix. 1.
1BB Lukex. 1.
180 Moulton, Gram. N. T. Greek, p. 134.
161 Exod. xxxii. 32; Ps. Ixix. 28; Dan. xii. 11; Mai. iii. 16.
168 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
reason about the matter, that is evidently not the
teaching of Christ or of the New Testament generally.
The Scripture constantly presses upon men the motives
of hope and fear, holds out to them the promise of re-
ward and the threat of penalty as incentives to holy
living. The life of a man is not his own ; it belongs
to God: and he is bound to care for it, and train it,
enrich it, for the glory of God. The first concern of
every man is to see that he is himself right with God.
Why should he be careful of the souls of others, and
careless of his own? Is his soul less precious in the
sight of God than his neighbour's? Nor is the life
equipped for service merely by serving. The roots
must be nourished that the fruit may abound, and
he who does not give heed to the development of his
own spiritual life, his own salvation in the largest
sense of the term, will have little strength or grace with
which he may minister to God or man. Because the
individual soul is of itself unspeakably precious before
God, and that it may be rendered effective and fruit-
ful in the service of the kingdom, every man is required
to look to himself, to make sure of his place among
the children of God.
This is the only occasion recorded in any of the
Gospels upon which Jesus is said to have rejoiced.
Much is told of his emotional life, of the passions and
affections that stirred his heart. Thrice it is related
that he wept: when from the height of Olivet he looked
down upon Jerusalem, and thought of the sin of the
chosen people, and the judgment that awaited
them; 188 when he mingled his tears with those of the
sisters of Lazarus; 188 and in Gethsemane, where he
offered up "prayers and supplications with strong cry-
ing and tears unto him that was able to save him from
death." 18 * Four times it is recorded that he loved:
189 Luke xix. 41. lea Jobs xi. 35. le * Heb. y. 7,
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 169
he loved the rich young ruler; 166 Martha and Mary
and Lazarus; 106 and the company of his disciples, the
twelve; 197 and John is distinguished as the disciple
whom Jesus loved. Twice he marvelled: at the faith
of the centurion; 168 and at the unbelief of the men
of Nazareth. 168 He was often moved with compassion
by the sorrows and miseries of men. His soul was
troubled in view of the suffering that threatened
him. 170 On one occasion he was moved to mingled
grief and anger by the hardness of men's hearts. 171
Only here is it said that he rejoiced. That is not to
say that his life was spent in darkness and sorrow.
The prophet calls him a man of sorrows, and that is
true, but it presents only one aspect of his life. Sor-
row played upon his life and sometimes penetrated to
the depths of his spirit, 17 " but the dominant note of
his experience was joy. "My meat is to do the will
of him that sent me." 1T8 The writer of the Epistle to
the Hebrews puts into the mouth of Christ the words
of Ps. xl. 8, which read in the original, I delight to do
thy will, my God. In his last discourse to his dis-
ciples beneath the shadow of the cross he spoke of
his joy. 174 But this is the only instance in which the
joy that filled his heart is given a definite place in the
record of his life. See paper, "The Emotional Life
of Our Lord," by Prof. B. B. Warfield, in Biblical and
Theological Studies by the Faculty of Princeton
Seminary.
What was the immediate occasion of his rejoicing?
Luke associates it with the return of the seventy and
the report which they gave to him of their ministry.
"In that same hour he rejoiced." The words that
186 Mark x. 27. 17 John xii. 27; Matt. xxvi. 37.
18a Johnxi. 5. 171 Mark iii. 5.
187 John xiii. 1; xv. 5. 172 John xii. 27; Mark xiii. 34.
188 Matt. viii. 10. 17S John iv. 34.
18B Markvi. $. 17 ' Reb. xii. 2.
170 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
follow, "I thank thee, Father/' are reported by
Matthew in a different connexion, following the woes
that Jesus pronounced upon the cities that had not
repented though they beheld his mighty works, and
the invitation, "Come unto me, all ye that labour and
are heavy laden." 17B But his note of time is not so
precise as Luke's "At that season"; 178 while Luke
reads, "In that same hour." We may presume that
the words were twice spoken, or note that while Mat-
thew's point of time is indefinite, Luke has fixed the
very hour. That Matthew uses the phrase at that
season in an indeterminate sense elsewhere is plain. 177
The ground of his rejoicing is "that thou didst hide
these things from the wise and understanding, and
reveal them unto babes." The question at once arises,
What is meant by these things? Jesus does not say,
but obviously he has in mind the mysteries of the
kingdom of heaven which he had revealed unto his
disciples, and had commissioned them to proclaim. 178
These are the things which God hides from some and
discloses to others among men.
There are those who would find the ground of Jesus'
thanksgiving simply in the revelation of these things
to babes, and read "though, or whereas, thou didst hide
these things from the wise and prudent." But the
difficulty is not removed by this rendering. In any
case Jesus recognizes that God hides the mysteries of
the kingdom from some and reveals them to others.
The fact indeed is written broadly across the face of
history. Nor is the rendering warranted. Rom. vi. 17
is not parallel. The literal rendering of that verse is:
"But thanks be to God that ye were bondservants of
sin, but obeyed from the heart." Here the adversative,
but (8s) justifies the rendering of the Revised Ver-
sion: "But thanks be to God, that whereas ye were
176 Matt. xi. 25. 177 Matt. xii. 1; xiv. 1.
178 Matt. xi. 25. 178 Luke viii. 10; Matt. xiii. 11.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 171
servants of sin." Here, however, the clauses are joined
by and (xal), and must be taken as together furnish-
ing the reason for his thanksgiving. It is in harmony
with all Scripture teaching, and especially with the
teaching of Jesus, to regard the hiding and the reveal-
ing as alike moving him to thanksgiving, because both
are comprehended in the purpose of God as principles
of the divine administration, and because taken to-
gether they promote the highest ends. The wise and
prudent are the worldly wise, those who are wise in
their own conceits, who rely upon their own under-
standing, and will not submit to be taught of God;
the babes are the humble, the docile. Paul enjoins the
Corinthians, "Brethren, be not children in mind: yet
in malice be ye babes, but in mind be men." 17e Jesus
rejoices that the truth is hidden from one class and
made known to the other, because God is thus glorified
as the source of all true wisdom. Only they are wise
who learn of him. The condition of entrance into the
kingdom of heaven is not intellectual superiority or
abundant learning, nothing that is confined of neces-
sity to a limited class; it is the meek and teachable
spirit; the gates of eternal life are thrown open to all
those who suffer God to be their guide.
The law here recognized prevails not only in the
realm of religious truth, but in every sphere of thought.
Lord Bacon tells us that "The access also to this work"
man's acquisition of power over nature "hath been
by that port or passage, which the divine Majesty
(who is unchangeable in his ways) doth infallibly
continue and observe; that is the felicity wherewith
he hath blessed an humility of mind, such as rather
laboureth to spell and so by degrees to read in the
volumes of his creatures, than to solicit and urge and
as it were to invocate a man's own spirit to divine
and give oracles unto him. For as in the inquiry of
179 1 Cor. xiv. 20.
178 THE HOLY SPIKIT IN THE GOSPELS
divine truth, the pride of man hath ever inclined to
leave the oracles of God's word and to vanish in the
mixture of their own inventions; so in the selfsame
manner, in inquisition of nature they have ever left
the oracles of God's works, and adored the deceiving
and deformed imagery which the unequal mirrors of
their own minds have represented unto them. Nay,
it is a point fit and necessary in the front and begin-
ning of this work without hesitation or reservation
to be professed, that it is no less true in the human
kingdom of knowledge than in God's kingdom of
heaven that no man shall enter into it except he
become first as a little child." 18
Paul has repeatedly set forth the same truth. "Pro-
fessing themselves to be wise, they became fools." 181
"Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
For seeing that in the wisdom of God, the world
through its wisdom knew not God, it was God's good
pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to
save them that believed." And the reason assigned is
"that no flesh should glory before God." 18a Jesus
rejoices that men do not enter the kingdom of heaven
through their own wisdom, but through humility and
faith; for thus the kingdom is thrown open to every
sincere and earnest soul, and to God is given all the
glory of their salvation.
The nature as well as the ground of his rejoicing is
indicated. He rejoiced in the Holy Spirit. The
phrase does not occur again in the New Testament.
Certain manuscripts omit Holy, and some scholars of
the first rank, therefore, as Meyer and Godet, read,
he rejoiced in spirit. Similar expressions are found
elsewhere: he perceived in his spirit; 188 he sighed
deeply in his heart; 184 he groaned in the spirit; 185 he
180 On the Interpretation of Nature, ch. i. 188 Mark ii. 5.
181 Eom. i. 22. 1S * Mark viii. 12.
188 1 Cor. i. 20-30. 18B John xi. 33.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS I. 173
was troubled in the spirit. 188 But the weight of
authority is in favour of the reading, Holy; and
though the phrase is unique, the thought is familiar.
"The kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but
righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." 18T
"The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy." 188 The joy
that thrilled the heart of Jesus was the joy of the
Holy Spirit, 188 the joy begotten by the Spirit in the
hearts of the children of God. From him all right-
eousness and peace and joy proceed. To him is
properly referred every pure emotion and holy pas-
sion and experience that stirs within the hearts of
men.
The passage shows that not only was the conduct
of Jesus, his outward activity, directed and controlled
by the Holy Spirit, but the Spirit inspired the very
thoughts and feelings of his heart. He walked not
after the flesh but after the Spirit, and he lived in the
Spirit, as the very source and spring of his life. The
joy that filled his heart he imparts to his disciples, 190
and Paul bids believers, Rejoice in the Lord. 191 We
cannot fail to note that while as a man Jesus receives
from the Holy Spirit the gifts of peace and joy, as
Son of God he bestows these gifts on men. 193 All
that is good in men is the gift of the Father through
the mediation of the Son by the operation of the Holy
Spirit.
From our study it is plain that references to the
Holy Spirit in the life of Jesus are not numerous in
the Synoptic Gospels. There are indeed only six,
beside those contained in the narrative of his birth.
(1) the words of John the Baptist "He shall baptize
you ,with the Holy Spirit." "' (2) The Spirit de-
189 John xiii. 21. 18B I Thess. i. 6.
187 Rom. xiv. 7. 18 John xv. 11.
188 Gal. v. 22. 191 Phil. iv. 4.
198 John xiv. 27; xv. 11.
193 Matt. iii. 11; Mark i. 8; Luke iii. 16.
174 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
scended upon him at his baptism. 19 * (3) He was led
by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of
the devil. 185 (4) He returned in the power of the
Spirit into Galilee. 186 (5) "I will put my Spirit upon
him." 197 (6) He rejoiced in the Holy Spirit. 198 Four
of these passages are found in Matthew, three in Mark,
and five in Luke. (5) is peculiar to Matthew, (4) and
(6) are peculiar to Luke.
But while these references are few, they are of great
importance, because they occur at critical points in
the history, as in his conception, his baptism, his
temptation, and because they imply the continuous
operation of the Spirit in his life. What is told us
of his acts and experiences upon these exceptional and
extraordinary occasions may fairly be taken to indi-
cate that the Spirit who then controlled and inspired
him was his constant guide and comforter, to whom
he committed all his ways and from whom he derived
unfailing supplies of strength and wisdom and grace.
That indeed is plainly declared by Matthew who
applies to Jesus the prophecy of Isaiah:
Behold, my servant whom I have chosen;
My beloved in whom my soul is well pleased;
I will put my Spirit upon him,
And he shall declare judgment to the Gentiles.
He shall not strive nor cry aloud;
Neither shall anyone hear his voice in the streets.
A bruised reed shall he not break,
And smoking flax shall he not quench,
Till he send forth judgment unto victory.
And in his name shall the Gentiles hope. 199
His character and his ministry are the fruit of the
Spirit of God.
194 Matt. iii. 16; Mark i. 10; Luke iv. 1. 187 Matt. xii. 18.
195 Matt. iv. 1; Mark i. 12; Luke iv. 1. 198 Luke x. 21.
188 Luke iv. 14. 1 "> Matt. xii. 18-21.
B IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL
CHAPTER V
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LIFE
OF JESUS II.
Each of the four Gospels presents Jesus as God
manifest in the flesh. He is not simply man in Mat-
thew, Mark, and Luke, and God in John : in all of them
alike he is God-man. This union of the divine and
human natures in one Person gives rise to startling
contrasts. He was thirsty by Jacob's well and asked
a woman of Samaria for a drink of water; to her he
gave the water of life eternal. He was asleep in a boat,
wearied with the labour of the day; he calmed the
storm with a word. He had nowhere to lay his head;
and all things were delivered unto him of the Father.
He wept beside the tomb of Lazarus; he called the dead
to life. He was a man of sorrows; he bequeathed to his
disciples his peace, his joy. Knowing that the Father
had given all things into his hands, with those same
hands he washed the feet of the disciples, setting the
power of God to perform the office of a slave. Dying
on the cross, to the penitent robber he opened the gates
of Paradise.
The earlier Gospels do not represent Jesus as man
becoming God, while John represents him as God
become man. The same Jesus appears in all of them,
the Word made flesh. But while this truth of the
twofold nature of Jesus is written broadly across the
face of every Gospel, it is also true that his divinity
shines most conspicuously in John ; because the beloved
175
176 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
disciple penetrated most deeply into the mystery of
his Person. The divine nature is not thrown into
relief by concealing his humanity, but rather by setting
the words and deeds of the Son of God side by side with
the physical infirmities and sorrows of the Son of man.
Nowhere else is Jesus at once so evidently human and
so conspicuously divine, as in the Fourth Gospel. John
does not depict the transfiguration scene, but the trans-
figured Christ appears on every page. This is especially
evident in Jesus' witness to himself. In the earlier
Gospels his chosen theme, is the kingdom of heaven,
of God; and his characteristic phrase, The kingdom
is like: in John he is himself the central theme, and
the characteristic phrase, I am. Much, therefore, that
is merely implied or suggested in the Synoptic Gospels
is fully disclosed here. Jesus is no more truly divine
but he is more evidently and radiantly divine in John.
We have seen that the Synoptic Gospels contain only
six references to the place and work of the Holy Spirit
in the life of Jesus; the Fourth Gospel contains only,
two, which we may now proceed to consider in order.
1 The witness of John the Baptist.
The Fourth Gospel does not relate the baptism of
Jesus, as the others do, but gives John the Baptist's
account of the descent of the Spirit, which accompanied
it. Of the baptism itself neither the evangelist nor
the Baptist speaks, and we learn of it only from the
Synoptic record.
On the morrow he seeth Jesus coming unto
him, and saith, Behold, the Lamb of God, that
taketh away the sin of the world. This is he of
whom I said, After me cometh a man who is be-
come before me: for he was before me. And I
knew him not; but that he should be made mani-
fest to Israel, for this cause came I baptizing in
water. And John bare witness, saying, I have
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS H. 177
beheld the Spirit descending as a dove out of
heaven ; and it abode upon him. And I knew him
not: but he that sent me to baptize in water, he
said unto me, Upon whomsoever thou shalt see
the Spirit descending, and abiding upon him, the
same is he that baptizeth in the Holy Spirit. And
I have seen, and have borne witness that this is
the Son of God. 1
The repeated phrase, I knew him not, evidently
means, I knew him not until I saw the Spirit descend-
ing upon him; that is, I did not recognize him as the
Christ. But this appears to imply that John had no
personal acquaintance with Jesus. It is hardly credible
that John should not have known of the birth and
office of Jesus from Elisabeth his mother, who in the
unborn babe in Mary's womb recognized my Lord. 2
Even if his father and mother, already advanced in
years at his birth, were dead before he was old enough
to receive the story from their lips, it is highly im-
probable that the tradition from which Luke derived
his narrative was unknown to him whom it so nearly
concerned. And it is no more credible that John
should have wholly lost sight of him whose forerunner
he knew himself to be. To say therefore, I knew him
not as the Christ implies, I did not know that it was
Jesus of Nazareth who came to me to be baptized.
They were kinsmen, yet there is in the record no indi-
cation that they had ever met before. John was in
the deserts, the wilderness of Judea, till the day of his
showing unto Israel; 8 while Jesus was brought up in
Nazareth of Galilee, and the Gospels give no indication
that he ever visited Judea from the time that he was
twelve years old until he entered upon his public
ministry.
That John might know the Christ when he ap-
1 John i. 29-34. s Luke i. 43. 8 Luke i. 80.
178 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
peared a sign was promised. The star made him
known to the wise men, the angel to the shepherds;
the Spirit declared him to John. It was the character-
istic and distinguishing mark of the Messiah as fore-
told by the prophets that the Spirit of Jehovah should
rest upon him ; and in the sight of John the prophecy
was fulfilled in Jesus. It might be said of John con-
fessing Christ as of Peter, "Flesh and blood hath not
revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in
heaven." *
At this point there is an apparent discrepancy be-
tween the Fourth Gospel and the First. Here John
the Baptist affirms that he did not know Jesus until
he saw the Spirit descending upon him, and this oc-
curred, as the other Gospel informs us, when he had
been baptized. But Matthew says that when Jesus
came to John to be baptized, John would have hin-
dered him, saying, "I have need to be baptized of thee,
and comest thou to me?" B How can these statements
be reconciled? If John "knew him not," what is the
meaning of the words that Matthew records? Why
should John seek to hinder Jesus from receiving bap-
tism at his hands, unless he recognized in him the
Christ? It is not enough to say in answer to the
difficulty that John was impressed by the character
of Jesus, that he had ascertained the purity and holi-
ness of his life, through personal intercourse with him
before he presented himself for baptism. The words
obviously convey a higher meaning. For John as a
prophet of God could recognize in the discharge of his
office no superior except the Christ. No mere man,
however exalted his character or holy his life, could
John regard as beyond the need of baptism and re-
pentance. But if he recognized in Jesus the Christ
before his baptism, how could he say, I knew him not
* Matt. xvi. 17. B Matt. iii. 14.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS H. 179
until the Spirit came upon him after his baptism?
The only adequate solution of the difficulty is that ac-
cording to Matthew John had a premonition or antici-
pation of the truth which came to full assurance only
when the promised sign was given. John believed that
Jesus was the Christ when he came to him to be bap-
tized, and he learned who he was; but he had no
authoritative and official knowledge of the fact until
he saw the Spirit rest upon him. Since the promise
had been given that the Christ should be indicated by
the descent of the Spirit upon him, for that sign John
must wait. The witness of John must follow the wit-
ness of the Spirit. However fully he might be per-
suaded in his own mind, he could not proclaim Jesus
as the Christ until the prophecies of the Old Testa-
ment and the promise of God had been fulfilled in
him. The prophet must speak by revelation, and not
run before he is sent.
Here as in the earlier Gospels John contrasts his
baptism with the baptism of Jesus. "He that sent me
to baptize in water, he said unto me, Upon whomsoever
thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon
him, the same is he that baptizeth in the Holy Spirit."
To the Synoptic record John adds, "And it abode upon
him." It may here be justified as expressing John's
point of view, for there is no reason to suppose that
he apprehended the Personality of the Spirit; or as
referring to the visible manifestation of the Spirit in
the form of a dove, since the subject of the verb abode
is not expressed in the Greek. The abiding of the
Spirit upon Jesus distinguishes him from the rulers
and prophets to whom the Spirit was given on a par-
ticular occasion for a special purpose and a limited
time.
The other Gospels relate that Jesus saw the descent
of the Spirit in the form of a dove, which marked his
180 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
entrance upon his Messianic work; the Fourth Gospel
records that John also beheld it, and it was to him
the promised sign of the Christ.
Jesus receives the Spirit that he may impart the
Spirit to men. He on whom the Spirit descends and
abides is he who baptizes with the Spirit. As in bap-
tism the body is immersed 'in water, so the soul is
immersed in the Spirit, affected in every part by his
cleansing power.
John omits and 'fire, which is found in Matthew and
Luke, and the omission points to a striking difference
between the two representations of Jesus. In Mat-
thew and Luke John presents him predominantly,
almost exclusively, as a judge. The axe, the winnowing
fan, the fire, are the instruments of justice. The de-
struction of the wicked is the conspicuous feature of
his ministry. But in the Fourth Gospel John presents
him as the Saviour, and the note of judgment is
wanting. How striking is the contrast between him
who wields the axe, baptizes with fire, burns the chaff
with unquenchable fire, and the Lamb of God who
taketh away the sin of the world! There is nothing in
the record of the Fourth Gospel that answers to the
axe and the fire; there is nothing in the Synoptic ac-
count that answers to the Lamb bearing the sins of
men. The Baptist was charged with a twofold mes-
sage, of which the first part is recorded by the Synoptic
Gospels only, and the second part only by the
Fourth Gospel. Before Jesus came to him, he cried,
"Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
After Jesus came to him he cried, "Behold, the Lamb
of God." Repentance and faith formed the burden
of his preaching; repentance that prepares the way
for the coming of the Saviour; faith that lays hold
upon him when he comes. John's representation of
Jesus is in harmony with the purpose which dominates
the Fourth Gospel throughout, and is expressed in
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS H. 181
xx. 31 : "These are written that ye may believe that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing
ye may have life in his name." Faith is the dominant
note of John's Gospel, as love is the dominant note
of his Epistle. Here, as often elsewhere, we must com-
bine the records of the various Gospels to reach the
full measure of the truth as it is in Jesus.
2 The Spirit given without measure.
He that cometh from above is above all: he
that is of the earth is of the earth, and of the earth
he speaketh : he that cometh from heaven is above
all. What he hath seen and heard, of that he
beareth witness; and no man receiveth his witness.
He that hath received his witness hath set his seal
to this, that God is true. For he whom God hath
sent speaketh the words of God; for he giveth
not the Spirit by measure. The Father loveth the
Son, and hath given all things into his hand. He
that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but
he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but
the wrath of God abideth on him. 6
Two preliminary questions must be considered be-
fore we undertake to ascertain the meaning of the ref-
erence to the Spirit.
(1) Are these the words of John the Baptist, who has
just been speaking, or of the evangelist? It cannot be
shown that the thought of the passage is too advanced
for John the Baptist, for it contains nothing that is
not virtually contained in his witness to Jesus. 7 In
i. 33, 34 the several Persons of the Trinity already ap-
pear, though John could not have apprehended the full
mystery of the Godhead as it is brought to light in the
New Testament. "He that sent me/' the Father; he on
whom the Spirit rests, the Son. There is nothing in
this passage which is not implicitly contained or ex-
8 John iii. 31-36. 7 Godet, in loc.
188 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
plicitly declared in John's witness in the first chapter
of the Gospel.
It is often affirmed that the passage cannot be re-
ferred to the Baptist because "no man receiveth his
witness" is inconsistent with vs. 29 "He that hath the
bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bride-
groom, that standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly
because of the bridegroom's voice: This my joy
therefore is made full." How could he rejoice if no
man receiveth Christ's witness? But the argument
is not weighty. John's joy in Christ was not measured
or determined by the faith of men. He could rejoice
in hearing the bridegroom's voice if there were none to
share his joy. Nor must the sorrowful words, "No man
receiveth his witness" be too literally understood; for
immediately he adds, "He that hath received his wit-
ness." Here as in John i. 11, 12 "He came unto his
own, and they that were his own received him not, But
as many as received him" the general truth is noted,
and then the proper exception made. In the heart
of John joy and sorrow were blended, as in the heart of
Jesus. The present tenses of the passage also point to
John, and while the question cannot be absolutely
determined, the balance of probability is decided in
favour of the view that these are the words of John the
Baptist. 8
(2) The construction of the sentence is in doubt.
What is the subject of the verb? The Authorized Ver-
sion reads, "God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto
him," but both God and unto him are properly omitted
in the Revised Version. The Greek reads simply,
ov Y<* &K M T Q V 5itooiv TO jtvefyia, and the subject must
be supplied. It is possible that either Father, Son, or
Spirit may be the subject. The Father gives the Spirit,
8 So Godet and Meyer, though Meyer adds that the passage was
"elaborated in its whole style and coloring by John" (the evan-
gelist). For the view that it is the evangelist who speaks, see
Westcott, in loc.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS II. 183
the Son gives the Spirit, or the Spirit gives, with the
object not specified. The third alternative may be
dismissed with little hesitation, for throughout the
Gospels the Spirit ordinarily does not give, but is
given, and there is no reason to forsake the common
usage here. It is not so easy to determine between the
Father and the Son, both of whom appear in the pre-
ceding clause. But here again the predominant usage
of the Gospels is in favour of regarding the Father
as the subject. Usually it is the Father who gives.
This passage presents the Father as sending the Son,
and giving all things into his hand. He who sends the
Son gives the Spirit; and in the all things which he
gives the Spirit is embraced. We may therefore with
little hesitation read, "God giveth not the Spirit by
measure." B And this is in evident accord with the
whole tenor of the passage. The Father sends the
Son, and the Son speaks the words 1 of the Father,
because the Father gives the Spirit without measure.
Having thus cleared the way, we may proceed to the
interpretation of the text. It is unlimited in form,
and declares a general truth "God giveth not the
Spirit by measure." The law prevails alike in nature
and in grace; and the affluence of the divine bounty
and goodness is a theme on which the sacred writers
delight to dwell both in the Old Testament and in the
New. 10 It is in accordance with the uniform teaching
of Scripture, therefore, that God is said to give the
Spirit without measure. He gives the Spirit to every
man as fully as he is able to receive him. As earth arid
sky are flooded with light, and the eye receives of its
radiance all that it is capable of receiving; as the at-
mosphere envelops the earth, and the lungs receive of
it all that they are able to contain; so the Spirit is
For the view that the Son is the subject see Westcott, in loc.
10 Ps. xxxi. 1, xxxiii. 5, Ixv. 11, Ixxxi. 10, Ixxxiv. 11; Matt. vi. 33,
vii. 11; I Cor. iii. 21-23; Ephes. iii. 19-21; Phil. iv. 19; Jas. i. 5.
184 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
poured out without measure and makes the hearts of
men his temples. It is recorded of many of the saints
of God that they were filled with the Spirit. The first
to whom that honour is ascribed in the Old Testament
record was not Abraham or Moses or David, not war-
rior or sage or king or prophet; but Bezalel, whose
office it was "to devise skilful works, to work in gold,
and in silver, and in brass, and in cutting of stones
for setting, and in carving wood, to work in all manner
of workmanship." " Thus early in the history of the
race did God set high honour on that manual toil
which centuries later was glorified by the Son at the
carpenter's bench in Nazareth.
There are many instances of the limitless gift of the
Holy Spirit in the New Testament, especially in the
writings of Luke, who alone of New Testament writers
uses the terms full of the Spirit, filled with the Spirit ; ia
unless Ephes. v. 18 should be deemed an exception
3dr)Qoi3a'& ev jcvsviiaTi where the thought is the same
though the construction is different. Some scholars
render, with the margin of the American Revision,
in spirit. But EV is evidently instrumental. The
contrast requires with the Spirit; and filled in spirit
standing alone conveys no intelligible meaning. The
phrase full of or filled with the Spirit in Luke has
always the simple genitive, though in ii. 40 he has
jdriQovfisvov aoqpiq:.
Jesus taught this truth by a familiar figure "If ye
then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto
your children, how much more shall your heavenly
Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?" 1S
This general law of the divine administration alike
in nature and in grace finds its supreme exhibition in
the Son. Men are limited partly by necessity, as
11 Exod. xxxi. 2-5.
13 Luke i. 15, 41, 67; iv. 1; Acts ii. 4; iv. 8, 31; vi. 3; vii. 55; ix. 17;
xi. 24; xiii. 9, 52.
18 Luke xi. 13.
SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF JESUS H. 185
creatures, partly by their own moral nature, as sinners.
They are straitened in themselves. There is no limit
to God's will and power to give, there is a limit to then*
capacity! to receive. In Christ alone is lodged the
capacity that answers to the largeness of the gift. He
alone is able to receive as God is able to give; for in
him is no hindrance of sin, no withholding or resistance,
no creature infirmity that may impair the free exercise
and operation of the power of the Spirit. He alone can
receive without measure the gift of the Spirit of God
in whom dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
PART THREE
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING
OF JESUS
A IN THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS
CHAPTER VI
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING
OF JESUS I.
The Jewish apocryphal writings add nothing to the
Old Testament representation of the Spirit, nor do they
appreciably affect the teaching of the New Testa-
ment upon this theme. This is clearly shown by
Swete. 1 The doctrine of the New Testament is de-
veloped directly from the Old. So close is the corre-
spondence between the old revelation and the new, so
carefully does the earlier teaching prepare the way
for the truth of the Personality of the Spirit, that the
transition to the doctrine of Jesus and of Paul was
made without a trace of antagonism or even of dissent
on the part of the disciples or of the Jews. The new
teaching was seen to be simply the logical sequence
of the old.
The earlier exangelists use the terms Spirit, Holy
Spirit, and Spirit of God a where Mark has the Spirit,'
and Luke the Holy Spirit. They represent Jesus as
speaking of the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of
God,* where Luke has finger of God, probably indicat-
ing the sense in which Spirit of God was understood
by the hearers, Spirit of your Father.* In the Author-
1 Holy Spirit in New Testament, pp. 4, 398.
2 Matt. iii. 16.
8 Matt. xii. 28.
* Matt. x. 21.
189
190 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
ized Version Ghost is frequently used instead of Spirit.
Hastings says. "Wherever jtvev^a is accompanied with
ayiov it is translated in A. V. after all the previous ver-
sions 'Holy Ghost' (in 1611 always written 'Holy
Ghost,' which is the more surprising that Rhem. New
Testament has almost always 'Holy Ghost'). When
jtvev^a occurs without ayiov, and the reference is to the
Holy Ghost, it is translated 'spirit' or 'Spirit'." 5 The
rule is correctly stated, but there are a few exceptions.
In Luke xi. 13; Ephes. i. 13; iv. 30; I Thess. iv. 8,otvei5(xa
ayiov is rendered Holy Spirit. The English Revisors
in some instances retain Holy Ghost and in others sub-
stitute Holy Spirit, as is indicated in the appendix of
the American Revision. In seventy-three instances
Holy Ghost is retained, upon what grounds does not
appear. When the phrase Holy Ghost first appears, in
Matt. i. 18, it is accompanied by a marginal note, "Or,
Holy Spirit, and so throughout this book," and a simi-
lar note is added wherever the phrase occurs through-
out the New Testament. The American Revisers have
taken a wiser course and read uniformly Holy Spirit.
This is the better way not only because it is in harmony
with modern usage, but because it preserves the term
which is enshrined in the earlier revelation. Why
should we speak of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testa-
ment and of the Holy Ghost in the New Testament?
Here we must inquire, What is the precise signifi-
cance of the term Holy Spirit? God is holy, God is a
Spirit; why then is the Third Person of the Trinity
specifically designated as the Holy Spirit? Augustine's
answer to the question is interesting, if not adequate.
His treatise On the Trinity, upon which he laboured
for nearly thirty years, is the ripe fruit of the most
original and powerful intellect that the church has
known since the days of the Apostles. In Book V, Ch.
5 HBD., II, 165, art. "Ghost."
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 191
xi. of this great work after remarking that the Trinity
cannot be called either the Father or the Son, he adds,
But it can be called in its entirety, the Holy
Spirit, according to that which is written, "God
is a Spirit"; because both the Father is a spirit
and the Son is a spirit, and the Father is holy and
the Son is holy. Therefore since the Father, the
Son and the Holy Spirit are one God, and certainly
God is Holy, and God is a Spirit, the Trinity can
be called also the Holy Spirit. But yet that Holy
Spirit who is not the Trinity, but is understood as
in the Trinity, is spoken of in his proper name, of
the Holy Spirit relatively, since he is referred both
to the Father and to the Son, because the Holy
Spirit is the Spirit both of the Father and of the
Son. But the relation is not itself apparent in that
name, but it is apparent when he is called the gift
of God; for he is the gift of the Father and of the
Son, because "he proceeds from the Father," as
the Lord says; and because that which the apostle
says, "Now, if any man have not the Spirit of
Christ, he is none of his;" he says certainly of
the Holy Spirit himself. . . . Therefore the
Holy Spirit is a certain unutterable communion
of the Father and the Son; and on that account,
perhaps, he is so called, because the same name is
suitable to both the Father and the Son. For
He Himself is called specially that which they are
called in common; because both the Father is a
spirit and the Son is a spirit, both the Father is
holy and the Son holy. In order, therefore, that
the communion of both may be signified from a
name which is suitable to both, the Holy Spirit
is called the gift of both.
In commenting on these words in the third volume
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Dr. Shedd
remarks:
The reason which Augustine here assigns, why
the name Holy Spirit is given to the third person
namely, because spirituality is a characteristic
of both the Father and Son, from both of whom he
proceeds is not that assigned in the more devel-
oped trinitarianism. The explanation in the latter
is, That the third person isj denominated the
Spirit because of the peculiar manner in which the
divine essence is communicated to him namely,
by spiration, or out-breathing: spiritus quia spira-
tus. This is supported by the etymological signi-
ficance of jtvEVficc, which is breath; and by the
symbolical action of Christ in John xx. 22, which
suggests the eternal spiration, or out-breathing of
the third person. The third trinitarian person is
no more spiritual, in the sense of immaterial, than
the first and second persons, and if the term
"spirit" is to be taken in its ordinary signification,
the trinitarian relation, or personal peculiarity, as
Augustine remarks, "is not itself apparent hi this
name"; because it would mention nothing dis-
tinctive of the third person, and not belonging to
the first and second. But taken technically to
denote the spiration or out - breathing by the
Father and Son, the trinitarian peculiarity is ap-
parent in the name, and the epithet "Holy" is
similarly explained. The third person is the Holy
Spirit, not because he is any more holy than the
first and second, but because he is the source and
author of holiness in all created spirits. This is
eminently and officially his work. In this way
also the epithet "Holy" which with ordinary
use would specify nothing peculiar to the third
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OP JESUS I. 193
person- mentions a characteristic that differen-
tiates him from the Father and the Son.
Dr. Hodge speaks to the same effect:
The Third Person of the Trinity is called "The
Spirit" by way of eminence probably, for two rea-
sons, first, because He is the power or efficiency
of God, i.e. the Person through whom the efficiency
of God is directly exercised; and secondly to ex-
press his relation to the other persons of the
Trinity. As Father and Son are terms expressive
of relation, it is natural to infer that the word
Spirit is to be understood in the same way. The
Son is called the Word as a revealer or image of
God, and the Third Person is called Spirit as his
breath or power. He is also predominantly called
the Holy Spirit, to indicate both his nature and
operations. He is absolutely holy in his own na-
ture, and the cause of holiness in all creatures. 8
In our study of the name we must not lose sight of
the fact that the term Spirit, Holy Spirit was employed
in the Old Scripture before the truth of the Trinity
had been revealed. Men knew God in the variety of
his manifestations and operations long before the dis-
tinction of Persons in the Godhead was made known.
Monarchianism in its various forms, like many other
heresies, is simply a case of arrested development; for
it held fast the doctrine of a modal Trinity, as it was
apparently presented in the Old Testament, and re-
fused to recognize the truth of the essential Trinity
as it was brought to light in the New. Spirit, like
breath, signified primarily the power or efficiency of
God; and the term designated primarily rather an
economic than a Trinitarian relation. The Third
8 Syst. TheoL, Vol. I., beginning of chapter viii.
194 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Person was given the name Spirit as the manifested
energy of God rather than upon the ground of this
eternal procession. 7
The New Testament discovers behind the varied
manifestations of God the personal distinctions upon
which they rest, and the term which in the first place
expresses an economic relation is found adequate to
express the essential nature of the Spirit. Back of
his going forth from God as a power is his proceeding
from God as a Person. This truth of the Procession
of the Spirit will come before us for fuller consideration
when we take up the teaching of Jesus as recorded in
the Fourth Gospel. Now it appears that as soon as the
Personality of the Spirit is disclosed, the name assumes
a new and higher significance, and discovers the essen-
tial and eternal relation which he sustains to the Father
and the Son. The term Holy is applied to him in vir-
tue of his office; for he is the source and spring of holi-
ness in all the creatures of God.
In the synoptic report of the teaching of Jesus there
are found seven distinct references to the Holy Spirit;
or if similar sayings spoken on different occasions are
reckoned separately, there are ten. Three are peculiar
to Matthew xii. 18, 8 xii. 28, and xxviii. 19; and two
are peculiar to Luke iv. 18 " and xi. 13. Two are
found in each of the Gospels, though in one instance
Luke gives a different setting to the words: the blas-
phemy against the Holy Spirit Matt. xii. 31, 32;
Mark iii. 29; and Luke xii. 10; while in the other in-
stance, the promise that the Spirit shall teach the dis-
ciples what to say in the hour of danger, each of the
evangelists places the words in a different connexion
Matt. x. 20; Mark xiii. 11 ; Luke xii. 12. The reference
to David speaking in the Spirit is found in Matt. xxii.
7 See my Teaching of the Gospel of John, p. 162.
8 (Quotation from Isaiah.)
' Ibid.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 195
43 and Mark xii. 36. In the course of our study pas-
sages of similar import will be brought together, and
the points of difference noted.
I. PROPHECY FULFILLED IN HIM
The first passage that invites our attention, as we
follow the order of the Harmony, is the quotation of
Isaiah Ixi. 1, 2, in Luke 4:18:
And he came to Nazareth, where he had been
brought up; and he entered, as his custom was,
into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood
up to read, and there was delivered unto him the
book of the prophet Isaiah. And he opened the
book, and found the place where it was written,
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. Because he
anointed me to preach good tidings to the poor:
He hath sent me to proclaim release to the cap-
tives, and recovering of sight to the blind, To set
at liberty them that are bruised, To proclaim
the acceptable year of the Lord.
The quotation differs in details from both the He-
brew and the LXX, but expresses with sufficient accu-
racy the sense of the original.
So far as the record indicates, this is the first public
appearance of Jesus in Nazareth, his first appeal to the
people of the town where he had been brought up. He
appropriates and applies to himself the prophecy re-
garding the Servant of Jehovah, the mysterious figure
that dominates the latter part of the book. As kings
and priests were anointed with oil, the symbol of the
Spirit, he is anointed with the Spirit himself, anointed
for service, as the leaders of the people of God under
the old covenant were endowed by the Spirit with gifts
and grace sufficient for their tasks. The Spirit by
whom he was conceived, who descended upon him in
196 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
visible form at his baptism, abode upon him as the
Christ of God throughout his ministry. It is a mission
of mercy upon which he is sent, and the day of ven-
geance of our God, of which the prophet speaks, is not
named, though the following verses convey to the Jews
a veiled warning not to receive the grace of God in
vain. When John the Baptist sent messengers from
his prison to ask, "Art thou he that cometh, or look we
for another?" Jesus answered by pointing to his works
of grace and power; and the argument reaches its
height in the words of the prophet which he proclaimed
to the men of Nazareth: "The poor have good tidings
preached to them." 10 The philosopher speaks to the
cultured, the prophet of God speaks to the poor.
The passage presents no peculiar difficulties from the
point of view of our theme, and it is needless to spend
time in elucidating the obvious. It is sufficient to refer
to the admirable commentary of Plummer.
II. BLASPHEMY AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT
Matt. xii. 22-32; Mark iii. 20-30; Luke; ii, 10:
Each of the Synoptic Gospels records the difficult say-
ing of Jesus regarding the unpardonable sin; but Luke
does not refer it to the same occasion as Matthew and
Mark. This difference does not compel us to ask which
representation is correct, for there is no reason why
both should not be correct. There is every reason to
believe from the Gospel record and from the rules of
reason that Jesus often repeated himself. His words
were not addressed to modern critics, who have the
whole record before them, but to his immediate hearers,
an audience continually changing. It is preposterous
to assume that the greatest of teachers persistently
disregarded the primary law of education. The great
10 Matt. xi. 5.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 197
truths of the Kingdom, we may be sure, were taught
again and again throughout his ministry. No reason
can be assigned why he may not have spoken of
blasphemy against the Holy Spirit according to the
representation of Matthew, and again on a different
occasion and a later time according to the representa-
tion of Luke.
Matthew and Mark agree in substance, though they
differ in some matters of detail. Neither Gospel pur-
ports to furnish a complete verbal report, and there
is no difficulty in supposing that here and elsewhere
the narratives must be taken together, in order to ob-
tain a full and detailed record of the facts. We are
not shut up to the alternative, Matthew or Mark; but
receive both Matthew and Mark. Each supplies de-
tails which are lacking in the other. Matthew says
that Jesus spoke to the Pharisees; Mark says that he
addressed the scribes that came down from Jerusalem.
Mark tells us that the scribes said, "He hath Beelze-
bub, and, By the prince of demons he casteth out the
demons." What provoked this charge Mark does not
tell us; but Matthew relates the occasion: "Then was
brought unto him one possessed with a demon, blind,
and dumb; and he healed him, in so much that the
blind and dumb both spake and saw. And all the people
were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?
But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow
doth not cast out demons, but by Beelzebub the prince
of demons." The answer of Jesus according to Mark
is an appeal to reason. "How can Satan cast out
Satan?" Is he divided against himself? If so, how
can his kingdom stand? And if another has entered
the domain of Satan and spoiled his goods, he must be
stronger than Satan, he must have mastered him. To
this Matthew adds an argument ad hominem: "If I
by Beelzebub cast out demons, by whom do your sons
198 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
cast them out?" If they and I alike cast out demons,
why do you ascribe my work to Satan and theirs to
God? Your sons are your pupils, your followers, or
simply those of your own race. Exorcism was a com-
mon practice among the Jews. 11 We cannot stop to
ask whether Jesus implies that their sons did actually
cast out demons, or speaks only by way of concession.
It would be interesting to inquire whether Jesus or
any New Testament writer ever constructs an argu-
ment upon a baseless assumption merely in order to
stop the mouth of an opponent ; but it would lead us
too far from our theme.
"But if I by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then
is the Kingdom of God come upon you." Since the
casting out of evil spirits transcends the power of man,
it must be referred to a supernatural power, either to
Satan or to God. It has been shown that it cannot be
of Satan; then it must be of God. The conclusion is
inevitable: the miracle is wrought by Jesus through
the Spirit of God. Mark omits this saying, and Luke
has, by the finger of God instead of by the Spirit. 1 ' 2
This is probably the sense attached to the term Spirit
of God by those who heard Jesus speak. The finger,
like the hand, may be used as a symbol of power, 18
and the personality of the Spirit was not yet clearly
apprehended. The Spirit of God and the power of
God are still equivalent terms to those who had been
trained in the law. If these mighty works have been
wrought of God, then the Kingdom of God is come
upon them. The Kingdom is here in the person of
the King. Where the Messiah appears, clothed with
the power of the Spirit, there is the Kingdom of God.
The argument is followed by a solemn warning:
11 Schiirer, HJP. See Index, Magic.
12 Luke xi. 20.
13 Exod. viii. 19; xxxi. 18; Deut. ix. 10; Ps. viii. 3.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I, 199
31. "Therefore I say unto you, 28. "Verily I say unto you, All
Every sin and blasphemy shall their sins shall be forgiven
be forgiven unto men : but the unto the sons of men, and
blasphemy against the Spirit their blasphemies wherewith-
shall not be forgiven. soever they shall blaspheme :
32. And whosoever shall speak a 29. But whosoever shall bias-
word against the Son of man, pheme against the Holy Spirit
it shall be forgiven him; but hath never forgiveness, but is
whosoever shall speak against guilty of an eternal sin:
the Holy Spirit, it shall not 30. because they said, he hath an
be forgiven him, neither in unclean spirit."
this world, nor in that which Mark iii. 28-30.
is to come."
Matthew xii. 31, 32.
While these reports differ in certain details, they
agree that there is pardon in the mercy of God for
every sin but one. "Every sin and blasphemy shall
be forgiven." "All their sins shall be forgiven unto the
sons of men, and their blasphemies wherewithsoever
they shall blaspheme." Blasphemy is specified as a
peculiarly heinous form of sin. All sins, even blasphe-
mies. And Matthew singles out one kind of blasphemy
as specially abhorrent blasphemy against the Son of
man. The conjecture that Son of man is a misconcep-
tion of Mark's phrase, sons of men, is wholly unneces-
sary. Here again we must remember that neither
evangelist pretends to furnish a detailed and complete
report, and there is no reason why Jesus may not have
said, "all their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of
men," as Mark records, and also, "Whosoever shall
speak a word against the Son of man it shall be for-
given him," as Matthew has it. We are not shut up to
the inquiry, Which is true? There need be no hesita-
tion in accepting both as true. Much futile labour
would be saved if we should simply apply to the Gos-
pels the principles that guide us elsewhere; and rec-
ognize that none of them tells the whole story, but
that they must be put together that the full truth
may appear.
Mark reads, blaspheme against; Matthew has, speak
200 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
a word against. The comparison of vs. 31, blasphemy
against the Spirit and vs. 32, speak against the Holy
Spirit shows that these are equivalent terms. Thus the
offences that may be forgiven are named in an ascend-
ing scale sins, the general term; blasphemy; blas-
phemy against the Son of man.
Blasphemy in Scripture usage signifies abusive, scan-
dalous, injurious language, directed against man or
God. Evidently Jesus has here in mind evil speaking
against God. Under the Mosaic law he who blasphemed
the name of Jehovah was put to death : "The congre-
gation shall certainly stone him." " There are sins
that may be committed without thought of God, or
conscious violation of his law ; but blasphemy is a direct
and purposed insult to the majesty of the Most High ;
a deliberate defiance of the Almighty. Yet even blas-
phemy may be forgiven.
Two kinds of blasphemy are set in contrast blas-
phemy against the Son of man and blasphemy against
the Holy Spirit. Of the first it is declared that it
shall be forgiven. This is not because the blasphemy
against the Son of man is treated as a light offense
On the contrary, by singling it out from the category
of sins and blasphemies and setting it apart it is
recognized as an offense of a particularly heinous
character. Sin, blasphemy, blasphemy against the
Son of man this is the ascending scale. Already he
had asserted and exercised authority to forgive sins; 15
had healed multitudes of the sick; 18 had affirmed that
he was lord even of the Sabbath; 17 that all things had
been delivered unto him of the Father, and that he
alone knew God, and revealed him to whomsoever he
would. 18 Luke adds further emphasis to the thought
of the greatness of the Son of man. He records the
14 Lev. xxiv. 16. 17 Mark ii. 28.
"Mark ii. 5, 10. 18 Matt. xi. 27.
16 Mark i. 34; iii. 11.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 201
saying about the sin of blasphemy against the Holy
Spirit in a different connection, as contained in the
words of Jesus to his disciples in chapter xii. The
sequence of thought here is very striking, even start-
ling. "Every one who shall confess me before men,
him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels
of God ; but he that denieth me in the presence of men
shall be denied in the presence of the angels of God." "
Here he declares that the destiny of men is determined
by their relation to him. Evidently in the mind of
Jesus blasphemy against the Son of man is not a minor
offence, but a sin of a peculiarly heinous character; yet
even this may be forgiven. But there is another step
in the ascending scale sin, blasphemy, blasphemy
against the Son of man, blasphemy against the Holy
Spirit. By thus leading the thought step by step to
this final form of sin, Jesus pictures its appalling nature
in the most solemn and impressive way. Here the line
is crossed that marks the limit of forgiveness.
The thought that for this sin there is no pardon is
differently expressed by the evangelists. Luke has
simply, "shall not be forgiven." Matthew reads, "Who-
soever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not
be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in that which
is to come" ; neither in this present age or dispensation,
nor in that which shall be ushered in by the coming of
the Son of man in glory to judge the world. Upon
the judgment follows the life eternal, so that Jesus'
words mean neither now nor forever, and declare in the
strongest terms that forgiveness is eternally impossible.
The passage of itself neither implies nor denies that
there may be sins which are forgiven in the world to
come. The question was simply not present to the
mind of Jesus at this time, and he throws no light
upon it; but his teaching regarding the doctrine of
future probation is sufficiently clear elsewhere. Mark
16 Luke xii. 8, 9.
202 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
reads, "whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy
Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal
sin." Does this mean, a sin that continues forever, or
a sin of which the consequences are everlasting? No
doubt both are true. But the term used is not d^a^tici
but d^aQTriiJia, 20 which denotes rather an act than a
state of sin, and the second interpretation of the words
therefore expresses most clearly what was in the
thought of Jesus. This is a sin which is never forgiven
and of which the punishment therefore is without end.
Now we turn to inquire what is the nature of the
sin against the Holy Spirit, and why it alone is excluded
from the divine mercy which is ready to pardon all
other sins, however aggravated they may be.
It is not the inner witness of the Spirit to which he
refers, the voice of the Spirit speaking in the heart;
but the manifestation of the Spirit in the work of the
Son of man. His words are spoken in reply to the
charge of the scribes and Pharisees, He hath an unclean
spirit. The reason why blasphemy against the Son of
man may be forgiven while blasphemy against the
Holy Spirit is never forgiven, does not lie in the relative
dignity of the Son of man and the Spirit. For Jesus,
as we have just seen, claimed to have and to exercise
the attributes and prerogatives of the Almighty. Blas-
phemy against him is blasphemy against God. Both
Son and Spirit are divine. Only one reason for the
greater guilt of this form of blasphemy can be found
the difference in the clearness of the manifestation of
God. Blasphemy against the Son of man is distin-
guished from other forms of blasphemy because in him
God is more fully and clearly revealed than he had
ever been made known before. Blasphemy under the
Gospel is therefore an aggravated sin. "A man that
hath set at naught Moses' law dieth without compas-
sion on the word of two or three witnesses: of how
* Trench, Synonyms N. T., LXVI.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 203
much sorer punishment, think ye, shall he be judged
worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God,
and hath counted the blood of the covenant wherewith
he was sanctified an unholy thing, and hath done de-
spite unto the Spirit of grace?" 21 Paul tells the men
of Athens: "The times of ignorance therefore God
overlooked; but now he commandeth men that they
should all everywhere repent: inasmuch as he hath ap-
pointed a day in which he will judge the world in
righteousness by the man whom he hath ordained;
Whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that
he hath raised him from the dead." 22
But while it is true that God is most clearly revealed
in his Son, it is also true that the divinity of the Son
is obscured by the human nature which he assumed,
so that the fulness of the Godhead which dwells in him
is at once revealed and veiled by the flesh. In submit-
ting to become man he laid aside his divine glory,
emptied himself, exchanged the form of God for the
form of man, even of a bondservant. 23 It is possible,
therefore, that men may rail against him, resist him,
blaspheme him, crucify him, through ignorance, an
ignorance which is not without guilt indeed, but which
is yet not deliberate and wilful defiance of God. Peter
said to the men of Israel, after. speaking of the rejection
and crucifixion of Christ, "and now brethren, I know
that in ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers." 2 *
And Paul speaks to the same effect: "We speak God's
wisdom in a mystery, even the wisdom that hath been
hidden, which God foreordained before the world unto
our glory : which none of the rulers of this world hath
known: for had they known it, they would not have
crucified the Lord of Glory." 2B And Paul says of
himself that though he was a blasphemer, and a per-
81 Heb. x. 28, 29; cf. Heb. ii. 2, 3. 2l Acts iii. 17.
23 Acts xvii. 30, 31. 2B I Cor. ii. 7, 8.
23 Phil. ii. 7.
204. THE HOLY SPIKIT IN THE GOSPELS
secutor, and injurious, to which he adds elsewhere that
he strove to make the followers of Christ blaspheme, 88
yet he obtained mercy because he did it ignorantly in
unbelief. 87
Jesus prayed for those who nailed him to the cross,
"Father, forgive them: for they know not what they
do." 28 Whether or not these words formed part of
the original text of Luke, and the manuscript evidence
is against it, there is a general agreement that they pre-
serve a precious fragment of tradition which we may
accept without hesitation as trustworthy.
But there are works of Jesus which are so obviously
and unmistakably wrought by the power of the Spirit
of God that only those can fail to see and understand
who have wilfully blinded their eyes and hardened
their hearts against the truth. The Pharisees recog-
nized that he exercised supernatural power; in the case
of their own- followers they affirmed that the casting
out of evil spirits was accomplished by the power of
God; yet when Jesus cast them out they said, "He hath
Beelzebub, and by the prince of the demons casteth
he out the demons." A work which when wrought
by others they ascribed to God, when wrought by Jesus
they ascribed to Satan. Moved by envy and pride and
hatred they rejected and denied the clearest manifesta-
tion of the power of the Spirit, because he wrought
through Jesus. Their hatred of Jesus drove them to
blaspheme the Holy Spirit who dwelt in him and
through him revealed most clearly his grace and power.
They set their prejudices and interests over against
the manifestation of the Spirit, and exalted themselves
above God.
The sin of which Jesus speaks is not a single isolated
act; it is an act which betrays a deliberate, determined,
malignant spirit of opposition to the Spirit of God
when he operates in unwelcome ways or toward unwel-
88 Acts xxvi. 11. "I Tim. i. 13. 28 Luke xxiii. 34.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 205
come ends. This is apparently the first time that the
charge of having an evil spirit was brought against
Jesus; and so terrible is the guilt of confounding the
work of the Holy Spirit with the work of Satan that he
immediately utters this solemn note of warning, that
men may not incur this mortal sin. Yet according to the
Gospel record the charge was renewed upon several oc-
casions. In Matt. ix. 34 when he had cast out a demon
from one who was dumb, the multitude marvelled,
saying, "It was never so seen in Israel" ; but the Phari-
sees said, "By the prince of demons casteth he out
demons." The remaining instances are all recorded
by the Fourth Gospel alone. In vii. 20 when Jesus had
declared that his teaching was of God, and asked "Why
seek ye to kill me?" it was the multitude who replied,
"Thou hast a demon: who seeketh to kill thee?" In
viii. 46-48 Jesus threw out the challenge to his enemies,
"Which of you conyicteth me of sin? If I say truth,
why do ye not believe me?" and affirmed that God
spoke through him: "He that is of God heareth the
words of God ; for this cause ye hear them not, because
ye are not of God." Then the Jews inquired, "Say we
not well that thou art a Samaritan and hast a demon?"
He answered, "Verily, verily I say unto you, If a man
keep my word, he shall never see death." 38 And the
Jews replied, "Now we know that thou hast a demon."
When he represented himself as the good shepherd, who
giveth his life for the sheep, "there arose a division
again among the Jews because of these words, and
many of them said, He hath a demon, and is mad.
Why hear ye him?" 80
It is evident from this review that the words of the
scribes and Pharisees which drew from Jesus this sol-
emn warning were not the expression of a passing
thought or a sudden burst of anger, but of a deliberate
and settled purpose already forming to ascribe to Satan
sa John viii. 52. John x. 20,
206 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
the teaching and works of Jesus which were manifestly
due to the power of the Holy Spirit.
Bunyan has told us how he was tempted to commit
this sin : "In these days, when I have heard others talk
of what was the sin against the Holy Ghost, then
would the tempter so provoke me to desire to sin that
sin, that I was as if I could not, must not, neither
should be quiet until I had committed it. Now no
sin would serve but that. If it were to be committed
by the speaking of such a word, then I have been as if
my mouth would have spoken that word, whether I
would or no; and in so strong a measure was that
temptation upon me, that often I have been ready to
clap my hands under my chin to hold my mouth from
opening; and to that end also I have had thoughts at
other times to leap with my head downward into some
muck-hole or other, to keep my mouth from speak-
ing." S1 But no single word or act, however atrocious
it may be, is sufficient to constitute the sin against the
Spirit, unless it is the expression of a deliberate and
malignant hatred of good and choice of evil.
The saying of Jesus rests upon the principle fre-
quently set forth in Scripture teaching that responsi-
bility is measured by knowledge. "That servant, who
knew his lord's will, and made not ready, nor did ac-
cording to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes;
but he that knew not, and did things worthy of stripes,
shall be beaten with few stripes." 32 To the Pharisees
Jesus said, "If ye were blind, ye would have no sin;
but now ye say, we see; your sin remaineth." 3S The
brighter the light, the greater is the guilt of those who
will not see. The clearest revelation of the Father
and the clearest manifestation of the Spirit are both
given through the Son. He who rejects the Spirit
working through him rejects the most manifest opera-
tion of the Spirit that can be conceived. And beyond
Grace Abounding, ch. V. SB Luke xii. 47, 48. S8 Johnix. 41.
81
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 207
the Spirit there is nothing. He is the ultimate power
in the kingdom of God. To say that Jesus has an
unclean spirit is to confound evil with good, and set
Satan upon the throne of the kingdom of God.
As Jesus pronounced this the only sin that lies be-
yond reach of forgiveness, if there are other passages
of the New Testament which relate to the subject they
must be interpreted in the light of his teaching. There
are two passages of this nature which call for
consideration.
(a) Heb. vi. 4-6: "For as touching those who were
enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were
made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and tasted the good
word of God, and the powers of the age to come, and
then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again
unto repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the
Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame." In
connexion with these verses should be taken in. 12:
"Take heed, brethren, lest haply there shall be in any
one of you an evil heart of unbelief, in falling away
from the living God"; and x. 26, 27: "For if we sin
wilfully after that w have received the knowledge
of the truth, there remaineth no more a sacrifice for
sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment,
and a fierceness of fire which shall devour the adver-
saries." This is evidently the sin of apostasy from
Christ.
The passage bristles with difficulties. Is the impos-
sible relative or absolute; does it indicate merely that
the human teacher is not able to lead men a second
time to repentance; or does it signify that there is no
hope of repentance and restoration even in God? Does
the writer picture in these graphic phrases the condi-
tion of those who have been truly regenerated, or
simply of those who have been awakened and have
made a profession to which there is no corresponding
reality? The passage has inevitably become a battle-
208 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
ground between the opposing doctrines of the final
perseverance of the regenerate and falling from grace.
None of these questions calls for discussion here. It
is sufficient for our purpose to inquire what is the
relation of this passage to the words of Jesus with
which we are engaged. If we accept the truth of Jesus'
teaching that there is only one unpardonable sin, two
alternatives present themselves; either the sin of
apostasy is identical with the sin against the Spirit, or
it is not beyond the range of repentance and pardon.
The first is evidently to be preferred. The passage
in Hebrews differs from the teaching of Jesus not be-
cause it deals with another kind of sin, but because
it deals with the same sin in another class of persons.
Jesus speaks of unbelievers, who continually and malig-
nantly reject the plainest manifestation of the truth;
the writer of the Epistle goes further, and speaks of
those who had penetrated so deeply into the truth that
they had tasted of the heavenly gift, and the word of
God, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and
then fell away. The sin against the Spirit may be
committed by those who are open and avowed enemies
of Jesus, and by those who have been his followers, at
least hi outward profession. And here again the prin-
ciple is made plain, that men are judged according to
the measure of light that they have enjoyed, a principle
signally illustrated in the woes pronounced upon
Chorazin and Bethsaida and Capernaum in comparison
with Tyre and Sidon and Sodom. 8 * What hope remains
for those who have been partakers of the Holy Spirit,
have recognized and acknowledged him, and then have
deliberately renounced his guidance and authority,
and repudiated the Son in whom he dwells and through
whom he works? 3 B
(b) The second passage which call for remark is I
8 * Matt. xi. 20-24. " See Delitzsch on Hebrews, in loc.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 209
John v. 16, 17: "If any man see his brother sinning a
sin not unto death, he shall ask, and God will give him
life for them that sin hot unto death. There is a sin
unto death : not concerning this do I say that he should
make request. All unrighteousness is sin; and there is
a sin not unto death." The Epistle may be called the
doctrinal interpretation of the Gospel, or the com-
mentary of the beloved disciple upon the words of the
Master. It is natural therefore to associate this pas-
sage with the teaching of Jesus regarding the unpardon-
able sin; and a careful examination shows how closely
they are related. "All their sins shall be forgiven unto
the sons of men, and their blasphemies wherewithso-
ever they shall blaspheme"; "there is a sin not unto
death." "Whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy
Spirit hast never forgiveness"; "there is a sin unto
death." A sin unto death is not merely a sin that
naturally issues in death, for that is true of all sin. The
distinction is sharply drawn and indicates unmistak-
ably that the sin unto death is a sin that inevitably
issues in death, that is, a sin which has no forgiveness.
According to John, as in the teaching of the New
Testament in general, the destiny of men is determined
by their relation to Christ. "He that hath the Son
hath the life: he that hath not the Son of God hath
not the life." 3e But in the Epistle as in the words of
Jesus it is the Spirit of God who dwells in the incarnate
Son and works through him. "Hereby know we the
Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus
Christ is come in the flesh is of God; and every spirit
that confesseth not Jesus is not of God." 87 In the
Gospel and the Epistle alike the sin condemned is the
sin of wilful and malignant hostility to the manifesta-
tion and operation of the Holy Spirit in the Son of
man. For by the Spirit through the Son God grants
"Uohnv. 12. "Uohniv. 2.
210 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
to men the fullest and clearest revelation of his charac-
ter and will, makes to them the final offer of his grace.
If this be rejected, nothing remains.
Here again it must be noted that the sin is not an
isolated act, but rather a state or condition which
betrays itself in word or deed. For sin of this nature
prayer is not commanded though it is not forbidden.
John is speaking of the prayers of believers for one
another "If any man see his brother sinning"; and
intimates that by this sin a man forfeits his right to the
intercession of the Church. How it may be known
whether a man has been guilty of this sin is a question
that John does not stop to ask.
We conclude, then, that the unpardonable sin of
blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the attitude of
deliberate, wilful, malignant hostility to the clearest
manifestation of the presence of God which is given by
his Spirit dwelling in and working through his Son.
It is the most heinous of those sins which the Mosaic
law called presumptuous or highhanded. 38 "And if one
person sin unwittingly, then he shall offer a she-goat a
year old for a sin offering. . . . But the soul that
doeth aught with a high hand whether he be home-
born or a sojourner, the same blasphemeth Jehovah;
and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
Because he hath despised the word of Jehovah, and
hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly
be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him." 88 It is the
sin of open and persistent defiance of God when his
will is clearly revealed which, alike in the Old Testa-
ment and the New, is the sin unto death, under the
law of Moses the death of the body, under the clearer
light of the gospel that loss of eternal life which is
termed the second death.
88 See Delitzseh on Ps. xix. 13; Haupt on I John v. 17, note.
89 Num. xv. 27-31; c/. Dent. xvii. 12.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OP JESUSI.
III. THE PROMISE OF THE SPIRIT
When Jesus sent forth the twelve to preach the gos-
pel and to work miracles he gave them a charge, which
in Matthew's report is given at length. He warns them
of the persecutions which they shall suffer: "But be-
ware of men ! for they will deliver you up to councils,
and in their synagogues they will scourge you; yea, and
before governors and kings shall ye be brought for my
sake, for a testimony to them and to the Gentiles."
But with the word of warning is given also the word
of comfort: "But when they deliver you up, be not
anxious how or what ye shall speak; for it shall be
given you in that hour what ye shall speak. For it is
not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that
speaketh in you." 40 Mark and Luke give a meagre
report of this charge, and omit the reference to the
Holy Spirit. But they both record similar promises
given upon different occasions. When Jesus foretold
the destruction of the temple, "Peter and James and
John and Andrew asked him privately, Tell us, when
shall these things be?" " Then he pictured to them
the signs of the end. These do not concern us here,
but again the disciples are forewarned of the sufferings
that they shall be called to undergo, and again the
assurance is given them of divine assistance. Mark
reads, "And when they lead you to judgment, and
deliver you up, be not anxious beforehand what ye
shall speak; but whatsoever shall be given you in that
hour, that speak ye; for it is not ye that speak but
the Holy Spirit." " In the parallel passage Matthew
makes no allusion to the aid of the Spirit. Luke reads,
"Settle it therefore in your hearts not to meditate be-
forehand how to answer; for I will give you a mouth
and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be
able to withstand or gainsay." " When these accounts
4 Matt. x. 17-20. * 2 Mark xiii. 11.
41 Mark iii. 3, 4; Luke xxi. 7. ta Luke xxi. 14, 15.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
of Mark and Luke are brought together, they imply
the claim of Jesus that he would confer upon his dis-
ciples the gift of the Holy Spirit. "It is not ye that
speak but the Holy Spirit; I will give you a mouth
and wisdom." It is the Holy Spirit, it is Jesus, who
speaks through them. This is the nearest approach
that the Synoptic Gospels present to the promise of
John xvi. 7: "If I go not away, the Comforter will not
come unto you; but if I go, I will send him unto you."
Though John the Baptist declared, "He shall baptize
you in the Holy Spirit," nowhere in the earlier Gospels,
and rarely in John, does Jesus explicitly affirm that he
will send the Holy Spirit. Ordinarily the Holy Spirit is
sent by the Father. But in this instance there is an im-
plicit claim which is clearly brought out by a compari-
son of the accounts, and this is strengthened by a com-
parison of this passage in Luke with the similar passage
in xii. 11, 12: "And when they bring you before the
synagogues, and the rulers and the authorities, be not
anxious how or what ye shall say; for the Holy Spirit
shall teach you in that very hour what ye ought to
say." Each of the evangelists records the promise of
the Holy Spirit to aid the disciples in the hour of need,
and each places it in a different setting. Here again it
is evident that our Lord frequently repeated the les-
sons that he taught, for men were slow to understand
and believe.
The meaning of the promise is clear. God will not
forsake his children, nor Jesus his disciples, when dan-
ger threatens. Not only shall they be guarded and
kept, but they shall be given by the Spirit words of
wisdom and of power which none can withstand. The
promise has been abundantly verified in the experience
of God's people throughout the whole history of the
church from the day of Pentecost to this hour. The
Person of the Spirit comes more clearly to light. He
shall teach, he shall speak. Those personal acts and
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 213
attributes which are so conspicuously disclosed in the
Fourth Gospel already begin to appear.
The promise is designed to meet a special need of the
disciples, and therefore falls far short of the rich
promises of the Fourth Gospel. Here the inspiration
of the Spirit is limited to a particular occasion; there
he shall lead them into all the truth, and shall abide
with them forever. In one case the Spirit shall help
them in the hour of personal peril, in the other case he
shall equip them to be the leaders and teachers of the
church of God. The second promise is therefore far
broader and richer than the first. And in each instance
the promise is suited to the particular occasion. Wher-
ever there is need, there is a promise to meet it, accord-
ing to the assurance given us by Paul: "My God shall
supply every need of yours according to his riches in
glory in Christ Jesus." ** Men are never far from the
water-brooks of the Kingdom of God. There are large
promises that sweep the whole range of human need;
there are particular promises addressed to special ne-
cessities and occasions.
IV. THE GIFT OF THE SPIRIT
Luke xi. 13: When the disciples asked Jesus to
teach them how to pray, he gave them the form which
we call the Lorcl's prayer. The secret of effective prayer
is faith in God, for prayer without faith is a babble of
empty words. He went on to show them that faith is
rational. There is every reason to believe that God
will hear and answer our petitions. Here, as often
elsewhere, he makes use of the feelings and habits of
men to throw light upon the character of him in whose
image they are made. How do men deal with their
children? Do they seek to satisfy every just and
reasonable desire? "If ye then, being evil, know how
to give good gifts unto your children, how much more
"Phil. iv. 19.
214 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to
them that ask him?" If men, wicked and selfish as
they are, love their children and delight to minister
to their needs, how much more shall God, who is alto-
gether good, bless those who seek his favour.
This passage is peculiar to Luke. But Matthew
records the Lord's Prayer in a different connexion, in
the Sermon on the Mount, 46 and later in the same
discourse presents the same encouragement to prayer.
"If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts
unto your children, how much more shall your Father,
who is in heaven give good things to them that ask
him?" 48 Here again there is no need ,'to inquire
whether Matthew or Luke has given the more accurate
report of Jesus' words. The word is general in one
Gospel, specific in the other. As the Holy Spirit is
the richest gift that God can bestow, the promise of
the Spirit involves all good things. The greater in-
cludes the less. This is the most general and compre-
hensive promise of the Spirit contained in the Synoptic
Gospels, and approximates the assurances of the
Fourth Gospel. The terms of the promise are very
broad give the Holy Spirit. The thought is lifted
at once above the realm of the material needs to the
highest spiritual sphere the Father who is in heaven,
the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not given for a
specific purpose, but in the fulness of his strengthen-
ing and sanctifying power that he may minister to
every Want of the soul. Only when we study the teach-
ing of Jesus regarding the office of the Holy Spirit
in the Fourth Gospel shall we be able to comprehend
the breadth and grace of the promise shall give the
Spirit. The condition of receiving the Spirit is that
we ask. Blessings of a material kind may be lavished
upon men without discrimination: "He maketh his
sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain
* B Matt. vi. 9-13. * 8 Matt. vii. 11.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 215
on the just and the unjust." * 7 "He is kind toward
the unthankful and evil." * 8 But for spiritual gifts,
and the gift of the Spirit, there must be the prepara-
tion of mind and heart. He only receives who desires.
Food and raiment, sunshine and rain, men receive of
God, though they do not acknowledge or even know
him. But the home of the Spirit is the heart, and
the heart must seek him and bid him welcome. There
is much in life that we receive without asking, find
without seeking; but the crowning gifts of God are
reserved for the earnest spirit, the eager desire, the
hungering and thirsting after the righteousness which
is imparted only by the Spirit of God.
V. DAVID'S SON AND DAVID'S LORD
While the Pharisees
were gathered together,
Jesus asked them a ques-
tion, saying What think
ye of the Christ? Whose
son is he? They say
unto him, The son of
David. He saith unto
them, How then doth
David in the Spirit call
him Lord, saying, The
Lord said unto my Lord,
Sit thou on my right
hand, till I put thine ene-
mies underneath thy feet?
If David then calleth him
Lord, how is he his son?
And no one was able to
answer him a word,
neither durst any man
from that day forth ask
him any more questions.
Matt.xxii. 41-46.
And Jesus an-
swered and said, as
he taught in the
temple, How say
the scribes that the
Christ is the son of
David? David him-
self said in the
Holy Spirit, The
Lord said unto my
Lord, Sit thou on
my right hand, till
I make thine ene-
mies the footstool
of thy feet. David
himself calleth him
Lord; and whence
is he his son? And
the common people
heard him gladly.
Mark xii. 35-37.
And he said unto
them, How say they
that the Christ is
David's son? For
David himself saith
in the book of
Psalms, The Lord
said unto my Lord,
Sit thou on my
right hand, till I
make thine enemies
the footstool of thy
feet. David there-
fore calleth him
Lord, and how is
he his son?
Luke xx. 41-44.
The quotation is from the hundred and tenth Psalm,
verse 1.
These passages record the same event and agree in
47 Matt. v. 45. 48 Luke vi. 35.
216 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
substance, while they differ in various matters of de-
tail. In Matthew Jesus speaks to the Pharisees, in
Luke to the scribes, while in Mark the hearers are
not named. The form of the question is not precisely
the same, but each evangelist puts it in a somewhat
different way. Yet the occasion is obviously the same.
In each case Jesus had just put the Sadducees to
silence, and he adds a warning against the scribes, with
whom Matthew associates the Pharisees.
The comparison of these passages throws light upon
the nature and scope of inspiration. The Scriptural
doctrine of inspiration must recognize the facts of
Scripture and cannot be based upon a priori theories.
The Bible must be suffered to bear its own witness, and
no doctrine can be maintained which is not in accord-
ance with the method actually employed. Obviously
inspiration does not require that events shall be re-
corded with verbal exactness. There is in Scripture
no attempt at painful particularity or precise and
literal accuracy. It is sufficient that the substance of
the truth shall be correctly conveyed. The writers
tell their story as honest witnesses always do, each
in his own way, differing in various matters of detail,
while yet they are in substantial harmony with one
another. The truth of history or doctrine is not tied
to a single form of words, but may be expressed in
various modes of speech. There are different ways
of telling a story, each of which is true, though they
do not precisely agree in every particular. The sacred
writers are not mere amanuenses, the pen of the Holy
Spirit, as Augustine calls them/ 9 Yet it must be noted
that Augustine recognized also the human element
in the Scripture. "For to speak of the matter as it
is, who is able? I venture to say, my brethren, per-
haps not John himself spoke of the matter as it is,
but even he only as he was able; for it was man that
" Con}. VII, 21.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 217
spoke of God, inspired indeed by God, but still man.
Because he was inspired he said something ; if he had
not been inspired, he would have said nothing; but
because a man inspired, he spoke not the whole, but
what a man could he spoke." B0 In these few preg-
nant sentences Augustine sets forth in his matchless
way the relation of the divine and the human factors
in the composition of the Scripture. There is always
at work the tendency to magnify one of these elements
at the expense of the other. The supernatural ele-
ment is denied, and we have a book without inspira-
tion and authority, except that which may spring
from the wisdom of the writer. Or the human ele-
ment is virtually excluded, and we have a rigid and
mechanical view of inspiration which is wholly out of
harmony with the phenomena which the Scripture
presents. We must recognize the free movement of
the mind of the writer, in his choice of material, his
mode of expression, which are his own; and wfe must
recognize also the controlling, restraining, inspiring
operation of the Holy Spirit, by which the writer is
preserved from error and enabled to convey the truth
in such manner as shall serve the purpose of God.
The union of the divine and human in this respect is
a mystery indeed, but not a mystery peculiar to the
nature of inspiration. It meets us everywhere in
the Christian life, and notably in the work of sancti-
fication. "Work out your own salvation for it is
God that worketh in you!" B1
In our study of these passages there are two points
that call for consideration.
(a) David's authorship of the Psalm. This is
directly and explicitly affirmed. Mark reads, "David
himself said in the Holy Spirit" ; and Luke has, "David
himself saith in the book of Psalms" ; while Matthew
puts the assertion in the form of a question: "How
60 Tract on John i. 1. B1 Phil. ii. 12, 13.
218 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
doth David in the Spirit . . . ? If David then calleth
him . . . ?"
But it is said that Jesus' knowledge did not extend
to matters of a critical nature, questions of date and
authorship. Upon one occasion he confessed himself
ignorant. 62 These words are sometimes carried far
beyond the boundaries of his thought. That in his
human nature he was subject to the limitations of
other men in respect to knowledge is obvious enough,
and is clearly indicated in the Gospel story. Bs But
ignorance is not error. To say that he did not know
is far removed from saying that he undertook to teach
what he did not know. In the very act of confessing
his ignorance of the time of his return he drew the
line between his knowledge and his ignorance. He
knows or he does not know. There is not with him,
as with other men, a region of speculation and con-
jecture lying midway between knowledge and igno-
rance; he never said, I think, \I believe, I suppose.
When he spoke, therefore, he claimed to speak with
authority. His words are the words of God, for it is
God who speaks through him. What he did not know
he did not venture to affirm. When he did affirm, the
word is true which he spoke to Nicodemus: "We speak
that which we know." Bt We may readily dismiss the
suggestion of ignorance in this matter as an altogether
inadequate explanation of his words.
It is maintained again that he spoke by way of
accommodation. He simply accepted the current
ascription of the Psalm to David without expressing
an opinion regarding it. It is altogether probable,
indeed it may be regarded as fairly certain, that Jesus
held the common belief of the Jews of his time con-
cerning the divine authority and the human author-
ship of the various books of Scripture. Every refer-
ence that he makes to the Old Testament bears out
i
52 Mark xiii. 32. BS Luke ii. 52. B * John iii. 11.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 219
this view of his attitude toward the sacred writings.
But upon certain points he has left no explicit teach-
ing, and his authority cannot be invoked in arrest of
historical and critical investigation. The devout be-
liever will welcome the most searching examination
of every portion of the Scripture, assured that the
results of scientific inquiry cannot be at variance with
the word of him who is the truth.
In Matt. xv. 7 and the parallel passage in Mark
vii. 6, Jesus said to the Pharisees and scribes, "Well
did Isaiah prophesy of you." In Matt. xiii. 13 he
said, "Unto them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah."
In these instances the question of authorship was not
important. There is no reason to doubt that he shared
the current belief, but he did not explicitly affirm that
Isaiah was the author of the prophecy; he simply cited
the book by the name of the reputed author. In his
discourse regarding the end he refers to "the abomina-
tion of desolation which was spoken of by Daniel the
prophet." B5 Here again the question of authorship
does not arise. It is the prophecy and not the prophet
that is in the mind of Jesus; so that Mark in the
parallel passage omits the name of Daniel, and Luke
makes no direct reference to the prophecy. Here again
we may assume that Jesus shared the common belief
of the time, but he gives no explicit teaching. In all
these cases the prophecy and not the prophet held the
first place in the thought of Jesus and the prophecy
was true by whomsoever spoken. Whatever we may
infer concerning the opinion of Jesus he did not pro-
nounce explicitly upon the question of authorship.
But here the case is altogether different, and the
question of authorship is of prime importance. The
whole force of the reasoning turns upon it. If David
was not the author of the Psalm, the argument falls
to the ground. Nor can it be maintained that we have
BB Matt. xxiv. 15.
220 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
here merely an argument ad hominem; that Jesus is
simply meeting the scribes and Pharisees upon their
own ground, confuting them from their own point of
view. That mode of argument he used sometimes to
stop the mouths of his foes. But more than that is
involved here. For he does not merely accept the
authorship, he affirms it in the most direct and explicit
manner. "David himself said in the Holy Spirit."
"David himself saith in the book of Psalms." "David
himself calleth him Lord." We have here not the
"hypothetical use of a current tradition," B8 but a
categorical assertion as clear and strong as may be
conveyed in human speech. The question of author-
ship is not merely a matter of critical research, but is
bound up with the interpretation of Scripture. The
meaning of the passage in the Psalm is determined by
the person of the writer. If Jesus may not be followed
in his interpretation of the Scripture, if he is in error
regarding a prophecy which refers to himself, how far
may we trust him in other matters?
We appear, then, to be shut up to these alternatives;
either Jesus was mistaken in an explicit assertion that
related at once to his own Person and to the interpre-
tation of the Scripture; or David was the author of
the Psalm. If we reject his teaching here, it is diffi-
cult to see upon what ground we may put faith in his
exposition of any portion of the Scripture ; for nowhere
else has he spoken more clearly and particularly than
here. 67
(b) The inspiration of David. "How then doth
David in the Spirit call him Lord?" "David himself
said in the Holy Spirit." Luke omits the reference
to the Spirit. "David himself in the book of Psalms."
To speak in the Spirit is to speak by the authority and
68 Swete on Mark xii. 36.
B7 For David's authorship see Delitzsch and Perowne on Ps. 110 and
Broadus on Matthew, in loc. Against it, Briggs on the Psalm;
Comms. of Gould; Swete and Plummer on the Gospels.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OP JESUS I.
inspiration of the Spirit. When we read in Mark i. 23
of a man in an unclean spirit we understand that the
evil spirit was his master. Nowhere else in the Gospels
is this phrase employed to denote the inspiration of
the Old Testament writers, nor indeed is it found else-
where in the New Testament; but the truth is fre-
quently expressed in various forms that Scripture is
given by inspiration of God. Sometimes it is attributed
directly to the Holy Spirit. The text of Acts iv. 25 is
uncertain, but the weight of evidence favours the read-
ing adopted by the Revised Version "Who by the
Holy Spirit by the mouth of our father David thy
servant, didst say," followed by a citation from the
Second Psalm. The word of God is the sword of the
Spirit. 58 In Heb. iii. 7 a quotation from Psalm xcv
is prefaced with the words, "Wherefore, even as the
Holy Spirit saith." And in the same manner Jere-
miah xxxi. 33 ff. is introduced: "And the Holy Spirit
also beareth witness to us." B9 In the Fourth Gospel
Jesus repeatedly refers to the Scripture as the word
of God, and declares it cannot be broken. 80 Peter
sums up the teaching of the New Testament regard-
ing the Old in a sentence "No prophecy ever came
by the will of man; but men spake from God, being
moved by the Holy Spirit"; 61 words which fully and
fairly represent the whole trend of New Testament
doctrine.
To say that David speaks in the Spirit is equivalent
to saying that the Spirit speaks through David. Jesus
regarded the Old Testament with reverence as the word
of God, and appealed to it as the final authority in
matters of faith and morals. So far as the record indi-
cates, no question of the integrity and the inspiration
of the Scripture ever entered the mind of Jesus or his
apostles. What is here said of David they would say
B8 Ephes. vi. 17, 80 Johnx. 35.
59 Heb. x. 15. 01 II Peter i. 21.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
,with equal confidence of all the sacred writers: they
spoke in the Spirit; and their word is therefore the
word of God through them. It may be argued that
Jesus was mistaken, but that this was his doctrine is
too obvious to be denied. In Matt. v. 17, 18 he makes
the broad and explicit assertion, "Think not that I
came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not
to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you,
Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle
shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things
be accomplished." Upon these verses Allen remarks,
"Commentators have exhausted their ingenuity in an
attempt to explain away this passage, but its meaning
is too clear to be misunderstood. Christ is here repre-
sented as speaking in the spirit of Alexandrine and
Rabbinical Judaism." aa And the suggestion is made
that "These verses did not originally belong to the
Sermon, but have been placed here by the editor,
who has thus given to adTjQtooai (-to bring into clear
light the true scope and meaning) a sense (viz. to
reaffirm and carry out in detail) which is foreign to
the general tenor of the Sermon." To eliminate is
easier than to interpret. But the difficulty here lies
rather in the mind of the commentator than in the
words of Jesus, which are in entire accord with the
general tenor of his teaching. It must be noted that
he draws a clear distinction between the moral and the
ceremonial law. "Perceive ye not," he said to his dis-
ciples, "that whatsoever from without goeth into the
man, it cannot defile him . . . ?" "This he said," the
evangelist adds, "making all meats clean." 83 He
taught that the temple worship, the centre of the
ceremonial system, should be abrogated. 8 * BB How
then can he say that "one jot or one tittle shall in
82 Comm. in loc.
""Mark vii. 18, 19.
84 John iv. 21.
' 5 See my Teaching of the Gospel of John, p. 31,
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 223
noi wise pass away from the law, till all things be
accomplished"? Because the ceremonial law had been
fulfilled, accomplished had served its purpose. All
that it signified has been brought to light, all that it
sought to do has been performed. All things that it
represented and predicted have been accomplished in
Christ, and having served its purpose it is done
away. 68
The moral law he represents as of perpetual validity.
It is not under the gospel the condition of salvation
but remains in force as the rule of duty. He fulfills
the moral code primarily by drawing out its full mean-
ing, showing the principles that underlie the letter of
the law, and declaring its full scope and purpose. He
fulfilled it also by his personal obedience, as he said
to John the Baptist, "Thus it becometh us to fulfil
all righteousness" ; er but that is not the main thought
here. He fulfils the law primarily as a teacher ex-
pounding its full significance. When he sets his teach-
ing over against the teaching of the law, he does not
contravene the word of Moses, but explains, supple-
ments, enlarges it, in opposition to the narrow literal-
ism of the scribes. The law forbids murder and
adultery; Jesus carries the law into the inner region
of thought and motive where the sin is conceived.
In certain cases the law permitted practices such as
polygamy and divorce "for your hardness of heart"
which were yet inconsistent with the perfect right-
eousness which God requires. Jesus claimed the right
to set aside the later commandment in favour of the
law which was originally enjoined. "From the begin-
ning it hath not been so"; 68 and restored the original
intent and purpose of the law of marriage. Certain
practices were tolerated for a time which fell short of
88 An interesting and valuable discussion of the subject is found
in Turrettin, Theol Loc., XV, Qu. 26.
87 Matt. iii. 15.
68 Matt. six. 9.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
the perfection which he enjoins men to. seek. They
answered their purpose in confining and restraining
within definite limits the customs which had sprung
out of the weakness and sinfulness of men, until the
time should come when they might safely be annulled.
Where the law restrained, Jesus went further in the
same direction and forbade outright. Swearing is per-
mitted in certain cases by law; Jesus himself replied
when he was put upon his oath by the high priest. 69
But if the law of truth prevailed, there would be no
room for the oath. Men are compelled to swear be-
cause they do not trust one another. The bare word
should be sufficient, and the oath is the fruit of sin.
God himself must confirm the promises with an oath
that men may believe him. 70 The oath is required
for confirmation, 71 but when the Spirit of truth reigns
in the hearts of men they will swear not at all. "Let
your speech be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay; for whatsoever
is more than these is of the evil one." 72 Whatever
valuable purposes the oath may answer in the present
imperfect state of society, the necessity of it is traced
to him who was a liar from the beginning. If the law
were observed in its true intent, there would be no
place for the oath.
The law of retaliation, "an eye for an eye, and a
tooth for a tooth," was designed to limit and restrict
the spirit of revenge. Jesus forbids that spirit alto-
gether, and carries the law to its legitimate end. 78
When he commands his disciples to love their enemies,
he is not contravening the law, but the Rabbinic tra-
dition, which added to the words of Leviticus "Thou
shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" the injunction,
"and hate thine enemies."
69 Matt. xxvi. 63. 71 Heb. vi. 16.
70 Heb. vi. 13. 7a Matt. v. 37.
78 On these passages see the Comm. of Plummer and Broadus.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS I. 225
His whole attitude toward the law is indicated in
the words, "Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your
heavenly Father is perfect."
.Thus he claimed and exercised the right to deter-
mine what portions of the law had served their pur-
pose, and are done away with; and to interpret the
precepts of the law according to their true significance
and give them their full effect. This authority he
exercised over the law as over the Sabbath, of which
he claimed to be the Lord. 74 The moral code remains
in full force under the gospel as the rule of duty and
of life. We are not saved by keeping the law, but we
are not saved without it.
The exposition of the passage does not properly fall
within the scope of our inquiry. It is sufficient to
observe that the Psalm was generally recognized by
the Jews as prophetic of the Messiah; 75 and is fre-
quently applied to him in the New Testament, where
indeed it is more frequently cited than any other pas-
sage of the Scripture. In his sermon of the day of
Pentecost Peter expressly ascribes the Psalm to
David. 76 In Heb. v. 6 a quotation from the Psalm is
given as the word of God, but David is not named.
There are other passages which apparently are based
upon the Psalm, though it is not expressly cited. 77 If
Abraham could see his day, and Moses could write of
him, and all the prophets bear witness to him, why may
not David also have been granted a vision of the
Christ?
That the Psalm is Messianic, therefore, is attested
by the Jews, by Jesus, by the Apostles. In later times
indeed this was denied by the Rabbis, but only because
of their opposition to the claims of Jesus. The ques-
tion of Jesus can be answered only by recognizing that
7 * Mark ii 28.
76 Edersheim, 'Life of Christ, II, 270.
76 Acts ii. 33-35.
77 1 Cor. xv. 25; Ephes. i. 20; Heb. i. 3, 13; x. 12; I Peter iii. 22.
226 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
the Messiah is both human, as David's son, and divine,
as David's Lord. This the Pharisees could not deny
without invalidating their own Scripture; nor would
they acknowledge it because they feared the claim of
Jesus to be the Christ.
CHAPTER VII
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING
OF JESUS II.
VI. THE BAPTISMAL FORMULA
But the eleven disciples went into Galilee,
unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed
them. And when they saw him, they worshipped
him; but some doubted. And Jesus came to them
and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath
been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Go
ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them into the name of the Father and
of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; teaching them
to observe all things whatsoever I commanded
you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the
end of the world. 1
The other Gospelsi present no precise parallel to
this passage, yet each of them records a commission
of similar import given by Jesus to his disciples. The
closing verses of Mark xvi. 9-20 do not belong to the
original text of the Gospel, but it is generally agreed
that they may represent a very early tradition. There
it is recorded that Jesus charged his disciples to "Go
into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole
creation. He that believeth and is baptized shall be
saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned.
And these signs shall accompany them that believe:
1 Matt, xxviii. 18-20.
227
THE HOLY SPIEIT IN THE GOSPELS
in my name shall they cast out demons; they shall
speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents,
and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall in no wise
hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they
shall recover." 2
Luke presents yet another form. "And he said unto
them, These are my words which I spake unto you,
while I was yet with you, that all things must needs
be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses,
and the prophets, and the psalms, concerning me.
Then opened he their mind, that they might under-
stand the scriptures; and he said unto them, Thus
it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and rise
again from the dead the third day, and that repentance
and remission of sins should be preached in his name
unto all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. Ye
are witnesses of these things." 8
John's record is brief. "Jesus therefore said unto
them again, Peace be unto you; as the Father sent
me, even so send I you. And when he had said this,
he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive
ye the Holy Spirit; whosesoever sins ye forgive, they
are forgiven unto them; whosesoever sins ye retain,
they are retained." 4 Jesus repeated his command in
the Acts: "It is not for you to know times or seasons,
which the Father hath set within his own authority.
But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is
come upon you; and ye shall be my witnesses both in
Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto
the uttermost parts of the earth." G
Thus Matthew, Luke, and John, and the unknown
author of the addition to Mark unite in testifying that
after his resurrection Jesus appeared to his disciples,
and laid upon them the duty of preaching the gospel
throughout the world, while the most complete account
2 Mark xvi. 15-18. * John xx. 21-23.
8 Luke xxiv. 44-49. B Acts i. 7, 8.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS II. 229
of the commission thus conferred is given by Matthew.
"Make disciples of all the nations" is the broad and
comprehensive command. The gospel is to be preached
not simply as a testimony, though that of course is
included/ but as the power of God unto salvation,
the salt, the light, the leaven, by which the world shall
be renewed. This making disciples is to be by baptism
and teaching. By baptism men are inducted into the
kingdom; by teaching they are instructed in the
nature and duties and rights and privileges of the
kingdom.
It is the relation of the Holy Spirit to this work of
making disciples of all the nations which specially
engages our attention.
We are confronted at once by the question of the
text; for the attempt is made to eliminate Matthew
xxviii. 19 upon various grounds.
The verse is assailed from the side of textual criticism.
It might appear indeed that there is no room for doubt,
for the words are found in every manuscript and early
version that has come down to us. If further evidence
is required, we may turn to the citations of the pas-
sage in early Christian literature. In the Didache,
probably of the first half of the second century, it is
written: "Now concerning baptism, thus baptize ye;
having first uttered all these things, baptize into the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Spirit, in running water." 7 8 Justin Martyr, about the
middle of the second century, says of those who receive
the gospel and confess their sins, "they are brought by
us where there is water, and are regenerated in the
same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated.
For in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the
8 Matt. xxiv. 14.
7 Chap. vii.
8 Swete, Holy Spirit in Anc. Ch., Add. note, p. 411 ; Art. "Didache"
HBD, Extra vol., p. 438, where it is gratuitously observed that the
reference to baptism indicates a later hand (p. 477).
230 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the
Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with
water." 9 These are the earliest references to the
Trinitarian formula of baptism beyond the New
Testament. There is no reason to doubt that the
writers had the words of Matthew in mind; and those
words are explicitly cited by Irenaeus 10 and Tertul-
lian; 11 while Origen affirms that
the person of the Holy Spirit was of such authority
and dignity, that baptism was not complete except
by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of
them all, i.e., by the naming of Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit, and by joining to the unbegotten God,
the Father, and to his only begotten Son, the
name also of the Holy Spirit. 12
It is needless to pursue the subject further. Lists of
early writers who refer to the passage are given in
Hastings' Dictionary Apostolic Church, Art. "Bap-
tism," pp. 130, 131, and Sophocles' Lexicon may be
consulted 6attrit;co and 6cxjtria^a. The witness of
the creeds is cited by Swete, and he affirms that
"early baptismal creeds and rules of faith follow,
practically without exception, the Trinitarian scheme,
which appears in St. Matthew's account of the insti-
tution of Christian baptism." ia
Against this weighty array of evidence, however, is
set the fact that Eusebius in quoting this passage often
reads simply, "Go and teach all nations in my name" ;
and this is conceived to be the original form of Jesus'
words, while the reference to baptism is supposed to
have been added by a later hand for liturgical reasons.
The argument is drawn out at length by Conybeare
in the Hibbert Journal i, 102-8, and is sufficiently
9 1 Apol 61. " De Princ. I, 3, 2.
10 Agt. Her. III. 17, 1. 1S Holy Spirit in Anc. Ch., p. 157.
11 On Baptism, 13.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS II.
answered by Chase in the Journal of Historical Studies
vi, 24, p. 483. Allen inclines to the view that the
shorter form of Eusebius "is the original text of the
Gospel," but leaves the question in doubt. 14
The weight thus ascribed to Eusebius' form of quo-
tation cannot be justified, unless it is shown that he
has occasion to quote the words precisely as they are
found in Matthew, and that he was accustomed to
quote with verbal exactness. Neither point can be
established. Regarding his method of quoting Scrip-
ture, Bishop Lightfoot remarks 1B that "he is of ten care-
less in his manner of quoting," and gives various illus-
trations. 18 And again in his Essays on Supernatural
Religion he says, "The manner in which Eusebius will
tear a part of a passage from its context is well illus-
trated by his quotation from Irenaeus," which is
appended. 17 Even though Eusebius "had in the library
of his deceased bosom friend Pamphilus, whose name
he had added to his own, the finest known copies, the
most accurately written copies, of the Bible," la his
habit of quotation must be borne in mind.
The fact is so obvious that there would be no need
to call attention to it if it were not so often disregarded,
that early writers do not quote Scripture with the ver-
bal precision which the modern critic exacts, though
he does not always practice it. How precarious is this
mode of argument may be copiously illustrated from
writers of every age, even those of a high order of
scholarship. In his Authorship of the Fourth Gospel,
discussing "the differences in form between Justin's
quotation, 18 and the phraseology of the Fourth Gos-
pel," Ezra Abbot shows in detail that
14 Comm. in loc.
16 Diet. Chr. Biog. II, p. 326.
19 Cf. McGiffert's Eusebius, III, 23, note 5.
17 p. 168, note 1.
18 Gregory, Canon & Text N. T. p. 36.
19 of John iii. 3-5.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
they all admit of an easy and natural explanation
on the supposition that he really borrowed from
it, and that they are paralleled by similar varia-
tions hi the quotations of the same passage by
Christian writers who used our four Gospels as
their exclusive authority. 20
Numerous examples are given of the loose way in
which the passage is cited in early writers; and choos-
ing a modern illustration he notes nine instances of
the citation of John iii. 5 by Jeremy Taylor, "who is
not generally supposed to have used many Apocryphal
Gospels," and shows that "all of these differ from the
common English version, and only two of them are
alike." 21
It may also be observed that the writers of the New
Testament in quoting from the Old Testament, which
they regarded as the very Word of God, used great
freedom in modifying the phraseology of the text;
sometimes gathering up the significance of various
passages in a single sentence, as Jesus did in John vii.
38; sometimes even giving to the words a new form
and meaning, as in Ephes. iv. 8, where "Thou hast
received gifts among men" az becomes, he "gave gifts
unto men." To demand precise verbal accuracy in
all instances of quotation is to impose a burden which
neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear.
Johnson remarks:
Verbal exactness in quoting is a habit only
recently introduced in literature. It was impos-
sible, in effect, before the invention of printing
made books abundant, and the construction of
indexes and concordances rendered it easy to find
20 pp. 31,32.
2 1 1 have gathered a number of instances of inexact quotation and
self-contradiction by modern writers in my paper "The Authorship
of the Fourth Gospel/' Princeton Theol. Rev., 1912, 455-8.
23 Ps. Ixviii. 18.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS II.
any passage at will,
far from universal. 83
Yet even today it is
It is reasonable to conclude that Eusebius, like every
other writer of ancient or modern times, cited Scrip-
ture as it suited the particular purpose that he had in
mind. Sometimes he quoted Matthew xxviii. 19 in
the precise form in which it appears in the Gospel.
The passages in which this form occurs are said by
Coneybeare, indeed, to have been written at a late
date after he had learned from other sources the Trini-
tarian formula; but this view is sufficiently answered
by Chase in the article already cited.
The evidence in favour of the verse is simply over-
whelming. If it had not been seriously questioned,
we should say that it is beyond reach of question.
There should be no hesitation whatever in accepting
it as belonging to the original text of the Gospel.
But if the verse be accepted as genuine, the ques-
tion arises, Are these the words of Jesus, or are they
to be ascribed to the author or editor of the Gospel?
Moffatt asserts that
on the whole, the probabilities seem to converge
on the likelihood that the Trinitarian form was
introduced by the author of the Gospel himself,
as a liturgical expansion of the primitive formula
of baptism into the name of Jesus. 2 *
Prof. Wood takes the same position in his Spirit of
God in Biblical Literature, asserting that the investi-
gations of Conybeare "throw grave critical doubts
upon the Trinitarian formula as a part of the original
text," 2B and maintaining that
the slight reference to baptism in the activity of
Christ (baptism seems to disappear totally from
24 Intro. Lit. N. T., p. 254. That the words should be referred to
Christ is maintained by Plummer, in loc., and Zahn, Intro. N. T.,
II, p. 591.
S5 p. 133, note.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Christ's work after the beginning of the Judean
ministry), the fact that Christ so filled the con-
tent of the religion of the early Church, coupled
with the use of Christ's name only in all refer-
ences to baptism, make it probable that the Trini-
tarian formula does not come from Christ. 89
The reasons assigned for referring these words to the
evangelist and not to Jesus must be examined with
care.
What are the facts upon which we must base our
judgment? What is the custom of New Testament
writers in referring to baptism?
Baptism is frequently alluded to with no indication
of form or method. 27
When allusion is made to the mode of baptism, two
forms appear, (a) the Trinitarian formula occurs
only in the passage before us. (b) ordinarily baptism
is administered in the name of Jesus. And here again
there are variations of form. There is baptism in
the name of Jesus (ev TCO 6v6nati). 28 In the first of
these passages the Received text has sjtl tw 6v6[*cm
and this reading is retained by Alford, Meyer and
Nestle. Westcott and Hort read EV for sjd. If we
follow their guidance, there is no example of baptism
gjti tco ov. in the New Testament. 29 Again there is
baptism into the name of Jesus slg to 6v. 30
Such phrases as calling on his name,* 1 the name by
which ye are called** probably refer to baptism in or
into the name of Jesus. In Gal. iii. 27 the phrase
occurs, "baptized into Christ."
This variety of form is found also in the Didache.
28 p. 134.
27 Acts iii. 12, 13, 37, 38; ix. 18; xvi. 15, 33; xviii. 8; I Peter iii. 21.
28
29
. , , .
Acts ii. 38; x. 48; I 5 Cor. vi. 11.
Justin Martyr has ejil with the genitive (7 Apol., 61).
3 "Acts viii. 16; xix. 5.
"Acts ix. 21; xii. 16.
3a Jas. ii. 7.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING; OF JESUS II. 235
In Chapter VII, as we have seen, the command is given
"Baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit"; while in Chapter IX it is
written, "But let no one eat or drink of your eucharist,
except those baptized into the Lord's name; for in
regard to this the Lord hath said : 'Give not that which
is holy to the dogs/ " It is altogether natural that in
baptism emphasis should be placed upon the name of
Jesus as the distinctive feature of the Christian con-
fession, separating the believer from Jew and Gentile
alike as no other name could do.
From these facts what conclusion may be drawn?
They do not lead us to infer that in Matthew xxviii. 19
we have the words of the evangelist and not of Jesus;
but rather that while these are the words of Jesus they
do not prescribe a fixed formula which must be rigidly
observed. He gave his disciples not a form of words to
be repeated, but an interpretation of the nature and
significance "of the sacrament. In this respect the
words are analogous to the phrases, baptize unto re-
pentance, ss the baptism of repentance unto remission
o/ sins, 3 * indicating the purpose and import of the rite.
This conclusion is confirmed by the habitual atti-
tude of Jesus and of the New Testament in general
toward rites and forms of every kind, of which vari-
ous instances may be noted. The Lord's Prayer is a
conspicuous example. Though it is introduced with
the injunction, "after this manner therefore pray ye," 35
"when ye pray, say," 36 yet it is not recorded in the
same form by Matthew and Luke, as is evident at a
glance when their reports are set side by side. Mat-
thew reads, "Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed
be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done,
as in heaven, so on earth. Give us this day our daily
bread. And forgive us our debts, as we also have
88 Matt. iii. 11. 8B Matt. vi. 9.
"Mark i. 4. 89 Luke xi. 2.
236 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
forgiven our debtors. And bring us not into tempta-
tion, but deliver us from the evil one." Luke has,
"Father, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come.
Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us
our sins; for we ourselves also forgive every one that
is indebted to us. And bring us not into temptation." 87
Moreover there is no citation of the prayer and no indi-
cation of its use anywhere in the New Testament. Prof.
Lindsay indeed says that "The use of the Lord's Prayer
is not mentioned but may be inferred" and quotes
from Weizsacker's Apostolic Age: "Paul nowhere
mentions the Lord's Prayer. But we may assume that
we have a trace of it in Rom. v. 11, 15; and Gal. iv. 6.
In speaking of the right to call God Father, he gives
the Aramaic form for Father, in each instance adding
a translation, and this is only to be explained by sup-
posing that he had in mind a formula which was known
wherever the Gospel had penetrated, and which, by
preserving the original language, invested the name
with peculiar solemnity, in order to maintain its sig-
nificance unimpaired in the believer's consciousness." 8 "
But the argument thus presented is highly precarious.
It cannot be maintained that the term Father, so con-
stantly on the lips of Jesus, could have become familiar
only through the Lord's Prayer. We may safely affirm
that there is no trace of the Prayer in the writings of
the New Testament.
The law of the Sabbath fills a large place in the
legislation of the old dispensation, and formed one of
the main points of contention between Jesus and the
Jews. Yet the day was changed from the seventh to
the first of the week without the least indication of a
command concerning it. We infer that the change
was commanded simply because the change was made.
87 For various* readings in Luke's version of the Prayer see
Plummer, in loc.
88 Church and Ministry in the Early Centuries, p. 44, note 3.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS II. 237
If we turn to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper we
find that here too no form is prescribed. The reports
of the institution of the Supper given by the Synoptic
Gospels differ in several particulars; and Paul gives
an account, which he professes he has received directly
from the Lord, that does not precisely agree with either
of them. 38
In describing the mode of worship which was ob-
served in the apostolic church, Lindsay remarks that
St. Paul does not mention the benediction as
forming part of the Christian worship, but the
way in which 'it occurs regularly at the beginning
of his Epistles, preserving always the same form,
warrants us in supposing its liturgical use in the
manner above indicated. 40
But the fact stares us in the face that Paul does not
preserve always the same form, but employs a variety
of forms. In Rom. i. 7; I Cor. i. 3; II Cor. i. 2;
II Thess. i. 2; Philemon 3; Gal. i. 3; Ephes. i. 2;
Phil. i. 2, we read "Grace to you and peace from God
our (the) Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ"; in
Col. i. 2, "Grace to you and peace from God our
Father"; to which the Received Text adds, "and the
Lord Jesus Christ"; in I Tess. i. 1, after the address
"unto the church of the Thessalonians in God the
Father and the Lord Jesus Christ," "Grace to you and
89 1 Cor. xi. 23-26. Prof. Machen holds that Paul does not lay
claim here to a direct revelation from the Lord, but refers to infor-
mation which he had gathered from eye-witnesses. (Origin of Paul's
Religion, pp. 148-9.) But the argument of Hodge upon the other
side of the question seems fairly conclusive (Com., in loc.). The
view that Paul claims a special revelation is held also by Ellicott,
Godet, and Meyer. Robertson and Plummer (Inter. Grit. Com.,
in loc.) agree with Machen. In view of the importance of the mat-
ter, and of Paul's peculiar position in the apostolic company, as
one untimely born (I Cor. xv. 8), it is not surprising that a special
revelation should have been granted him, by which he was enabled
to speak with the same authority as an eye-witness.
* Church and Ministry in the Early Centuries, p. 44.
238 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
peace" ; in I Tim. i. 2 and II Tim. i. 2 "Grace, mercy,
peace, from God the Father; and Christ Jesus our
Lord"; in Titus i. 4 "Grace and peace from God the
Father and Christ Jesus our Saviour."
A similar variety appears in the other Epistles of
the New Testament. Hebrews and I John have no
benediction, and James has simply Greeting. I Peter
i. 2 reads, "Grace to you and peace be multiplied";
and II Peter i. 2, "Grace to you and peace be multi-
plied in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord."
II John 3 has, "Grace, mercy, peace shall be with us
from God the Father, and from Jesus Christ, the Son
of the Father, in truth and love." In place of bene-
diction III John has a prayer "Beloved, I pray that
in all things thou mayest prosper, and be in health,
even as thy soul prospereth." Jude 1 reads, "mercy
unto you, and peace and love be multiplied."
It may also be noted as illustrating the attitude of
Jesus toward rites and forms that he did not himself
administer baptism, as John tells us, correcting a false
report which had come to the ears of the Pharisees,
but committed it as a ministerial office to his dis-
ciples,* 1 and the apostles followed his example. Peter
commanded Cornelius and those who were with him
to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts x. 48).
Paul thanked God that he had baptized very few in
Corinth, "lest any man should say that ye were bap-
tized into my name"; and indicated the nature and
purpose of his ministry by affirming that "Christ sent
me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel." * a * 8
The obvious fact is that the New Testament pre-
scribes no fixed formula of any kind for worship, for
prayer, for baptism, for the Lord's Supper. There is
no set form of words enjoined for any service or cere-
mony of the church, no ritual of any kind whatsoever.
" John iv. 1, 2. "I Cor. i. 14-17. * 8 See HDAC, I, 133.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS II. 239
The endeavour to impose upon the church sacramental
theories and methods which have no divine authority
has been the most prolific source of division and strife.
The New Testament is not a code but a Gospel. Rites
and forms have no value in themselves, and are of use
only as they serve to convey spiritual truth to the
mind and heart of the worshipper.
It is evident in the light of this review that there
is no reason to suppose that Jesus is here prescribing
a formula to be observed. It is not the ceremony of
baptism of which he speaks, but rather the nature and
significance of the rite; and he says to his disciples
not, You shall use this form of words, but, You shall
administer the rite with this purpose and intent, of
bringing men into fellowship with the Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit. A study of the precise significance of
these words will soon demand our attention.
Again it is affirmed that the passage is not hi har-
mony with the general tenor of Jesus' teaching.
McGiffert says,
Of the Trinitarian formula, into the name of the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, which later
became universal in the Church, we have no trace
in the New Testament, except in the single pas-
sage, Matthew xxviii. 19, It is difficult in the light
of all we know of Jesus' principles and practice,
and in the light also of the fact that the early dis-
ciples, and Paul as well, baptized into the name
of Christ alone, to suppose that Jesus himself
uttered the words: "Baptizing them into the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost," which are quoted hi Matthew xxviii. 19.
But it may be that he directed his apostles not
simply to make disciples of all the nations but
also to baptize them, as they had, perhaps, been
in the habit of baptizing those that joined their
240 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
company. If, then, he simply gave the general
direction to baptize (cj. the appendix of Mark xvi.
16), it would be very natural for a scribe to add
the formula "Into the name of the Father and of
the Son and of the Holy Ghost," which was in
common use in his day. On the other hand, the
fact must be recognized that Paul's indifference
about performing the rite of baptism (see I Cor.
i. 14 seq.) is hardly what we should expect if the
eleven apostles received from Christ a direct com-
mand to baptize; and it is not impossible that the
entire passage (Matt, xxviii. 19b) is a later addi-
tion, as maintained by some scholars/*
The assumption which underlies the argument that
these words of Jesus contain a prescribed formula has
already been sufficiently answered. The question at
once arises, if, as Prof. McGiffert asserts, this Trini-
tarian formula "involves a conception of the nature
of the rite which was entirely foreign to the thought
of these primitive Christians, and indeed no less for-
eign to the thought of Paul," what could induce a
scribe to insert it at a date so early that no trace of
any other reading appears? Prof. McGiffert recog-
nizes that "we find it expressly enjoined in The Teach-
ing of the Apostles, and that it was in common use in
the middle of the second century is clear from the old
Roman symbol which was based upon it, and also from
Justin Martyr's Apology." How can we account for
the early and widespread use of this form of words?
With the Gospel record before us, why should we
resort to conjectures regarding the origin of the for-
mula? There is no need of ingenious hypotheses to
account for the words. The simplest explanation of
the use of them throughout the church is that they
came from the lips of Jesus.
** Apostolic Age, p. 61.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OP JESUS H.
The fact is that the formula is not foreign to the
thought of the time, and contains nothing that is out
of harmony with the teaching of Jesus. The constit-
uent elements of the formula are two, the act of bap-
tism, and the Trinitarian formula with which it is
administered. Which of these is out of harmony with
the teaching of Jesus? With the rite of baptism he
was familiar; he recognized the baptism of John as of
divine authority, and himself submitted to it that he
might fulfill all righteousness. Though he did not him-
self baptize, his disciples administered the rite under
his direction/ 5 He said to Nicodemus, "except one
be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into
the Kingdom of God"; where baptism is evidently
meant. And from the day of Pentecost throughout
the whole history of the church the sacrament of
baptism has held its place side by side with the
Lord's Supper.
No less familiar to the thought of Jesus was the
conception of the Trinity. He spoke constantly of the
Father, often of the Holy Spirit, and called himself
the Son. The last words of Jesus which Luke records
unite the Father and the Spirit with himself: "And
behold, I send forth the promise of my Father upon
you." " The promise of the Father is the Holy
Spirit.* 7 The early addition to Mark refers to
baptism, 48 and John * 9 as well as Luke to the Holy
Spirit.
If then both baptism and the Trinity were familiar
to the thought of Jesus, what reason may be given
why he should not have brought them together in this
form of words which Matthew records? And if both
parts of the command, the act and the form, are evi-
dently embraced in our Lord's teaching, how can the
* B John iv. 1, 2. * 8 Mark xvi. 16.
48 Luke xxiv. 49. * 9 John xx. 22.
47 Acts i. 4, 5;ii. 33.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
command itself be out of harmony with his doctrine?
Each of the Synoptic Gospels represents the Father
and the Spirit as present at the baptism of Jesus; how
then could the use of the threefold name in baptism
appear strange to those who wrote and to those who
read the Gospels? And how could he to whom the
word was spoken from heaven, "Thou art my Son,"
upon whom the Spirit came, when he was baptized
of John how could he fail to associate baptism with
the presence of Father, Son, and Spirit? Matthew's
report simply gathers up in one comprehensive phrase
elements of Jesus' teaching with which all the Gospels
have made us acquainted. There is no reason what-
ever in the light of the Gospel record why Jesus should
not have commanded his disciples to baptize, and why
he should not have commanded them to baptize in
the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
And there is every reason to believe that the practice
of the early church was founded upon the word of
Jesus.
Our judgment is confirmed when we turn to the
other books of the New Testament. The longer form
of the apostolic benediction is as thoroughly Trini-
tarian as the baptismal formula. 60 Paul's letters
abound in reference to the several Persons of the
Trinity. In I Cor. vi. 11 he associates baptism
with the Trinity: "but ye were washed, but ye
were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name
of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our
God."
In view of these obvious, even obtrusive, facts, it
is difficult to understand how the conception of bap-
tism into the name of the Trinity can be represented
as "entirely foreign to the thought of these primitive
Christians, and indeed no less foreign to the thought
of Paul." On the contrary, it is in entire harmony
BO II Cor. xiii. 14.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS II. 243
with the teaching of Jesus as recorded by the Gospels
and understood by his disciples. Nor is it easy to
imagine how a command entirely foreign to the con-
ceptions of the time, and resting upon no recognized
authority, should have so quickly and easily laid hold
of the faith and worship of the church. "The truth
is that this passage in Matthew supplies exactly the
clue we need in order to understand the rapid devel-
opment of doctrine and the continuity of custom in
the early Church." 51 "It is no slight confirmation of
the statement in the first Gospel that if it were true
it would supply just the explanation that we want at
once of the established rite and of St. Paul's language.
In any case we seem compelled to assume that there
was some foundation far back in the teaching of our
Lord himself. If there was not, at what point in the
six and twenty years B2 can the usage (doctrinal or
liturgical) have been introduced in a manner so
authoritative as to impose it upon St. Paul and the
churches of his founding? We may greatly doubt if
any satisfactory answer can be given to this ques-
tion." BS
Here it is of interest to note that while the doctrine
of the Trinity is fundamental to New Testament
teaching, the term first appears in Theophilus of
Antipch, about 180 A.D. 8 * "The moon wanes monthly,
and in a manner dies, being a type of man; then it is
born again, and it is crescent, for a pattern of a future
resurrection. In like manner also the three days which
were before the luminaries, were types of the Trin-
ity (tQidbog), of God, and His Word, and His Wis-
dom." BB It is obviously employed not as a term
61 D'Arcy, Art. "Trinity" in HDC. & Gs. } II, p. 764.
62 Between the Ascension and the Apostolic benediction in
II Cor. xiii.
68 Sanday, Art. "God/' HBD II, p. 214.
B *To Antolyous, ch. xv.
SB Ante Nicene Fas., II, p. 101. See also Sophocles' Lexicon
244 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
just introduced, but as one so familiar as to require
no comment or explanation. The earliest use of the
Latin Trinitas is found in Tertullian. 68
Another objection to ascribing these words to Jesus
may be briefly noted. If he gave the command to make
disciples of all the nations, how could the apostles have
shown such hesitation in admitting Gentiles to the
church? Why should Peter require a sign and a voice
from heaven when he had heard these plain and imper-
ative words from the lips of his Master? The answer
is obvious: the point at issue in the thought of Peter
and others of like mind was not whether the Gentiles
should be admitted to the church, but how they should
be admitted. Must they be compelled to enter as
proselytes through circumcision and the keeping of
the law of Moses or should they be received upon sim-
ple confession of their faith in Christ? This question
Jesus did not here or elsewhere clearly and definitely
determine. The answer was left to the irresistible
logic of circumstances and the guidance of the Holy
Spirit, and was rendered by the church in the council
gathered at Jerusalem. 67 5S
In view of all the evidence in the case we need have
no hesitation whatever in accepting these words not
only as part of the original text, but as actually spoken
by Jesus. The textual and exegetical proof may fairly
be deemed conclusive.
With this preliminary study of the integrity and
authority of the text we are prepared to enter upon
the interpretation of the text. The passage contains
Jesus' claim of authority, his command to make dis-
ciples of all the nations, and his promise to be with
his disciples to the end of the age, the present age,
which shall be terminated by his coming in glory to
judge the world. It is the command with which we
56 On Modesty, ch. xxii. Agt. Praxeas, chs. ii. and iii. See Art.
"Trinity, Holy," by Cheetham, DCB., Vol. IV, p. 1043.
* " Acts xv.
58 See Machen, Origin of Paul's Religion, p. 14.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OP JESUS II. 245
are now concerned, especially the baptismal formula;
"Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
The first question of an exegetical nature that meets
us relates to the rendering of the preposition el?.
Shall we read in or into the name? Or is the render-
ing a matter of indifference because no material dis-
tinction between the terms can be drawn? Robertson
goes far in affirming that "it is quite immaterial
whether one uses ? ovo^ia as in Matt. x. 41-42; xii.
41, or ev ovo^att, as in Matt, xxi 9; Mark ix. 49.
Hence we find either baptized ev the name of Jesus
Christ B0 or baptizing elg the name of the Father }
and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. 60 It is split-
ting a hair to insist on into the name because of the
use of elg." 81 Moulton speaks more cautiously:
"There are many New Testament passages where a
real distinction between sis and ev is impossible to
draw without excessive subtlety . . . the argument
that because els often denotes rest in or at, and
sometimes represents that motion towards (as distin-
guished from motion to) which may perhaps have been
the primitive differentia of the dative, therefore it is
immaterial whether elg or ev or the simple dative
be used with any particular word, would be entirely
unwarrantable. It depends upon the character of the
word itself." 82
The fact that the language found it necessary to
evolve el? from ev indicates that they are not merely
synonyms; and the evident fact that they are some-
times used interchangeably does not prove that they
are never distinguished. 63 si? TO 6vo[*a does not mean
59 Acts ii. 38.
80 Matt, xxviii. 19.
91 Biblical Review, Jan., 1923, p. 68.
63 Gram. N. T. GR., Vol. I, pp. 63, 66.
8 8 For a discussion of the question see Robertson Gram. N. T. Gr
pp. 59 ff, 649. HDAC Vol. I, p. 134. Meyer on Rom. vi. 3. Ellicott
on Gal. iii. 27. Burton on Gal. iii. 27.
246 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
simply, with reference to or by authority of. Such
phrases as Rom. vi. 3, "Or are ye ignorant that all we
who were baptized into Christ Jesus, were baptized
into his death?"; and Gal. iii. 27, "For as many of you
as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ," evi-
dently denote union, incorporation with. How intimate
the union designated by the preposition may be in any
particular case is determined by the context, and par-
ticularly by the object of the preposition. To be bap-
tized into (elg) Moses "* means into the relation of
discipleship and obedience. To be baptized into Christ
means to be brought into that oneness of life with him
which he set forth in the figure of the vine and the
branches. To be baptized into one body 6B is to be
incorporated into the body of Christ, which is his
church. In the light of New Testament teaching to be
baptized into the name of the Trinity is to be intro-
duced to that mystical or spiritual union with Father,
Son, and Spirit which Jesus dwelt upon in his last dis-
course to his disciples before his death, and which
finds frequent expression in the teaching of Paul. To
baptize men into the divine name is not merely to
pronounce over them that name, but to bring them
into living fellowship and union with him to whom
that threefold name belongs.
If now we seek to draw a distinction between bap-
tizing in and into the name, the difference appears to
lie in this: Baptism in the name regards the relation
of fellowship and union as already established, and
now recognized and confirmed by the administration
of the ordinance; baptism into the name signifies the
introduction into that fellowship. In one case the
believer is baptized because he is in Christ; in the
other case, that he may be in Christ.
Both these conceptions are in accord with the general
teaching of Scripture. The believer is baptized be-
64 1 Cor. x. 2. "I Cor. xii. 13.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS II. 247
cause he is ingrafted into Christ; he is ingrafted into
Christ by baptism. To baptize in is to recognize a
relation; to baptize into is to constitute a relation.
Faith in Jesus and fellowship with him are the condi-
tions on which baptism is administered, and therefore
the believer is baptized in his name, on the ground of
his relation to him. On the other hand baptism is the
rite by which the believer is publicly and formally ad-
mitted to that fellowship. Associated as it is with open
confession of sin, the public acknowledgment of Jesus
as Saviour and Lord, and the reception into the visible
church and incorporation with the people of God,
baptism marks the beginning of a new stage in the
spiritual life, of a closer fellowship with Jesus through
obedience to his command and the public recognition
of his authority in the manner which he has prescribed.
To be baptized into Christ Jesus is to be baptized into
his death, to be brought into such a union with him
that we die with him unto sin. 68 To be baptized into
Christ is to put on Christ. 67 To the Colossians Paul
writes, "In whom (Christ) ye were also circumcised
with a circumcision not made with hands in the putting
off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of
Christ;;; having been buried wiithl him in baptism,
wherein (EV <f>) ye were also raised with him through
faith in the working of God, who raised him from the
dead." 68 The wherein of our English versions and the
ev <f> of the Greek are ambiguous, and may mean
in whom, that is, in Christ, as interpreted by Meyer
in loe. ; or to baptism, as held by Ellicptt, Lightf oot,
and Abbott. The reference to baptism is decidedly to
be preferred. "Baptism is the grave of the old man,
and the birth of the new. As he sinks beneath the
baptismal waters, the believer buries there all his cor-
rupt affections and past sins; as he emerges thence, he
rises regenerate, quickened to new hopes and to new
88 Rom. vi. 3, 4. " 7 Gal. iii. 27. as Col. ii. 11, 12.
248 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
life. This it is, because it is not only the crowning act
of his own faith, but also the seal of God's adoption
and the earnest of God's Spirit. Thus baptism is an
image of his participation both in the death and in the
resurrection of Christ." 9 Paul affirms that Christ
cleansed the church by the washing of water with the
word; 70 and that we are saved "through the washing
of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." 71
In both cases baptism is evidently meant. Ananias
said to Saul at Tarsus, "Arise and be baptized, and
wash away thy sins, calling on his name." 7a And Peter
writes, after referring to the ark in which Noah and
his household were saved through water, "which (i.e.
water) also after a true likeness, doth now save you,
even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the
flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward
God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." 73
It is evident from these passages that the New
Testament attaches great importance to the sacrament
of baptism. But it contains no doctrine of baptismal
regeneration. It is clearly taught that "The sacra-
ments become effectual means of salvation, not from
any virtue in them, or in him that doth administer
them; but only by the blessing! of Christ, and the
working of his Spirit in them that by faith receive
them." The sacraments are means of grace in the
same sense as the Word, which does not save men
simply by the hearing of the ear, but only as it is
applied by the Spirit to lead them to faith and
obedience.
The sacraments are given to be a badge of disciple-
ship, a bond of union, a means of grace. Baptism may
be regarded either as the seal of a relationship already
established (sv) or as the rite by which initiation into
69 Lightfoot, in loc. 71 Titus iii. 5.
70 Ephes. v. 26. 7a Acts xxii. 16.
78 1 Peter iii. 20.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS II. 249
that relationship is procured (&s). But it must al-
ways be borne in mind that according to the doctrine
of Scripture the sacraments are means of grace, not
conditions of salvation. 74
In his Commentary on Galatians iii. 27 Burton holds
it an "outstanding fact" that "the use of 6ojttia> lg TO
OVO\IOL was in all probability derived from the usage
of the mystery religions, and to one familiar with that
usage would suggest the ideas associated with such
phraseology." But in view of the opinion which Paul
entertained and vigorously expressed regarding the
moral and spiritual condition of the pagan world, as
in Romans i., it is in the highest degree improbable,
may even be pronounced impossible, that in connexion
with one of the most solemn rites of Christian worship
he would introduce a formula associated with the be-
liefs and practices of heathen worship. 75 Surely it is
immeasurably more probable that these are the words
of Jesus, and that they were used by Paul and received
by the church not as derived from the system of pagan
worship against which they protested and contended
without ceasing, but as taught by him whom they
revered as Saviour and Lord. Why should we seek for
another origin of the phrase, when this lies close at
hand?
The significance of the phrase into the name of now
invites our attention. To baptize into Christ and into
the name of Christ are equivalent terms. Tertullian
says correctly that Jesus commands his disciples "to
baptize into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy
Ghost." 7e The name is the mark by which the person
is known and recognized, by which he is distinguished
and represented. The use of the term name of God
74 The significance of baptism is treated by Prof. Chas. Hodge with
his usual clearness in his Comm., on Ephes. v. 26. See also Machen,
Origin of Paul's Religion, p. 286.
76 See Machen, ibid., pp. 280 ff. Gray, HBD, III, p. 480.
78 Agt. Praxeas XXVI. Prescr. agt. Her. XX.
250 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
for God is frequent in the Old Testament, and expresses
the sum-total of those attributes by which he is known
as God. In Luke vi. 22: "they shall .... cast
out your name as evil"; Acts i. 25; "there was a
multitude of persons (literally names, ovo^dTcov) gath-
ered together"; Rev. iii. 4: "Thou hast a few names
in Sardis that did not defile their garments" ; Rev. xi.
13: "There were killed in the earthquake^ seven
thousand persons" (literally names of men, ovdjxata
dv&ecbjtcov), names is obviously equivalent to persons.
To baptize into the name of is to baptize into the
person of into a relation of fellowship and union such
as is expressed in the term one with Christ. "Even
as thou, Father, art in me and I in thee, that they also
may be hi us." 77
No doctrinal significance may be attached to the
use of the singular (ovc^a) instead of the plural.
The singular is often used in classic Greek where the
plural might appear to be called for; and this is found
also in the New Testament, Luke vi. 22: "Cast out
your name"; Rev. xvii. 8: "And they that dwell on
the earth shall wonder, they whose name (ovojAa) had
not been written in the book of life from the foun-
tion of the world." The unity of the three Persons
is apparent from the whole scope of the passage,
but it is not established by the use of the singular
name, instead of the plural. 78 On the other hand, the
term is in entire harmony with Scripture teaching, and
we cannot fail to recognize its eminent fitness here.
In view of the place filled by the Holy Spirit in the
life and teaching of Jesus and in the faith and life of
the church, it must appear strange that the New Testa-
ment contains neither direction to pray to him, nor
77 John xvii. 21.
78 See McLean, Art. "Baptism," DAC 1:134. Deissman, Bible
Studies, pp. 146 and 196. He says "The hypothesis of a Hebraism is
unnecessary; the Papyri demonstrate the same usage." Robertson
Gram. GK. N. T., p. 649.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OP JESUS II. 251
any instance of such prayer. Some scholars have,
thought that prayer to the Spirit is found in II Thess.
iii. 5 : "And the Lord direct your hearts into the love
of God, and into the patience of Christ," 79 understand-
ing by Lord, Holy Spirit. But the term is properly
referred to Christ in accordance with New Testament
usage. 80 Hort has found an example in Acts ix. 31,
which he renders, "So the Ecclesia throughout all Judaea
and Galilee and Samaria had peace; being built; and
walking by the fear of the Lord and by the invoca-
tion (JtaQcodiioei) o f the Holy Spirit (probably the
invoking his guidance as Paraclete to the Ecclesia)
was multiplied." 81 But aedxA.i|cis ^ oes not a p pear to
be used in this sense in the New Testament, and it is
properly rendered comfort, as in our English versions.
The nearest approach to the invocation of the Holy
Spirit is seen in the Apostolic benediction: "The
grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God,
and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you
all." 8a The benediction is both a wish and a prayer,
and there is nothing incongruous in supposing that
Paul is here invoking the Holy Spirit. But it is more
in harmony with customary New Testament modes of
thought and speech to conceive of him as praying to
God for the gift of the Holy Spirit, who is usually
represented as given or sent; and the same may be
said of the salutation in Rev. i. 4, where by "the seven
spirits that are before his throne" we should under-
stand the Holy Spirit in the variety and perfection of
his operations. 88 Charles holds that the phrase denotes
angels, and must therefore be an interpolation "prob-
ably early in the second century." How an interpola-
70 Hastings, Great Christian Doctrines; Prayer, p. 390.
80 SeeEllicptt, in loc.
81 The Christian Ecclesia, p. 55.
82 II Cor. xiii. 14.
83 See Swete, in loc. Trench, Eps. to Seven Churches.
252 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
tion so contradictory to the whole teaching of the book
should have crept unchallenged into the text, at a date
so early, is not explained. We may safely say, then,
that there is no command to pray to the Spirit and no
example of prayer to the Spirit to be found in the
pages of the New Testament. According to the Scrip-
ture representation believers pray for the Holy Spirit; 8 *
they pray and serve in the Spirit; 86 and the Spirit
prays within them, 88 but nowhere are they enjoined
to pray to him.
For this omission, at first sight so singular and sur-
prising, two reasons may be assigned, (a) The full
significance of the truth of the Personality of the Spirit
with all its doctrinal and experimental implications
was not immediately apprehended by the church. A
truth which though in harmony with earlier Scripture
teaching yet marked so great an advance upon it could
not be grasped at once in the fulness of its meaning.
Time was required to assimilate it, and give it its proper
place in the system of revealed truth.
This omission gave occasion to some in the early
church to ask questions that Gregory Nazianzen found
it necessary to answer in a discourse which Swete pro-
nounces the "greatest of all sermons on the doctrine
of the Spirit." 87 These are the questions asked as late
as the closing years of the fourth century, as he states
them in his sermon :
Who in ancient or modern times ever wor-
shipped the Spirit? Who ever prayed to Him?
Where is it written that we ought to worship Him,
or to pray to Him, and whence have you derived
this tenet of yours? "
88
8 *Luke xi. 13.
85 Ephes. ii. 18; Phil. iii. 13.
86 Rom. viii. 26.
87 Holy Spirit in Anc. Ch., p. 240.
88 "Fifth Theol. Oration/' Nicene Fas., VII, p. 321.
SPIRIT; IN THE TEACHING OP JESUS II. 253
His opponents accused him of bringing in a strange
God.
Of the wise men amongst ourselves, (he says)
some have conceived of Him as an activity, some
as a creature, some as God; and some have been
uncertain which to call Hun.
It is the Spirit in whom we worship, and in
whom we pray .... therefore to adore or
to pray to the Spirit seems to me to be simply
Himself offering prayer or adoration to Himself.
And what godly or learned man would disapprove
of this, because in fact the adoration of One is the
adoration of the Three, because of the equality of
honour and dignity between the Three?
He goes on to mark the progress of the Scripture
revelation of God.
The Old Testament proclaimed the Father
openly and the Son more obscurely. The New
manifested the Son, and suggested the Deity of
the Spirit. Now the Spirit Himself dwells among
us, and supplies us with a clearer demonstration
of Himself. For it was- not safe, while the God-
head of the Father was not yet acknowledged,
plainly to proclaim the Son; nor when that of the
Son was not yet received to burden us further (if
I may use so bold an expression) with the Holy
Ghost; lest perhaps people might, like men loaded
with food beyond their strength, and presenting
eyes as yet too weak to bear it to the sun's light,
risk the loss even of that which was within the
reach of their powers; but that by gradual addi-
tions, and as David says, Goings up and advances
and progress from glory to glory, the Light of
the Trinity might shine upon the more illumi-
nated.
254 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
And he adds the suggestion that the Deity of the Spirit
was one of the things which Jesus promised his disciples
should be taught them by the Spirit.
These somewhat extended citations may serve to
illustrate the difficulties which confronted the early
church as it sought to find a place for the doctrine of
the Spirit in the scheme of Christian truth. 89 As the
Son precedes the Spirit, in the order of the Trinity,
and as it is the office of the Spirit to interpret and
apply the teaching and work of the Son, the doctrine
of the Son necessarily precedes the doctrine of the
Spirit; and only when the Person and work of Christ
were fully apprehended were the Person and work of
the Spirit made the theme of particular investigation.
Schaff says therefore, after speaking of the doctrine
of the Person of Christ, "The doctrine of the Holy
Spirit was far less developed, and until the middle of
the fourth century was never a subject of special
controversy." B0
It was natural that before the doctrine of the Spirit
was developed in the theology of the Church many
crude ideas of his Person should be entertained. Origen
identified him with the little child whom Jesus set in
the midst of the disciples to illustrate the truth that
only the childlike may enter into the kingdom of
heaven. 81 We learn from Jerome 92 and Epiphanius
that there were those who identified him with Melchi-
sedec. 98 Justin Martyr taught that by the Spirit and
89 For fuller treatment of this subject see Swete, Art. "Holy
Ghost" in DCB and Holy Spirit in Ancient Church. Smeaton,
Doctr. of the Holy Spirit, Third Division. Schaff, Church Hist., II,
560 and III, 663. Fisher, Hist. Chr. Doctr. Index "Holy Spirit."
For references to Holy Spirit in Apostolic Fathers, see Winstanley,
Spirit in N. T., p. 156.
80 Ch. Hist., II, 560.
91 Matt, xviii. 2.
e * Letter 73.
9 8 See Art. "Melchisedec" in Smith BD, which is much more com-
plete and satisfactory than the art. in HBD, Swete, Holy Spirit in
Anc. Ch., p. 149, note 3.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OP JESUS II. 255
the power of God that came upon Mary we must
understand the Word, the Logos. 94 In this Justin "has
put into words the thought which was probably in the
minds of most Christians in the second century." 96
Purves affirms that Justin's "own thought strongly
tended away from the doctrine of the Trinity," and
shows how this lends great weight to his witness that
the church worshipped three divine Persons. 98
(b) It is also true that the church was accustomed
to think of the Holy Spirit, according to the prevailing
representation of the New Testament, as given or sent
by the Father and the Son; and it was natural, there-
fore, that prayer should be directed to them rather
than to him, that believers should pray for the Spirit
rather than to the Spirit, even when his Personality
was clearly recognized and his particular office was in
mind.
But though the doctrine of the Holy Spirit was not
fully developed for centuries, his Personality and Deity
were recognized by the church from the beginning, and
he was worshipped and adored side by side with the
Father and the Son. Creeds are the fruit at once of
experience and of controversy; they are the endeavour
of the church to express and to guard its faith. Before
the church could formulate the doctrine of the Holy
Spirit, there must be rich experience of his regenerating
and sanctifying power; and the truth may be precisely
and adequately defined only by answering the doubts
and objections which it is called to meet. The earliest
creed that has come down to us, the so-called Apostles'
Creed, in its original form probably of the second cen-
tury, recognizes the Spirit in the fewest possible
words "I believe .... in the Holy Spirit."
But though the doctrine was slowly unfolded, the
94 1 Apol 33.
96 Swete, Holy Spirit in Anc. Ch., p. 387.
99 Test, of J. M. to Early Christianity, pp. 275 ff.
256 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Spirit held a large place from the beginning in the
devotional life of the church. There is an unbroken
chain of testimony from the days of the apostles that
the church worshipped the Spirit with the Father and
the Son. To illustrate this by examples belongs to
Church History, or the History of Doctrine, and does
not fall within the scope of the present work. The
student who desires to pursue the subject will find
abundant material in the article on the Holy Ghost in
the Dictionary of Christian Biography, by Swete;
Smeaton's Doctrine ojf the Holy Spirit, Third Division;
Swete's Holy Spirit in the Ancient Church; and the
Introduction to Kuyper's Work of the Holy Spirit, by
B. B. Warfield, which is decidedly the most valuable
part of the book.
B IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL
CHAPTER VIII
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING
OF JESUS III.
The first passage that claims our attention is the
conversation with Nicodemus recorded in chapter
three. We may trace in outline the course of Jesus^
thought, and then take up in detail the references to*
the Holy Spirit.
Nicodemus addresses Jesus as a teacher come from
God. Jesus answers that more than a teacher is needed
by him who would see the kingdom of God; he must be
born again. There is only one way by which men may
enter the kingdom, whether they be Jews or Gentiles,
the way of the new birth. The Jews are not, as they
were prone to fancy, birthright members of the king-
dom by virtue of their descent from Abraham. They
too must be born again. When Nicodemus could not
understand, Jesus proceeded to unfold to him the
origin and nature of the new birth. "Except one be
born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God."
But the regenerating work of the Spirit rests upon
the atoning work of the Son; and this Jesus presents
to Nicodemus in a figure drawn from a familiar story
of the Old Scripture. "And as Moses lifted up the
serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man
be lifted up; that whosoever believeth may in him
257
258 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
have eternal life." The new birth is of the Holy Spirit,
but the eternal life which is thus begun is in him, the
Son of man. He has purchased for men the right to
become children of God; 1 they are actually made chil-
dren of God by the renewing power of the Spirit.
The work of the Spirit rests upon the work of the
Son, the work of the Son rests in turn upon the sover-
eign grace of the Father. Jesus ascends to the ultimate
source of salvation in the love of God. "For God so
loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but
have eternal life." This is the gospel in a sentence.
The Son is represented as the gift of love, the object of
faith, the source of eternal life. God loves and gives,
man believes and lives. Eternal life is the gift of God,
offered to men in his Son, imparted to men by his
Spirit. "God gave unto us eternal life, and this life
is in his Son." z The Holy Spirit is the "Spirit of life
in Christ Jesus," imparting in regeneration the new
life, the eternal life, which God proffers to men in his
Son. The new life is begotten by the Holy Spirit upon
the ground of the redemption accomplished by the
Son, who is the gift of the Father's love that men may
live in him.
Verses 16-21 are correctly regarded as the words of
Jesus by Meyer and Godet. Westcott ascribes them
to the evangelist, but his reasoning is far from con-
vincing. The chief arguments adduced are: (1) "The
secondary character" of the section, which "adds no
new thoughts." But in fact the passage is not sec-
ondary, but of primary importance, for, as we have
seen, the thought here reaches its climax; the new birth
is traced from the work of the Spirit to the gift of the
Son, and thence to the love of the Father, as its source
and spring. These are new thoughts of the first im-
portance. Where in the preceding words of Jesus is the
1 John i. 14. a I John y. 11.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 259
Father named, his love for the world, his gift of his
Son? These are new thoughts without which the
teaching would be incomplete and would leave the
final truth untouched. (2) The use of certain phrases
which are not elsewhere employed by Jesus, but by the
evangelist only begotten Son, believe in the name of,
to do the truth. But the preceding section furnishes
a sufficient answer. There we find the phrase, "born
of water and the Spirit," which occurs nowhere else
in the teaching of Jesus. If the particular words which
Westcott cites are nowhere else ascribed to Jesus, yet
the thoughts which they convey are obviously con-
tained in his teaching. We must remember how small
a portion of his words has been preserved, and must
permit so great a teacher to use upon appropri-
ate occasions terms which he does not ordinarily
employ.
With this survey of the course of Jesus' thought we
are prepared to take up in order the points which are of
special interest in our study of the Holy Spirit.
The Authorized Version renders verse 3, "Except a
man be born again." For again the English, and
American Revisers read anew, with from above in the
margin. Scholars are divided in opinion between these
renderings, and the question which is to be preferred
requires our consideration. The word ovorttev has sev-
eral meanings in the New Testament, (a) Ordinarily
in accordance with its derivation it signifies from
above. 8 (b) From the beginning.* (c) Over again,
anew. This sense of the word is found in the New
Testament unless the verse in hand be an exception,
only in Gal. iv. 9, where it is joined with JtoAiv. 5 These
with the present passage are the only instances
of the use of the word in the New Testament. The
3 Matt, xxvii. 57; Mark xv. 38; John iii. 31; x. 11; xix. 23; Jas.
i. 17; iii. 15, 17.
* Luke i. 3; Acts xxvi. 5.
8 See Ellicott and Burton, in loc.
260 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
usage of New Testament writers!, and of John in
particular, is obviously and strongly in favour of the
rendering from above, which is also in accord with the
characteristic teaching of the Fourth Gospel and the
First Epistle of John, that the new birth is of God. 8
But New Testament usage is not uniform, and yields
some support, though slight, to anew.
There are other considerations to be borne in mind,
however, as we attempt to fix the meaning of the term.
If Jesus spoke in Aramaic, the precise word that he
employed has not been preserved, so that our judg-
ment must be based upon the Greek. Nicodemus evi-
dently understood Jesus to mean anew. But are we
bound by Nicodemus' understanding or misunder-
standing of the term? It might be ambiguous to him
as to us; he was bewildered and may easily have
misapprehended Jesus' teaching, as even his dis-
ciples often did; and he was slow of understanding
in this spiritual realm of which Jesus spoke. The
word of Nicodemus therefore carries with it no deci-
sive weight.
Much is made of the fact that "in the traditional
form of the saying 7 a word is used (avayBwao^ai ) as
equivalent to the ambiguous phrase of St. John
(y&wrv&rjvai avcotfev ) which unquestionably can only
mean 'to be reborn'." 8 9 But against this may be set
the fact that Greek writers from Origen usually adopt
the sense from above. The word was of doubtful
meaning to them as to us. Chrysostom recognizes the
ambiguity: "The word 'again' in this place, some
understand to mean 'from heaven/ others 'from the
beginning'," 10 In his eighth Homily on the Epistle to
6 John i. 13; I John ii. 29; iii. 9.
7 e. g. Just. M. I. Apol.
* Westcott, Addl. note. Abbot, Auth. Fourth G., pp. 20 ff. Drum-
mond, Char, and Auth, oj Fourth Gospel, ch. ii.
8 of. I Peter i. 3, 23.
1 Horn, on John, in loc.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III.
the Colossians he uses the word in the sense of anew,
afresh.
The case is argued with learning and ability by Ezra
Abbot, Westcott, and Godet in favour of the rendering
anew, and by Meyer and D wight " in favour of from
above. After scholarship and critical skill have done
their utmost, the ambiguity remains. Both renderings
have support in Greek usage; both are appropriate to
the course of the thought, and we cannot pronounce
with confidence in favour of either; though the weight
of evidence appears to incline toward the reading from
above. Happily the question is of no great importance,
for the words that follow make it abundantly clear that
the new birth is a birth from heaven. "Except one
be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot see the
kingdom of God."
There are those who regard water (vSoros) as an
interpolation; 13 but as it is found in all manuscripts
and versions and appears in frequent citations by early
Christian writers, the attempt to elide it must be
pronounced an instance of the pernicious habit of de-
termining a text by the critic's judgment of what
should have been said, instead of examining the evi-
dence with open mind to discover what actually was
said.
The question what is meant by water has given rise
to much debate, for both exegetical and theological
considerations are involved. That water signifies bap-
tism was the view generally held by the church until
the time of the Reformation, when Calvin, recoiling
from the doctrine of baptismal regeneration as main-
tained by the church of Rome, taught that water is
merely the symbol of the Spirit's work, representing his
cleansing and renewing power, and has no relation to
11 Add. note in Godet.
12 Swete, Holy Sp. in N. T., p. 132. Wendt, Gospel Ace. to St.
John, p. 120.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
baptism. "Spiritum et aquam pro eodem posuit."
Theologians of the Reformed faith have commonly
followed Calvin in this opinion.
The older view, however, is maintained by many
of the ablest modern expositors, as Meyer, Westcott,
and Godet, and is indeed so obviously correct that it
would seem to be impossible to miss it, if it were not
so often missed.
Others again have thought that by water is meant
the word. It is true that the new birth is said to be
accomplished by the word of God. "Of his own will
he brought us forth by the word of truth"; 18 "Having
been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of
incorruptible, through the word of God which liveth
and abideth";" and that the word is compared to the
rain and the snow that come down from heaven to
water the earth and make it fruitful; 16 but the narra-
tive gives no indication that this was in the mind of
Jesus here.
It is hardly possible that Nicodemus should have
attached to the word any other meaning than baptism.
The land was ringing with the name of John the Bap-
tist: his fame was in all men's mouths; and of his
ministry baptism was the central feature, outstanding
and conspicuous. This natural and obvious sense of
the word should be retained unless it is at variance
with the course of the argument or with the general
tenor of Scripture teaching. But it is in fact in
entire harmony with the context and with New Testa-
ment doctrine, as may readily be shown. From every
point of view water suggests the rite of baptism.
If we regard water as merely a symbol, signifying
spiritual renewing and cleansing, is not the sacramental
water set apart by divine command for the very pur-
pose of representing the inward work of the Spirit;
and is it not therefore the highest form of the symbol
18 Jas. i. 18. 14 1 Peter i. 23. 1B Isa. Iv. 10.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 263
and the one which Jesus would naturally employ?
If common water may signify the Spirit, how much
more the water of the sacrament? Why then should
Jesus pass by the most obvious symbol of the Spirit's
work; the rite administered by John, his forerunner
and herald, sent by God to baptize men unto repent-
ance; the rite to which he had himself submitted that
he might fulfil all righteousness; the rite which he him-
self had already begun, or was soon to begin, to ad-
minister by the hands of his disciples? 18
Smeaton understands that our Lord has in mind
"the sprinklings, ablutions, lustrations common in the
Mosaic law."
The water referred to by our Lord in this con-
nexion was but the ceremonial expression for the
cleansing of our person by His own obedience or
atoning sacrifice, proving the complete removal of
guilt and of everything that could exclude us on
the ground of law from the Kingdom of God. 1T
But again we ask, If the washings of the Mosaic law
may be signified by the water, why may not baptism,
the divinely appointed rite of the New Testament, be
regarded as the highest expression, the fulfilment, of
the Old Testament symbolism? Did not these Old
Testament cleansings reach the height and fulness of
their symbolic significance in baptism? Why then
should Jesus choose the earlier and lower form of the
symbol, and pass by the later and higher form in which
the truth was expressed? When Jesus would use water
as a sign of spiritual cleansing, why should he not use
the water of the sacrament, ordained of God for the
very purpose of signifying the cleansing and renewing
work of the Spirit?
But baptism is more than a symbol; it is a sacra-
ment. As a sacrament it is appointed to be a badge of
16 John iii. 34, 36; iv. 1,2. 1T Doct. of Holy Spirit, p. 183.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
discipleship, a bond of union, a means of grace. Here
the analogy which has been drawn between the phrases,
the Holy Spirit and fire, and water and the Spirit,
breaks down. It is said that if in one case fire is used in
a merely symbolic sense, water may be used in the
same sense as the other. But the difference is plain;
fire is merely a symbol and has no sacramental signi-
ficance; there is no sacrament of fire. But there is a
sacrament of water. Water is not merely a symbol but
a sacrament.
The place here accorded to baptism is in harmony
with the general teaching of the New Testament. It
must be borne in mind, of course, that the term regen-
eration is used in a narrower and wider sense. It may
signify the immediate and instantaneous act of the
Spirit, or it may denote the whole complex process that
we are accustomed to call conversion, including on the
part oi man, repentance and faith; on the part of God,
the forgiveness of sin and the imparting of the new
life in Christ. If born of the water and Spirit be under-
stood in the larger sense of the term, there is no diffi-
culty in conceiving that the Spirit imparts renewing
grace in baptism as he imparts sanctifying grace in the
Lord's Supper. We find therefore that baptism is
associated with repentance, 18 and faith; 18 and with
the washing away of sin and spiritual cleansing and
renewing. 20 In Rom. vi. 3 Paul asks, "Or are ye
ignorant that all we who are baptized into Christ Jesus
were baptized into his death?" Through baptism we
are united with him in his death, and the benefits of his
atoning sacrifice are ours.
What is here said of baptism is repeatedly affirmed
elsewhere in the New Testament. In Ephes. v. 25, 26
we read: "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ
also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that
he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing
18 Matt. iii. 11. 18 Col. i. 12. ao Acts ii. 38; xxii. 16.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 265
of water with the word." The general term, word,
(QTiixati) takes its particular meaning here from its
association with baptism, and signifies the word of the
rite, that is, the formula of baptism and the promises
connected with it. Augustine has expressed the truth
in his familiar saying, Accedit verbum ad elementum,
et fit sacmmentum the word is added to the element,
and the sacrament is made. The water and the word
compose the sacrament; for by the word the water is
set apart for a sacramental purpose. 21 In Titus iii. 4, 5
baptism and the Spirit are joined together as in the
passage before us.
But when the kindness of God our Saviour, and
his love toward man appeared, not by works done
in righteousness, which we did ourselves, but ac-
cording to his mercy he saved us, through the
washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy
Spirit.
The reference of this passage to baptism has also
been denied, 22 but upon wholly insufficient grounds."
The washing or laver (toutQcp) o f water in Ephes.
v. 26 is the washing or laver of regeneration, and the
reference to baptism is as obvious hi one case as in the
other. Peter expresses the same thought in the
strongest possible way: "Because Christ also suffered
for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that
he might bring us to God ; being put to death in the
flesh, but made alive in the Spirit; in which also he
went and preached unto the spirits in prison, that
aforetime were disobedient, when the long-suffering
of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was
a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were
saved through water: which also after a true likeness
21 On this verse see Ellicott and Hodge, in loc.
22 Hodge, Syst. Theol., Ill, 595. On the place of baptism in Paul's
teaching, see Weiss, Bib. Theol. N. T., p. 84.
23 See Ellicott, in loc.
266 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away
of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good
conscience toward God, through the resurrection of
Jesus Christ." 2 * The closing words are obscure, but
the general sense of the passage is plain : baptism does
not avail as a mere outward ceremony, but only as it
is accompanied by that spiritual disposition which
is acceptable to God through Christ. 3 B
In his First Epistle John says of Jesus, "This is he
that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not
with the water only but with the water and with the
blood." as He evidently has in mind the flow of water
and blood from the side of Jesus pierced by the spear of
the Roman soldier as he hung upon the cross. This
John saw, and it was to him not a natural sequence of
the wound but a miracle, and he interprets it in this
passage of his Epistle. That the issue of blood and
water had a spiritual significance is plainly indicated
in the Gospel: "And he that hath seen hath borne
witness; and his witness is true; and he knoweth that
he saith true, that ye also may believe." 27 These strong
words would be unmeaning if he was speaking of a
merely natural phenomenon. Evidently he speaks of
a miraculous event which conveys a spiritual truth, and
what that truth is he shows in this comment upon the
matter in his Epistle. Christ came by blood and
water; the aorist (MMw) points to a historical fact. He
came, that is, he manifested himself as the Christ, and
this manifestation was through blood and water. These
general terms find more precise definition in the words
that follow "not with water only, but with the water
and with the blood" ; that is, the well-known water of
baptism and blood of atonement. The transition from
the general, water and blood, to the particular, the
water and the blood, is marked by the change of prepo-
24 1 Peter iii. 18, 21. * 8 1 John v. 6.
a B On this passage see Leighton, in loc. a 7 John xix. 35.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 267
sition from 8id by, to sv, with or in. Through water
and blood he reveals himself as the Christ; and
the water and the blood of his baptism and his sacri-
fice are the sphere in which he exercises the office of
the Christ. The baptism with water marked the begin-
ning of his Messianic ministry, the blood marked the
close of his work of expiation. His Messianic work on
earth is bounded by the baptism and the cross. "He
not only undertook, when he came to baptism, the
task of fulfilling all righteousness/ 8 but he also com-
pleted it by pouring out his blood ; ea and when this was
done, blood and water came forth from the side of Jesus
Christ, being dead on the cross." 30 Calvin speaks to
the same effect:
Water is a figure of ablution, and blood of satis-
faction. These things are both found in Christ,
who as John says "came by water and blood";
that is, to purify and redeem. Of this the Spirit
of God is a witness: or rather there are three that
bear witness, the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood.
In the water and the blood we have a testimony
of purgation and redemption; and the Spirit as
the principal witness confirms and secures our
reception and belief of this testimony. This sub-
lime mystery was strikingly exhibited upon the
cross, when blood and water flowed from Christ's
sacred side; which on this account Augustine has
justly called 'the fountain of our sacraments.' 81 82
It is evident from this review that the reference of
water to baptism is abundantly justified by Scripture
usage.
28 Matt. iii. 15.
28 John xix. 30.
s Bengel, in loc.
J 1 Instt. IV. 14, 22.
82 1 have treated at length of I John v:6-8 in connection with
John xix. 34-37 in my Teaching oj the Gospel of John.
268 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
And it may be shown with equal clearness that
the reference to baptism is in harmony with that sys-
tem of theology which is known as the Reformed
faith. The Westminster Confession of Faith teaches
that
The efficacy of baptism is not tied to that mo-
ment of time wherein it is administered; yet, not-
withstanding, by the right use of this ordinance
the grace promised is not only offered, but really
exhibited and conferred by the Holy Ghost, to
such (whether of age or infants) as that grace
belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God's
own will in his appointed time. 88
The Shorter Catechism inquires, "What are the out-
ward and ordinary means whereby Christ communi-
cateth to us the benefits of redemption?" and gives the
answer in these terms:
The outward and ordinary means whereby
Christ communicateth to us the benefits of re-
demption are his ordinances, especially the Word,
Sacraments, and prayer; all of which are made
effectual to the elect for salvation. 8 *
A sacrament is defined as "a holy ordinance insti-
tuted by Christ, wherein, by sensible signs, Christ and
the benefits of the new covenant are represented, sealed,
and applied to believers." SB "Baptism is a sacrament,
wherein the washing with water, hi the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, doth
signify and seal our engrafting into Christ, and partak-
ing of the benefits of the covenant of grace, and our
engagement to be the Lord's." 8e
It is interesting to note that the verse we have in
hand is cited in both the Larger and Shorter Cate-
18 XXVIII. 6. at Qn. 88. 8B Qn. 92. Qn. 94.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 269
chisms as one of the proof texts establishing the Scrip-
ture doctrine of baptism.
It is evident then that neither the general tenor of
Scripture teaching nor the principles of the Reformed
faith forbid us to recognize the rite of baptism in the
water which is here associated with the Spirit; on
the contrary, both Scripture and the Reformed faith
are in entire accord with this interpretation.
There is here no doctrine of baptismal regeneration,
as the term is commonly understood. Renewing grace
is not inseparably attached to the ordinance. Not all
who are baptized are regenerated, not all who are
regenerated are baptized. In commenting on this pas-
sage Smeaton says, "The term water has been variously
interpreted. (1) Some refer it to baptism an opinion
current in Patristic theology from the earliest times,
and asserted in the Greek and Latin church and in
some of the Protestant formularies. But it is unten-
able, as will be evident to every mind that weighs the
matter in the light of common observation. The water
to which the Lord refers certainly regenerates, and
entitles those who receive it to enter the Kingdom of
God, from which no true member can ever be cast out
again which cannot be affirmed of baptism in every
case." 8T If this be true, it weighs equally against his
own view of the water. Did the washings prescribed
by the law of Moses "certainly regenerate"? But it is
not true. Jesus does not say that men must be born
of water that they may enter the kingdom of God, but
of water and the Spirit. The very form of the phrase
shows how closely these words are linked together
not vScrros xccl Ix jtvev^atoc, as if water and Spirit
might be severed; but 8| uSatog wxl jtvsiinaTog . They
are united, the Spirit, who is the power by which
regeneration is accomplished, and baptism, the means
of grace which he employs. The water has no efficacy
87 Doctr. Holy Spirit, p. 183.
270 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
whatever apart from the Spirit. Water and the Spirit
do certainly regenerate, and the Spirit may use the
water to this end. Renewing grace may be imparted
through the sacrament of baptism as sanctifying grace
is imparted through the sacrament of the Supper. The
Spirit uses the sacraments not merely as signs and sym-
bols of his gracious work, but as the means by which in
part that work is accomplished. We must not, on the
one hand, ascribe to the sacraments an efficacy of
their own, nor, on the other hand, may we deny their
efficacy when they are employed by the Holy Spirit.
That baptism is simply one of the means which the
Spirit uses, and that regeneration is not inseparably
attached to it, is indicated by the fact that the water
does not again appear, but the Spirit alone is named:
"That which is born of the Spirit is Spirit." Baptism
is treated in the same way in the early addition to
Mark, xvi. 16 "He that believeth and is baptized shall
be saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned."
In Rom. x. 16 the confession of the mouth is joined
with the faith of the heart. "There is in every sacra-
ment a spiritual relation, or sacramental union, be-
tween the sign and the thing signified; whence it comes
to pass, that the names and effects of the one are
attributed to the other." 88 The same truth is taught
in John vi. Jesus declares emphatically and repeatedly
that men must eat his flesh and drink his blood if they
would have eternal life. Language could not be more
clear and explicit. But he goes on to explain the deeper
meaning of his words. It is the spirit that giveth
life; the flesh profiteth nothing." 89 He is not speaking
directly of the Lord's Supper, but sets forth the prin-
ciple which underlies it and gives it spiritual value.
The eating his flesh and drinking his blood is repre-
sented sensibly and visibly in the Supper. Whether
88 Westminster Confession of Faith, ch. xxvii. 2.
80 John vi. 63.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS IH.
we take otvevjia here to refer to the Holy Spirit or not
a question that we shall presently consider the
contrast is sharply drawn between the material and
the spiritual, and it is taught that the material has no
value or power of itself. It is true of the elements of
baptism and the Lord's Supper alike that they avail
only as they are employed by the Spirit to apply to
those who worthily receive them the benefits of Christ's
atoning work.*
The question has been raised whether Jesus speaks
of the baptism of John or of Christian baptism. Prob-
ably he spoke in general terms to include both forms
of baptism; for it is the sign and seal alike of John's
ministry and of the new covenant in Christ Jesus. And
the words gain added weight when we remember that
Nicodemus was of the sect of the Pharisees, who "re-
jected for themselves the counsel of God, being not
baptized of him (John)." 41 To the Pharisees the
injunction not to slight or neglect the ordinance of God
was particularly appropriate; for the baptism of John
was from heaven."
We need have no hesitation in the light of these
considerations in referring the water to baptism. Dr.
Hodge denies the reference in his Systematic Theology,
but in his commentary on Rom. vi. 3 and Ephes. v. 26
he teaches everything with regard to the nature and
effect of baptism which this interpretation requires.
That this obvious and appropriate and Scriptural sig-
nificance of the word has ever been abandoned must
be pronounced one of those instances, unhappily not
rare in the history of the church, in which the exposi-
tion of Scripture has been warped by the supposed
necessities of a theological system.
Twice again in this passage the Spirit is named.
* See Denney, Jesus and the Gospels, pp. 87-90.
41 Luke vii. 30.
* a Mark xi. 30.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh; that which
is born of the Spirit is Spirit." 4S The flesh is man in
his natural state of sin and condemnation. "Flesh and
blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither
doth corruption inherit incorruption." 44 The kingdom
is a spiritual kingdom, and only they may enter it who
are born of the Spirit: "not of blood, nor of the will
of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." * 6 In
the natural and the spiritual world alike the child
bears the image of the parent.
Ambrose accepted and defended a reading of the
verse which has no manuscript authority, and is evi-
dently a gloss: "that which is born of the flesh is
flesh, because it is born of the flesh ; and that which is
born of the Spirit is Spirit, because the Spirit is God." * 8
The last clause he accused the Arians of expunging
from the text : "Which passage you, Arians, so expressly
testify to be said concerning the Spirit, that you re-
move it from your copies, and would that it were from
yours, and not also from those of the Church." 4T
We -may suppose that the words were inserted by a
scribe in order to furnish additional witness to the
Deity of the Spirit, as the famous passage I John v. 7
was introduced to give support to the doctrine of the
Trinity. 48
The analogy between the natural and spiritual
realms which Jesus so often traces is drawn here: "The
wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the voice
thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh and whither
it goeth; so is every one that is bora of the Spirit." "
It is possible to tender atvefina by Spirit in both clauses
43 John iii. 6.
4i l Cor. xv. 50.
* B Johni. 13.
* 9 On the Holy Spirit, III, 59 and 63.
*< Ibid., Ill, 59.
18 Gregory, Canon & Text of N. T. f pp. 374, 508. Westcott on
Eps. of John, Addl. note in loc.
"John iii. 8. - . . .
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS IH.
of the verse, and read as the margin of the Revised
Version suggests, "The spirit breatheth." But in that
case the free self-determination of the regenerate soul
is compared to the free self-determination of the
Spirit a conception wholly foreign to the course
of Jesus' thought. As flesh and spirit are contrasted,
so wind and Spirit are compared. "Every one that is
born of the Spirit" is elliptical, and must be under-
stood to signify, "so is it with every one that is born
of the Spirit." For it is not the freedom of the soul
that is born again of which Jesus speaks, but the free-
dom of the Spirit in the work of regeneration. His
action is likened to the blowing of the wind in these
particulars: it is self-determined: "Where it will"; it
is known by its effects: "thou hearest the sound there-
of"; it is mysterious in its origin and operation: "thou
knowest not whence it cometh and whither it goeth."
Thus our Lord makes plain the truth that in order
to enter the kingdom of God there is need of a new
birth, a spiritual birth, a divine birth, a sovereign birth.
All this is involved in the phrase, "born of the Spirit,"
and belongs to the logical unfolding of the doctrine of
regeneration.
In his discourse on the bread of life recorded in the
sixth chapter of John, though Jesus does not directly
refer to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, yet he
sets forth the principle which underlies it and gives
to it spiritual value and power. Because baptism was
an established ordinance, he speaks of it distinctly and
directly to Nicodemus: but the sacrament of the Sup-
per had not yet been instituted, and therefore it is not
expressly named. But the truth which it symbolizes is
expressed, a general truth which finds a particular
application in the sacrament; as the cleansing which is
symbolized by water comes to its full significance in
baptism. "I am the bread of life"; "The bread which
I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world"; "Ex-
274 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
cept ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his
blood, ye have not life in yourselves" ; "He that eateth
my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me and I
in him."
His disciples found this a hard saying, and Jesus
expounded to them the spiritual significance of his
words: "It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh
profiteth nothing." The bold figure of eating his flesh
and drinking his blood was employed to arrest atten-
tion and awaken interest; but it is not to be taken
literally. Through the material the spiritual appears.
If this verse stood alone, and no further comment was
made, we should naturally infer that Jesus is speaking
of the Holy Spirit, the giver of spiritual life. And this
would be in entire accord with his teaching regarding
the Spirit in John iii. Thus he would ascribe to the
Spirit, though indirectly, the same efficacy in the ad-
ministration of the Supper that he had already ascribed
to him in the administration of baptism. The sacra-
ments derive all their power from him.
But the words that follow forbid this interpretation.
"The words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and
are life." It is the life-giving power of his words
of which he speaks, a truth that often finds a place in
his doctrine. The story of the two builders so teaches
that every man is building, that every building shall be
tested, that the result of the testing depends upon the
foundation; that the only sure foundation is obedience
to his word. By his word his disciples are made clean, 51
as they are sanctified by the word of God, Ba the word
which he has given them. 68 Therefore he said, "If a
man keep my word, he shall never see death." " But
the word and the sacraments and all other means that
may be employed to renew and cleanse the hearts of
80 Matt. vii. 24-27; Luke yi. 47-49. S8 John xvii. 14.
81 John xv. 3. 5 * John viii. 57.
58 John xvii. 17.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 275
men owe their efficacy to the Holy Spirit. Only as he
applies them to the soul do they accomplish the end
for which they are given. They are simply the instru-
ments which he employs to fulfil his sovereign work
of grace in the lives of men. The word of God avails
only as the Spirit of God brings it home to the heart
and gives it power over the life.
II. "Now on the last day, the great day of the feast,
Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let
him come unto me and drink. He that believeth on
me, as the Scripture hath said, from within him shall
flow rivers of living water. But this spake he of the
Spirit, which they that believe on him were to receive;
for the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was
not yet glorified." BB
The text presents two subjects for our consideration,
the words of Jesus and the interpretation of them by
the evangelist.
(a) The words of Jesus. The occasion that sug-
gested the figure is commonly supposed to have been
the ceremony of bringing water in a golden bowl from
the pool of Siloam and pouring it into vessels near the
altar, a ceremony which according to Jewish tradition
was derived from Isaiah xii. 3 "Therefore with joy
shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation." This
rite was observed every day of the feast of Tabernacles,
except perhaps the eighth, of which we lack sufficient
knowledge to speak with confidence.
The Spirit in his refreshing and lifegiving power is
frequently represented in the Old Testament and the
New by water, the indispensable condition of all
created life. In the story of the creation it is written,
"And no plant of the field was yet in the earth, and
no herb of the field had yet sprung up; for Jehovah
God had not caused it to rain upon the earth." 5e Some
of the fathers taught that the river of the water of life
56 John vii. 37-39. Gen. ii. 5,
276 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
in Revelation xxii. 1 B7 represents the Holy Spirit. 58 To
the woman of Samaria Jesus said, "If thou knewest the
gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to
drink ; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would
have given thee living water." 69 There as here the
water is the gift of Jesus. And it is living water, water
not drawn from Jacob's well or the pool of Siloam, but
springing from an overflowing fountain, water that
ministers refreshment and life not to the body, but to
the soul. There the water is represented as quenching
the thirst of the spirit; here it flows forth as a lifegiving
stream. The gift shall not be confined to him who re-
ceives it but in turn shall be imparted to others through
him. It is the law of the kingdom that as every man has
received a gift, so shall he minister it, as a good steward
of the manifold grace of God. 60
What is the Scripture to which Jesus refers? Where
in the Old Testament shall we find the words, "from
within him shall flow rivers of living water"? There is
nothing in the Old Scripture which answers precisely
to the words of Jesus. How then may the quotation
be explained? It is a forced expedient to refer the
words, "as the Scripture hath said," to the preceding
clause, "He that believeth in me" ; though it has been
resorted to also in John xix. 28, where "that the scrip-
ture might be accomplished" is by some scholars 81 con-
nected with the words preceding, "knowing that all
things are now finished," and not with "I thirst."
Smeaton affirms that the promise here given intimates
"precisely the same thing as Christ said to the woman
of Samaria. 62 The meaning is not that the Spirit
B7 Swete, Procession of the Spirit, pp. 8, 216; Comm. of Swete
and Charles, in loc.
58 Copious selections from ancient and modern writers bearing
upon this passage are given in Hare's Mission of the Comforter,
note H.
88 John iv. 10. ei See Meyer, in loc.
8 I Peter iv. 10. 2 John iv. 14.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS IH. 277
flows from one disciple to another for none can so
give the Spirit but that the Spirit as a flowing river
quenches the thirst and satisfies the desires, so that
the soul no longer thirsts for any other object." 83 But
the difference of phraseology clearly indicates a differ-
ence of meaning: "Shall become in him a well of
water springing up unto eternal life"; "from within
him shall flow rivers of living water." The water does
not simply spring up in the believer, it flows from him.
If believers may be called the light of the world and the
salt of the earth, there is no reason why they may not
be represented as ministering to others of that divine
grace with which their own hearts are filled. That
Christ works through men, and through them imparts
his grace to others is plainly declared in the figure of
the vine and the branches. The life is of the vine, the
branches bear the fruit: The vine bears fruit through
the branches. This thought underlies the whole con-
ception of the church as the body of Christ, in which he
dwells and through which he works, as he dwelt hi the
body of his flesh, and through it accomplished his work
on our behalf. It is the outflowing of the grace and
power of the Spirit in the ministry of believers of which
Jesus here speaks. At a later stage of our study we
shall see that the witness of the Spirit is ordinarily
borne through the disciples.
Obviously this is one of those quotations, frequent
in all literature, and found elsewhere in the New
Testament, which gather up the substance of various
passages in a sentence. They are termed "Quotations
of Substance" by Prof. Franklin Johnson in his Quota-
tions of the New Testament from the Old, Chapter
VI ; and he gives illustrations from the New Testament,
in which he discovers only three or four examples, and
specifies Matt. ii. 23; John vii. 38; and Ephes. v. 14;
while Rom. iii. 10 is regarded rather as a citation from
83 Doct. oj the Holy Spirit, p. 48.
278 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Psalm xiv. 3. Illustrations are drawn also from Greek
and Latin authors. 6 * This mode of quotation, indeed,
is so common that it need cause neither difficulty nor
surprise. And there is not the slightest occasion here
or elsewhere in the Gospels to suppose that the words
are drawn from some lost apocryphal writing; nor
is the accuracy of the record affected by the fact
that the precise form of words cannot be found in the
Old Testament. The endeavour is sometimes made to
force upon the speakers and writers of the New Testa-
ment a rigid and formal accuracy of quotation to which
they will not submit, and which is constantly trans-
gressed by authors of the first rank in every age. It is
interesting to note that one of the foremost Bible
scholars in citing this passage gives it in this fashion:
"If any man thirst let him come unto me, and drink
living water." 95 The citation is correct in substance
though verbally inexact.
The words of Jesus are not the citation of a specific
Old Testament prophecy, but rather a summary of
those passages which portray the beneficent out-flow-
ing of the life which is in fellowship with God; such
as Prov. xviii. 4: "The words of a man's mouth are as
deep waters; the wellspring of wisdom is as a flowing
brook"; Isa. Iviii. 11: "Thou shalt be like a watered
garden, and like a spring of water, whose waters fail
not." He who receives the living water through faith
in Christ shall in turn become to others a fountain of
blessing. It is highly significant that Jesus thus
gathers up in a sentence the Old Testament teaching
concerning the Holy Spirit, and relates it to his own
Person and work.
(b) The interpretation of the words of Jesus by the
evangelist.
Among the evangelists the beloved disciple alone
ventures to interpret the thought of the Master. The
64 See also Art. "Quotations" in HDC & Gs.
95 Calvin, Instt., Bk. IV, ch. xix., vi.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 279
earlier writers simply report what they had seen and
heard and gathered from tradition; John interprets.
They tell us what Jesus said; John goes further, and
tells us what he meant. To this general rule there is
a single striking exception in Mark vii. 19 "Perceive
ye not, that whatsover from without goeth into the
man, it cannot defile him; because it goeth not into
his heart but into his belly, and goeth out into the
draught?" The Authorized Version renders the words
that follow by "purging all meats." If the participle
is neuter, as in the received text, woftaQi^ov. it evidently
refers to the phrase, "that which goeth into the
draught." But the participle according to the decisive
weight of evidence is masculine, xc$aQit;cQv. 8a To what
then should it be referred? Meyer says to the draught,
which he regards as the logical subject, though it is in
the accusative case in the text. It is much better,
however, to refer it to Jesus, the subject of Xeyet in
the verse preceding, and read with the Revised Ver-
sion, "This he said, making all meats clean." In view
of "the freedom of the Greek from artificial rules and
its response to the play of the mind" 8T the separation
of the participle from the verb presents no serious
difficulty. The objection is raised that we have no
other example of such interpretation of Jesus' words
in Mark; and that is true. Sometimes we are called
on to reject a passage because something like it is found
elsewhere; and again because nothing like it is found
elsewhere. The New Testament writers observe no
rules of this kind, and each case must be determined
upon the evidence presented. In this instance we
naturally inquire, Have we not here a reminiscence of
Peter, recalling and interpreting the words of Jesus in
the light of his own experience on the housetop in
Joppa? 8
This interpretation, which was recognized by
" See Swete, in loc. " 7 Robertson, Gram. Gk. N. T., 417.
" Acts x. 11-15.
280 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
Origen, 68 and lifts the teaching of Jesus to the high
spiritual level which was characteristic of all his teach-
ing, may be accepted without hesitation. 70
How does John interpret the words of Jesus? "This
spake he of the Spirit, which they that believed on
him were to receive." Why "which"? Surely neither
Jesus nor John conceived of the Spirit as neuter, an
impersonal force or energy; yet that is the sense that
"which" inevitably conveys to modern ears.
In the light of this interpretation it is natural to
refer the living water of John iv. 10 also to the Spirit.
But there are several possible explanations of the
phrase in that passage: by the living water Jesus may
mean himself, God's grace and truth, faith, salvation;
and the truth conveyed may be conceived under so
many different aspects that we cannot determine pre-
cisely what lay in the mind of Jesus. He promised
the Samaritan woman water that would quench her
thirst, the thirst of the soul, and it is obvious that this
may be represented in various ways. The soul thirsts for
God; 71 for the word of God; 72 for the Spirit; 78 for
righteousness. 74 God is the fountain of life, 76 but there
are many ways through which he imparts himself to
men, and any one of these may answer to the living
water by which the thirst of the soul is quenched.
We cannot affirm, therefore, that Jesus here is speak-
ing, of the Spirit, though the resemblance of the two
passages may seem to point in that direction; and it
is probable that he makes use of the phrase to signify
in the most general sense the satisfaction of the soul
in God.
68 Matt. xi. 12.
70 In favour of this rendering see Swete and Gould; against it,
Meyer and Riddle.
71 Ps. xlii, 1, 2; Ixiii. 1; cxliii. 6; Isa. Iv. 3.
78 Amos viii. 11-13.
78 Isa. xliv. 3.
74 Matt. v. 6.
75 Isa. Iv. 1; Ps. xxxvi. 9; Jer. ii. 13; xvii. 13.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 281
Here the living water is expressly declared to be the
Spirit. But what is meant by the words that follow:
"For the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was
not yet glorified"? Given is not in the text, but is
evidently required in translation. The Spirit was pres-
ent and active in the world from the beginning; in the
Old Testament is represented as the efficient energy
of God, in the New Testament, disclosed as a divine
Person. Without him is nothing accomplished, for he
is the agent of the Godhead , in the realm of nature
and of grace. By him every soul is regenerated that
has ever entered the kingdom of God throughout the
whole course of human history. He rested upon judge
and prophet and king under the old dispensation.
John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit. The
power of the Spirit was conspicuously displayed hi
the conception of Jesus, through which the Word be-
came flesh. How then can it be said that the Spirit
was not yet given?
It is evident that the words must be understood not
in an absolute, but in a relative sense, a mode of speech
of which there are many examples both in the Old
Testament and in the New. It is not meant that the
Holy Spirit was not in the world until Jesus was glori-
fied, but that he was not disclosed in the fulness of
nis grace and glory, did not put forth the greatness
of his power. Jesus received the Spirit without meas-
ure, but he did not impart the Spirit to his disciples
in the height and fulness of his power until he was
seated at the right hand of the Majesty on high, and
crowned Lord of all.
All revelation is gradual and progressive, for it is
limited by the capacity of men to receive. The Son
was in the world from the beginning, as the maker
of the universe, the light which lighteth every man.
"Abraham rejoiced to see his day; and he saw it and
was glad." Moses wrote of him. He followed the
children of Israel in their long journey through the
282 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
wilderness. 78 The Old Testament was a continual
foreshadowing of him and of his redeeming work.
Yet of him too it might be said, He was not yet given.
For the incarnation ushered in a new era of revelation
immeasurably surpassing all that had gone before.
Pentecost holds in the revelation of the Spirit the place
that the incarnation holds in the revelation of the
Son. Then men began clearly to apprehend his Per-
sonality, and to experience in a measure unknown be-
fore, his sovereign power. The revelation of the Spirit
follows and keeps pace with the revelation of the Son.
When the Person of the Son is disclosed by his birth
in Bethlehem, the Person of the Spirit begins to ap-
pear. And when the atoning work of Jesus is accom-
plished, and he is exalted at the right hand of God, the
Spirit begins to exercise the full power of his ministry
in the church and in the world. It is his office to
witness to Jesus, and the work of Jesus must be fin-
ished before the witness can be borne. Calvary and
Olivet are the conditions of Pentecost. Jesus there-
fore may say to the disciples, though they have been
born again of the Spirit, "If I go not away, the Com-
forter will not come unto you ; but if I go, I will send
him unto you." 7r As under the old dispensation
there was a partial anticipation of Christ, so there
was a partial manifestation of the Spirit. He accom-
plishes more widely and perfectly under the Gospel
what he wrought more narrowly and imperfectly under
the law. For it is through the truth that he regener-
ates and sanctifies the soul; the truth comes to its
full expression in the finished work of Christ, and the
more fully and clearly the truth is revealed and appre-
hended the richer is the fruit in character and life.
In these respects, then, the revelation of the Spirit
76 1 Cor. x. 14.
77 John. xvi. 7.
78 Swete, Holy Spirit in N. T., note F, p. 375.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 883
after the ascension of Christ transcends all earlier
revelation.
(a) His Personality is clearly brought to light. He
is no longer a divine energy or power, but a divine
Person. Our Lord's clearest and fullest teaching re-
garding the Spirit was reserved until the night he was
betrayed; but though some perception of the truth
began to dawn upon the minds of the disciples, it was
not until the Spirit came upon them in mighty power
that the full import of the Master's words was appre-
hended. It is only after Pentecost that the work of
the Spirit is clearly distinguished from the work of
the Father and the Son; and regeneration and sanc-
tification which the Old Testament ascribes to God,
are seen to pertain to the special office of the Spirit. 79
Yet the truth was so thoroughly in harmony with the
representation of the Old Testament, sprang so natu-
rally from it, that it apparently provoked no opposi-
tion or dissent on the part of the Jews when it was
presented to them, and found its place without diffi-
culty or hindrance in the theology and life of the
church. When the truth was plainly disclosed, it was
seen to be the logical and inevitable sequel of Old
Testament teaching. We need not wonder that the
disciples were not able to grasp at once the full signifi-
cance of this great truth; for it is singular to observe
how in our own time, and in the writings of men who
hold without question the Personality of the Spirit,
the practice of using the neuter pronouns in referring
to him still persists. Thayer's Lexicon defines the
Spirit as God's power and agency and recognizes in
him no distinct personality; yet there is a curious inter-
change of it and he in the treatment of the theme. We
79 On the whole subject of the progressive disclosure of the Spirit,
see Swete, Holy Spirit in N. T., notes E and F. Kuyper's Work of
the Holy Spirit, ch. xxvi. The most valuable part of the work is
the introduction by B. B. Warfield, where the unfolding of the doc-
trine of the Spirit is admirably presented.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
find the same phraseology in places where we should
not expect it. The Authorized Version in Rom. viii. 26
reads, "The Spirit itself," which is properly altered in
the Revised Versions to himself. But in John xv. 26
both the English and American Revisions read: "But
when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto
you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth which
proceedeth from the Father." It is true of course that
in one clause the Greek pronoun is masculine, refer-
ring to jtaQdbdtytog, and in the other neuter, referring to
leveret; but to designate the Spirit by a pronoun
which in modern usage is not applied to persons, and
that in a passage which explicitly sets forth his Person-
ality, cannot be justified by niceties of grammar. The
thought must determine the rendering. In the same
way the Spirit is spoken of as neuter in the Revised
Versions, both English and American, hi I Peter i. 11:
"Searching what time, or what manner of tune, the
Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto,
when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ,
and the glory that should follow them." However it
may have been with the Old Testament prophets,
Peter certainly did not conceive of the Spirit as im-
personal, for in the beginning of this Epistle he asso-
ciates him with the Father and the Son. And in the
rendering of Peter's words, Peter's thought should con-
trol. In Titus iii. 6 both Revisions read "renewing of
the Holy Spirit (Ghost) which he poured out upon
us richly."
In his Spirit of God in Biblical Literature Prof.
Wood habitually speaks of the Spirit as it. He holds,
upon altogether insufficient grounds, that the teach-
ing ascribed to Jesus regarding the Spirit in John xiv.
16 was probably "a Christian addition." 80 Yet on
page 256 the Spirit appears as he.
Prof. J. A. Alexander in the first line of his Com-
80 p. 242.
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS III. 285
mentary on Acts xix. 2 uses it with reference to the
Spirit, but throughout the exposition he is always used.
The neuter pronoun is employed in similar fashion in
Sanday & Headlam's Commentary on Romans, follow-
ing the Authorized Version: "The Holy Spirit itself'; 81
and in Ellicott's Commentary on Galatians: "The
Holy Spirit itself." 82 Prof. Swete in his Holy Spirit
in the New Testament interchanges the masculine and
neuter in a strange and perplexing fashion throughout
the whole course of the work, and even in the same
sentence "We see the Spirit manifesting itself in the
events of our Lord's life, and in the experience of
believers after his ascension; and we also receive direct
teaching upon the work of the Paraclete and upon the
relation of Christians to Him." 8a We read again,
"When any personal action or relation is ascribed to
the Spirit the article at once reappears, e.g., . . .
when it is co-ordinated with the Father and the Son." 8 *
It is curious to observe that hi the closing paragraphs
of the book, which form a summary of the discussion,
in which the Personality of the Spirit is clearly shown,
it and itself are the only pronouns employed. In
Hastings' Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, Art.
"Holy Spirit," by James Danney, it frequently occurs,
even in passages where the Personality of the Spirit
is explicitly affirmed. And in the Dictionary of the
Apostolic Church the Spirit appears in the same para-
graph as both He and it.* 5 In the closing paragraph
of F. W. Robertson's fine sermon on "The Principle
of the Spiritual Harvest" we read that the reward of
the Christian life, "is the Holy Spirit of God in man,
making itself felt." In Leighton's Commentary on
I Peter iii. 21, note, the Spirit is twice referred to by
the neuter pronoun.
These illustrations, which might be indefinitely in-
" Rom. viii. 26. 88 p. 7. 80 Vol. I, p. 580.
82 Gal. v. 16. 8 *p. 397.
286 THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPELS
creased, indicate how closely the conceptions of the
Spirit as a divine energy and as a divine Person are
related, and how easily the mind turns from one to
the other.
(b) Under the old covenant the Spirit was given to
chosen individuals, particularly to those who repre-
sented and served the theocracy; at Pentecost he was
poured out upon the church and the church became
his abiding place, his temple. Here again it must be
borne in mind that the words are true in a relative
sense. He was present in the church of the Old Testa-
ment as truly as in the church of the New; and to
him must be ascribed the faith of Abraham, the wis-
dom of Moses, the patience of Job, the inspiration of
psalmist and prophet, as well as the guidance of the
apostolic company. But now he whose gifts had been
conferred for special purposes upon chosen men, is
poured out in the fulness of his sanctifying grace upon
all the people of God.
(c) Not only is the Person of the Spirit clearly made
known, and his power more widely diffused, but he
operates more energetically and fruitfully in the indi-
vidual life, in the church, in the world. As men of
the Old Covenant like Abraham and Moses and
David saw the Christ but dimly through the mist
of the intervening centuries, so the full work of the
Spirit was not wrought in them, for the work of the
Spirit is determined by the revelation of the Son. His
office in regeneration and sanctification, with which the
New Testament is chiefly concerned, is rarely alluded
to in the Old Scripture. His ministry could not be
clearly apprehended until his Person was disclosed.
Only after Pentecost is the work of the Spirit plainly
and explicitly distinguished from the work of the
Father and Son.
The transcendent nature of his work appears in the
change which his coming at Pentecost accomplished
SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS IH. 287
in the lives and character of the apostles. After three
years of fellowship with the Master they had been
timid as sheep; they became bold as lions. They had
been weak; they were clothed with power, and turned
the world upside down: they had been foolish and
slow of heart to understand and to accept the plain-
est teaching of Jesus, and stumbled at his word; they
began to speak with wisdom that none could withstand.
They were lifted to an immeasurably higher plane of
life, intellectual and spiritual. When we cross over
from the Gospels to the Acts, we are introduced to a
new world. We ask, Is this John? Can this be Peter?
They were narrow-minded, bigoted Jews; now they
have learned to look with the eyes of the Master upon
the great world for which God gave his Son to die.
They have grown mightily in strength and in spiritual
stature, and are ready for the enterprise to which Jesus
has called them, the conquest of the world.
CHAPTER IX
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE TEACHING
OF JESUS IV.
In his Christian Ecdesia, Dr. Hort affirms that chap-
ters xiii-xvii of the Fourth Gospel are "on the whole
the weightiest and most pregnant body of teaching on
the ecclesia to be found anywhere in the Bible." *
With even greater confidence a similar judgment may
be pronounced upon the teaching of these chapters
regarding the Person and work of the Holy Spirit.
It may be said with truth that they explicitly assert
or clearly imply all that is taught in the New Testa-
ment upon this theme. The Spirit is mentioned eight
times by name. Once he is called the Holy Spirit; 2
three times the Spirit of truth; 3 and four times the
Paraclete/ But this enumeration falls far short of
defining the place which the Spirit ho
