The Christology of St. Paul : Hulsean prize essay, with an additional chapter

^ C4 , - . - y . .^ ^ i^^ , /K^i-^W

/"

7

Novi/e£^

Xibmr^g of Tbistortc tTbeoIog^

EDITED BY THE REV. WM. C. PIERCY. M.A.

DEAN AND CHAPLAIN OF WHITELANDS COLLEGE

THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

S. NOWELL ROSTRON, M.A.

.-'

^^^

LIBRARY OF HISTORIC THEOLOGY

Edited by the Rev. Wm. C. PIERCY, M.A.
VOLUMES NOW READY.

THE PRESENT RELATIONS OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION.

By the Rev. Professor T. G. Bonney, D.Sc,
ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

By Professor Edouard Navillk, D.C.L,
MARRIAGE IN CHURCH AND STATE.

By the Rev. T. A. Lacey, M.A. (Warden of the LondoQ Diocesan Peoiteatiaiy),
THE BUILDING UP OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

By the Rev. CanoQ R. B. Girdlestone, M.A.
CHRISTIANITY AND OTHER FAITHS. Aa Essay In Comparative Religion.

By the Rev. W. St. Clair Tisdall, D.D,
THE CHURCHES IN BRITAIN. Vols. I. and //.

By the Rev, Alfred Plummer, D.D, (formerly Master of University College, Durham).
CHARACTER AND RELIGION.

By the Rev, the Hon, Edward Lytteltom, M.A, (Head Master of Eton College),
MISSIONARY METHODS, ST. PAUL'S OR OURS ?

By the Rev. Rolamd Allen, M,A, (Author of " Missionary Principles ").
THE RULE OF FAITH AND HOPE.

By the Rev. R. L. Ottley, D.D. (Canon of Christ Church, and Regius Professor
of Pastoral Theology in the University of Oxford).
THE RULE OF LIFE AND LOVE.

By the Rev. R. L. Ottley, D.D.
THE CREEDS : THEIR HISTORY, NATURE AND USE.

By the Rev, Harold Smith, M,A, (Lecturer at the London College of Divinity),
THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL (Hulsean Prize Essay).

By the Rev. S. Nowell Rostron, M.A, (Late Principal of St, John's Hall, Durham),
MYSTICISM IN CHRISTIANITY.

By the Rev. VV. K, Fleming, M.A., B.D.
RELIGION IN AN AGE OF DOUBT.

By the Rev, C, J. Shebbeare, M.A,

The following works are in Preparation : —

RELIGIOUS EDUCATION! ITS
PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE,

By the Rev. Prebendary B. Reynolds,

THE CATHOLIC CONCEPTION OF
THE CHURCH.

By the Rev. W. J. Sparrow Simpson, D.D.
COMMON OBJECTIONS
TO CHRISTIANITY.

By the Rev. C L. Drawbridge, M.A.

THE CHURCH OUTSIDE THE EMPIRE.

By the Rev. C. R. Davey Biggs, D.D.

THE NATURE OF FAITH AND THE
CONDITIONS OF ITS PROSPERITY.

By the Rev. P. N, Waggett, M,A.
THE ETHICS OF TEMPTATION.

By the Ven. E, E, Holmes. MJV.

AUTHORITY AND FREETHOUGHT
IN THfi MIDDLE AGES.

By the Rev. F. W. Bdssell, D.D.
EARLY CHRISTIAN LITERATURE,

By the Rev. Wm. C. Piercy, M.A.
GOD AND MAN, ONE CHRIST,

By the Rev. Charles E, Raven, M.A.

GREEK THOUGHT AND
CHRISTUN DOCTRINE,

By the Rev, J, K. Mozley, M.A,

THE GREAT SCHISM BETWEEN
THE EAST AND WEST.

By the Rev. F, J. Foakes-Jackson, D,D.

THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL IN
OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY.
By the Rev. A. Troelstra, D.D.

Full particulars of this Library may be obtained from the Publisher.

NEW YORK: FLEMING H. REVELL CO.

^N

THE CHRISTOLOGY OF
ST. PAUL

HULSEAN PRIZE ESSAY
WITH AN ADDITIONAL CHAPTER

BY THE REV.

S. NOWELL ROSTRON, M.A.

VICAR OF ST. LAWRENCE, KIRKDALE,
LATE PRINCIPAL OF ST. JOHn's HALL, DURHAM ; LATE SCHOLAR

OF ST. John's college, Cambridge

NEW YORK CHICAGO

FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY

MCMXII

U-

PUBLIC lu.'^'-M I

604162A i

PARENTIBUS FILIUS

HOC OPUSCULUM

D.D.D.

<

EDITOR'S GENERAL PREFACE

IN no branch of human knowledge has there been a more
lively increase of the spirit of research during the past few
years than in the study of Theology.

Many points of doctrine have been passing afresh through
the crucible ; " re-statement " is a popular cry and, in some
directions, a real requirement of the age ; the additions to
our actual materials, both as regards ancient manuscripts and
archaeological discoveries, have never before been so great as
in recent years ; linguistic knowledge has advanced with the
fuller possibiUties provided by the constant addition of more
data for comparative study, cuneiform inscriptions have been
deciphered and forgotten peoples, records, and even tongues,
revealed anew as the outcome of diligent, skilful and devoted
study.

Scholars have speciaUzed to so great an extent that many con-
clusions are less speculative than they were, while many more
aids are thus available for arriving at a general judgment ; and,
in some directions, at least, the time for drawing such general
conclusions, and so making practical use of such speciaUzed
research, seems to have come, or to be close at hand.

Many people, therefore, including the large mass of the parochial
clergy and students, desire to have in an accessible form a review
of the results of this flood of new light on many topics that are of
hving and vital interest to the Faith ; and, at the same time,
" practical " questions — by which is really denoted merely the
application of faith to life and to the needs of the day — have
certainly lost none of their interest, but rather loom larger than
ever if the Church is adequately to fulfil her Mission.

It thus seems an appropriate time for the issue of a new series
of theological works, which shall aim at presenting a general
survey of the present position of thought and knowledge in
various branches of the wide field which is included in the study
of divinity.

EDITOR'S GENERAL PREFACE

The Library of Historic Theology is designed to supply such
a series, written by men of known reputation as thinkers and
scholars, teachers and divines, who are, one and all, firm upholders
of the Faith.

It will not deal merely with doctrinal subjects, though pro-
minence will be given to these ; but great importance will be
attached also to history — the sure foundation of all progressive
knowledge — and even the more strictly doctrinal subjects will
be largely dealt with from this point of view, a point of view the
value of which in regard to the " practical " subjects is too
obvious to need emphasis.

It would be clearly outside the scope of this series to deal with
individual books of the Bible or of later Christian writings, with
the Uves of individuals, or with merely minor (and often highly
controversial) points of Church governance, except in so far as
these come into the general review of the situation. This de-
tailed study, invaluable as it is, is already abundant in many
series of commentaries, texts, biographies, dictionaries and mono-
graphs, and would overload far too heavily such a series as the
present.

The Editor desires it to be distinctly understood that the
various contributors to the series have no responsibiUty whatso-
ever for the conclusions or particular views expressed in any
volumes other than their own, and that he himself has not felt
that it comes within the scope of an editor's work, in a series of
this kind, to interfere with the personal views of the writers. He
must, therefore, leave to them their fuU responsibiUty for their
own conclusions.

Shades of opinion and differences of judgment must exist, if
thought is not to be at a standstill — petrified into an unpro-
ductive fossil ; but while neither the Editor nor all their readers
can be expected to agree with every point of view in the details
of the discussions in aU these volumes, he is convinced that the
great principles which he behind every volume are such as must
conduce to the strengthening of the Faith and to the glory of
God.

That this may be so is the one desire of Editor and contributors
aUke.

W. C. P.

London.

SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY

THIS Essay is an attempt to ascertain St. Paul's view
of the Person of Jesus Christ. It is not easy to define
the Hmits of such an inquiry. In the deepest sense, indeed,
for a Christian all theology is Christology.* It was so for
St. Paul. He makes no distinct formulation of the doctrine
of the Person of Christ. Dispute and controversy had not
hammered his convictions into rigid formulas. The growth
of systematic dogmatism had not led him to divide his con-
ceptions by sharp lines of distinction and clear classification
into carefully labelled compartments.^ But every line of
his writings is animated by the faith of his soul, and shines
with the light revealed. His theology is the application
of his living faith in Christ to the experiences and problems
of life and the unfathomed mysteries of eternity.

It will thus be seen at the outset that we part company
with those theologians who so treat St. Paul's doctrines
that they disconnect the Work from the Person of Christ,
not only as a distinction in thought but ^s a separate field of
study. Not only does the Work presuppose and involve the
Person, and the Person demand and illuminate the Work, but
the Work was the Person whose thought, word and deed were
throughout consistent. Only when both are presented to
the mind as a living whole is it possible to understand in

1 St. John i. i8.

* Cf. "Paul was not a schoolman born out of due time, neither
a dogmatiker, nor a 'systematic theologian.'" Cambridge Biblical
Essays, p. 353 (published since this essay was written).

viii SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY

any adequate degree the faith of the great Apostle of the
Gentiles. To this fact the course of the history of the Church
and of the history of Dogma has borne ample testimony.
We may take the words of Polycarp to keep us humble,
*' ovTe <yap eyo) ovre aXXo<; o/jiOto<; ifiol SvuaTaL KaraKoXovdrjcrai
rf) ao(j){a rov fMaKapiov Kal ivBo^ov JJdvXov ', " -"^ yet we may

also remember for our encouragement that the same Holy
Spirit who breathed His quickening insight into the hearts of
Augustine and Luther till they caught, each in his measure,
the meaning and inspiration of the Apostle's message, will
guide us into that region where the truth in all its parts ^ is
laid bare.

I must, in addition, express my gratitude to many writers
and teachers whose thoughts, and, perhaps, whose phrases, I
have appropriated without direct acknowledgment. My
thanks are especially due to J. H. A. Hart, Esq., M.A., Fellow
of St. John's College, Cambridge, who has increased the great
debt I already owe to him as his pupil by his generous help
in reading through the proof sheets for me, and enriching
them with many valuable suggestions.

It is required of the writer of an essay for the Hulsean
Prize, that he state what portions of his essay he claims as
original. Originality ought not to be sought after for its
own sake, and nothing has been further from the inten-
tion of the present writer, than to put forward any views
because they are " original." What has been done has
been simply to study and to endeavour to assimilate St.
Paul's own teaching and what some of the great students
of St. Paul have written, to pass this through the cru-
cible of another mind, and to set down the product
in as orderly a way as possible. In so far as it bears the
stamp of the individual this must of necessity be original,
and all that can be claimed as original, in that sense, is the

1 Ep. of Polycarp, § iii.

^ '* CIS TT]v 6Xrjdiiav Trao-av," St. John xvi. 13.

SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY ix

arrangement of the matter, and the method adopted here
of deahng with the subject. Many results have been
achieved quite apart from books, but it would be folly
to claim them as original, as the writer has only had access
to a small portion of the literature on the subject, and he
would probably find the same things said, and said far
better, elsewhere. In any case, it becomes one to write
with the utmost diffidence on a subject so difficult and
exacting in time, labour, and sympathy, and it is therefore
with a feeling of apology that this essay is published. The
last chapter has been added since this essay obtained the
Hulsean prize, and deals with the most recent phases of
controversy. A bibliography is appended at the end of the
volume.

The interval since this essay was presented for the Hulsean
prize has been too fully occupied with parochial and academic
duties to allow of publication before. It is a pleasant duty
to place on record my appreciation of the kind permission
of the University authorities, and the courtesy of the pub-
lisher, which have enabled me to revise the MS. in some
measure, and to indicate generally the trend of opinion on
the subjects here dealt with since that time.

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Scope of the Inquiry ... . . . . vii

CHAPTER I
Introduction ......... i

General Condition of New Testament Criticism, p. i ;
Books accepted as authentic, p. 3 ; Importance of
the Subject (i) in the Historical World, p. 4 ; (2) in the
Religious^Life.lp. 6; St. Paul's Cliristianity and
ours, Ritschlian opinions hereon, p. 6 ; How far
St. Paul created Christianity, p. 7 ; The Source of his
Theology, p. 8 ; His views and modern needs, p. 9 ;
General plan of the Essay, p. 10,

CHAPTER II

St. Paul's Religious Development . . . .12

Need of introductory study, p. 12 ; Tarsus, St. Paul's
early home, p. 13 ; Influences of early environment,
(i) Jewish, p. 14 ; (2) Greek, p. 15 ; (3) Roman,
p. 18 ; Influence of Jerusalem and GamaUel, p. 20 ;
Subjective preparation for Conversion, Romans,
vii. 7-13, p. 21 ; The Heavenly Vision, p. 22 ;
Did St. Paul's theology develop ? (i) Sabatier's
view, p. 23 ; Criticised, p. 24 ; (2) Pfleiderer's view,
p. 26 ; (3) Most probable view, p. 27.

CHAPTER III
Jesus as Messiah 29

General agreement that, for St. Paul, Jesus was the Mes-
siah, p. 29 ; St. Paul and Messianic ideas prevalent in
Palestine, p. 30 ; Effect of Conversion on St. Paul's
zi

xii SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Messianic Conception, (i) immediate, p. 31 ; (2) in
Arabia, p. 32 ; His Missionary Preaching, p. 33 ; a
brief summary of Contemporary Messianic hope, p.
34 ; General agreement of the PauHne Christ and the
Messiah of the Old Testament, p. 36 ; Christ the Holy
One and the Righteous One, p. 36 ; Christ the seed of
David, p. 39 ; St. Paul's knowledge and appreciation
of the Earthly Life of Jesus, p. 40 ; Christ the Suffer-
ing Messiah, p. 43 ; Christ as the Rock, the Deliverer
and the Lord of Peace, p. 45 ; Jesus Christ as " the
Son of God," the meaning of the Title in the Old Testa-
ment, to Jesus, to St. Paul, and to their contempor-
aries, p. 50 ; Jesus Christ as Judge, p. 53 ; Jesus
Christ "The Beloved," p. 54; Summary and Con-
clusion, p. 55.

CHAPTER IV

Jesus Christ as the Second Adam. .... 57

The Source of the Doctrine, p. 57 ; Contemporary Jewish
ideas of the Second Adam, p. 59; The "Adam-
Christ " section of Romans, p. 61 ; A consideration of
I Cor. XV. 45, 47, p. 62 ; Theories of the Pre-existent
Christ, (i) the Pre-existent Man theory, p. 63 ;
criticized, p. 64 ; (2) The Ideal Pre-existence, p. 67 ;
criticized, p. 68 ; (3) the Pre-existent God-Man, p. 70 ;
criticized, p. 71 ; (4) The real meaning of the passage,
p. 74 ; its bearing on St. Paul's Christology, p. 75.

CHAPTER V

Christ the Redeemer ....... 77

The Relation between St. Paul's views of the Redeeming
Work and the Person of Christ, p. 77 ; Preparation for
the Christian doctrine, p. 78 ; Meaning of Redemp-
tion to Jesus, p. 81 ; and to St. Paul, p. 81 ; three lead-
ing ideas of St. Paul's conception, p. 83 ; Why was the
death of Christ efficacious ? Dean Everett's theory,
p. 83 ; criticized, p. 84 ; Three aspects of St. Paul's
doctrine of Christ's death, (a) it was vicarious, p. 87 ;
Somerville's view criticized, p. 88 ; (^3) it was a propitia-
tory Sacrifice, p. 91 ; (y) it was representative, p. 92 ;
the connexion between the life of Jesus on earth and

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS xiii

PAGE

Redemption, p. 93 ; the physical death of the Re-
deemer and the moral death of the redeemed, p. 96 ;
was the death of Christ moral as well as physical , p. 97 ;
The view of Christ's Person postulated by St, Paul's
doctrine of Redemptionj p. 98 ; Brief summary of the
first section of the book, p. 10 1.

CHAPTER VI

Christ as Eternal ........ 103

Christ as Pre-existent, three alternative views, p. 103 ; is
St. Paul's doctrine a combination of (i) Palestinian
ideas, p. 104, and (ii) Heathen ideas, p. 105 ? St. Paul's
teaching. The " Logos " in the Epistles and in St.
John's writings, p. 106 ; Particular coincidences in
idea and terminology, p. 108 ; especially in regard to
Creation, p. 109 ; Colossians i. 15-20 ; considered,
p. no ; the meaning of Philippians ii. 3-10, p. 112 ;
the identity of Christ's Person in every stage of His
Existence, p. 118 ; The moral consciousness of our
Lord during His earthly life, p. 121 ; Four views, (i)
theory of a " dual consciousness," p. 122 ; (ii) the " ab-
solute kenotic " theory, p. 123 ; (iii) gradual moral
union of Natures, p. 124 ; (iv) the " partial Kenotic "
theory, p. 124 ; a tentative view of the Pre-existent
Christ, p. 126 ; Summary, p. 128.

CHAPTER VII

Christ as Immanent . . . . . . .130

St. Paul the Mystic, p. 130 ; Christology and Pneumato-
logy, p. 131 ; St. Paul's doctrine of the Holy Spirit ;
(i) xopt? 3-"^ )(a.pLcrfj.aTa, p. 132 ; (2) The identification
of the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ, p. 134 ;
Yet a true distinction between the Lord and the Holy
Spirit, p. 135 ; a consideration of 2 Corinthians iii.
17-18, p. 136 ; of " in the word " and " in Christ," p.
137 ; of " the Image of the Invisible God," p. 140 ;
of Christ as the Head (a) of Man, ()8) of the Church and
the redeemed, (y) of Principalities and Powers, p. 142 ;
the source of St. Paul's doctrine of the Indwelling
Christ ; (i) Jewish ? p. 143 ; or (ii) the mysteries ? (p.
144 (their influence, p. 145) ; (iii) or personal experi-
ence ? p. 146 ; St, Paul's practical mysticism, p. 146 ;

xiv SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS

PAGE

a check on the mystical hfc ensured by (i) rcahzing the
transcendence of Christ, (ii) by truly valuing His
earthly life, p. 148.

CHAPTER VHI
Christ as Transcendent • 151

The idea of transcendence in Oriental Philosophy and in
Jewish Theology, p. 151 ; St. Paul's view of the
transcendent Christ indicated by his conception of
Christ (a) as Lord, p. 153 ; St. Matthew xxii. 44
and Psalm ex. i, and the use of the title " Lord " by
St. Paul ; considered, p. 155 ; it referred to (i) Christ
as exalted, p. 156 ; St. Paul's eschatology, i Cor. xv.
24-28, p. 157 ; it also referred to other functions of the
Risen Lord, (ii) as Protector, (iii) as Master, (iv) as
Sanctifier, (v) as the object of mystic union, (vi) as
Judge, p. 161 ; it also refers to (vii) Christ's oneness
with the Father both in the attribution of the same
functions to both, p. 164 ; and as the object of our
worship, p. 166.

The second phrase indicating St. Paul's conception is (/3)
Christ as Head, p. 167 ; the meaning of Colossians ii.
15-18, Christ as Ruler over Angels, p. 169 ; and over
Nature, p. 170 ; the ideas of immanence and transcen-
dence combined, p. 171 ; Summary, p. 173.

CHAPTER IX

Christ AS Perfect God and Perfect Man . . . .176

Was Christ for St. Paul Perfect God? p. 176; Three
questions to be answered, two to be considered here :
(i) Does St. Paul in his writings ever call Christ God ?
p. 177 ; A consideration of (a) the title Son of God, p.
177 ; (^) Colossians i. 19, Colossians ii. 9, and Philip-
pians ii, 7-11, p. 179 ; (y) Romans ix. 5, p. 180 ; (S)
Acts XX. 28, p. 184 ; (e) Romans xvi. 27, Romans
xi. 34-36, p. 185 ; (C) Colossians ii. 2, p. 186 ; Sum-
mary, Christ the Perfect Man, and the Perfect God,
p. 186.

(2) The second question is, What is the relation be-
tween the Christ of St. Paul and the Christ of Dogma ?
p. 191 ; Experience and Dogma, p. 193 ; Conclusion,
p. 194-

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS xv

PAGE

CHAPTER X

RiCENT Christological Thought 196

The movements of recent thought : (i) Historical research
and criticism, the Jewish and Gentile background of
St. Paul's Epistles, p. 197 ; (ii) Breaking away from
traditional statements, p, 199; (iii) The influence of
personality, p, 200 ; (iv) The growth of Socialistic
ideas, p, 200, (v) and of missionary enthusiasm, p. 200.
So far as these affect our purpose, these movements
centre round two aims : I . The recovery and estimation
of the Christ of History, p. 201 ; (i) the Rationalist
Christology, p, 204 ; (ii) the Christocentric Christo-
logy, p. 208 ; (iii) The Liberal Protestant Christology,
p. 209 ; (iv) The Ritschlian Christology, p. 212 ; (v)
the Eschatological Christology, p. 213 ; (vi) The
Modernist Christology, p. 216; (vii) the Hegelian
Christology, p. 217; (viii) the Christ of Socialism, p.
220.

II. The explanation of the Person of Christ, p. 220 ;
Dr. Sanday's " Christologies, Ancient and Modern,"
p. 221 ; Thetheory of a double consciousness in Christ,
p. 224 ; Christology the central impulse of Christianity,
p. 227.

The Christology of St. Paul

CHAPTER I

Introduction
General Condition of New Testament Criticism.

WITH the growth of the science of historical inquiry
there has come into the theological world a
spirit of investigation. Excavations resulting in important
discoveries in Egypt, Palestine, and Babylonia have shed
a new light on the conditions of life, the language, and
customs of the Eastern peoples, before and during the time
when the Early Christian Church was slowly gathering
strength for its conquest of the Gentile world. The
attacks of scepticism and agnosticism, and the apparent
conflict of Science with Faith have produced a flood of
apologetic literature. The most gifted of our scholars, the
clearest of our thinkers have been employed in attempts to
present the Christian Religion in a way acceptable to a
generation living under changed conditions, with different
habits of thought, and many fresh problems to solve.
This spirit, so necessary for true leaders of religious
thought, has not been altogether commendable in its
results. While, on the one hand, we have been guided
to a richer experience of the realities of our faith, to
a clearer understanding of its mysteries, to a stronger
sense of the unity of the scattered fragments of life and
often to a reverence that has deepened with growing
knowledge, on the other hand we have needed caution.

1 B

2 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

lest we should follow blindly those who have been led by
their own genius into extravagance, or have adopted the
Procrustean method of making the facts fit the theory. St.
Paul, his life, work, beliefs. Epistles, and place in the history
of the Christian Church have received a full share of atten-
tion, and the results have amply justified the study. The
importance of such work is obvious.^ It is a requirement
of our lives as Christians to ascertain all we can of the
Saviour as an historical Person, of His working in His
saints of old, of what He may and ought to be to ourselves.
Such historical knowledge is gathered mainly from the
docimients which make up the " Divine Library " of our
one New Testament. Roughly speaking, of these documents
the two most important groups are the Four Gospels and
the Epistles of St. Paul. On these successively the search-
light of historical criticism has been turned. For long the
Pauline Epistles were examined under its piercing ray,
but they have stood the test, and have issued triumphant
from the scrutiny of the most acute theologians of the last
century. Now the centre of attention is different. The
Gospels, and of them St. John more particularly than the
Synoptists, are the subject of criticism at the moment.
Round them investigation is unceasingly busy.^ In the

1 " The great fact of Christianity, " writes Dr. Alan Menzies, " is
that God sent His Son into the world, and how this took place the
New Testament is beUeved to tell us." Essays for the Times, St.
Paul's view of the Divinity of Our Lord, p. i.

* The latest weighty contributions are however to the Synoptic
problem. Such are the Studies in the Synoptic Problem (edited by
Prof. Sanday, 191 1), Introduction to the Literature of the New Testa-
-ment (Dr. Moffatt, 191 1), Introduction to the New Testament (Prof.
Zahn, 1909), Introduction to the New Testament (Prof. Peake,
1909), Expositor' s Greek Testament (edited Sir W. Robertson NicoU,
1910), Horae Synopticae (Rev. Sir John C. Hawkins, 1909), The
Synoptic Gospels (Prof. Stanton, 1909), New Testament Studies
(Prof. Harnack, "Crown Theol. Library," xx., xxiii., xxvii., xxxiii.).
Generally speaking they confirm the old conservative view in their
conclusions as to dates. Dr. Harnack thinks that all the Synoptic

INTRODUCTION 3

meantime, however, we may turn with restored confidence
to the greater part of the commonly accepted PauHne writ-
ings, and feel assured of the truth of conclusions based on
a careful study of documents which have come victoriously
through all the assaults of enemies and the doubts of friends.

Books accepted by the Writer as Authentic.
For the purposes of this essay, it is proposed to accept
as the work of St. Paul all his reputed writings except
the Pastoral Epistles. The position of Baur, who accepted
only Romans, Galatians, and i and 2 Corinthians as the
work of St. Paul, has long since been abandoned by all
moderate critics. There is a very general consensus of
opinion in attributing not only the earlier epistles but
also those known as the " Christological " Epistles (includ-
ing even Ephesians, as Dr. Knowling has shown ^) to St.
Paul's pen. Though, then, I believe that the Pastoral
Epistles are authentic, I have deemed it wise, in an essay
where the arguments for and against their acceptance can-
not be discussed, to base all inquiry on ground where
agreement is fairly general. There is no doubt, however,
that the Pastoral Epistles (as indeed the Epistle to the
Hebrews) emanate from a Pauline School, and as such
might be accepted as secondary evidence for St. Paul's
views of Christ. The Acts of the Apostles has been
accepted as historically trustworthy.

Importance of the Subject.
A clear view of what St. Paul taught concerning Christ

Gospels were written by about 80 a.d. See article Present Posi-
tion of New Testament Study, C.Q.R., October 191 1.

1 The Testimony of Si. Paul to Christ, p. iii. It is true that
Dr. Moflfatt {op. cit.) regards Ephesians as "a set of variations
played by a master hand upon one or two themes suggested by
Colossians," and thus considers it to be post-Pauline. This view
raises more difi&culties than it meets, and the balance of critical
opinion is still definitely on the side of the Pauline authorship of
the Epistle.

4 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

is necessary not only for the scholar but even more for all
those who find that religion demands thought, and obey the
commandment, " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God — with all
thy mind." ^ Broadly speaking, its value may be realized by
considering its effect in two departments of religious activity,
(i) In the Historical World.
(i) In the historical world. The student of Church
History knows what the influence of Paulinism through-
out the Church's existence has been. Whenever the
mantle of St. Paul has fallen on those who have come
after him, it has inspired them with intense fervour for his
principles, it has roused earnest zeal for the true faith, it
has produced men who have stood far above their contem-
poraries and have been the bulwarks of right teaching in
times of stress. His teaching, it is true, has been carried
in occasional instances to extremes of which he little
dreamed. Marcion, the first great teacher of the Pauline
School after the Apostolic Age, fell into the gravest errors,
similar in character to those into which many modem
theologians have also fallen. Of him Harnack remarks that,
in the 120 years that followed, " Marcion was the only
Gentile Christian who understood Paul, and even he mis-
understood him." 2 Marcion held with intense conviction
that Divine grace is freely given in Christ. He saw vividly
the sharp contrasts between the Gospel and the Law on the
one hand, and realized with sorrow how much the Gospel
teaching differed from current Christianity on the other.
He laid the greatest stress on Pauline modes of expression.
He and his " companions in distress and reproach " endured
privation and even death for the sake of their faith. Yet
his Gnostic theory of redemption and Docetic view of Christ's
earthly life, his unwarrantable mutilation of the New
Testament and rejection of the Old Testament are suffi-

1 Siavota ; cf. Matt. xxii. 37 ; Mark xii. 30 ; Luke x. 27. .

2 History of Dogma, vol. i. p. 89, cf. p. 136 n, 2.

INTRODUCTION 5

cient to justify the refutation of his theories by the Chuich,
and clearly show how far and where he had diverged
from the Gospel of St. Paul as from the Gospel of Christ.
But the real school of St. Paul consists of such towers of
strength as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen.
They sought to keep the Faith true and balanced, and this
often meant reaction and re-emphasis. In later times
Augustine in his reaction against Greek influences, the
reformers of the medieval Church against the corruption
of their day, Luther revolting from the Schoolmen, the
Jansenists from the dogmas of the Council of Trent, and
Wesley from the coldness of eighteenth-century deism dis-
played that strong, if sometimes violent, spirit of steadfast
adherence to the essence of Christianity characteristic of
the Pauline School. Thus and only thus was the Church
kept in her true course in times full of doubt and danger.^
We can only treat here of the fons et origo of this
invigorating and cleansing stream, and not of its course as
it flows through the history of the Church. Yet for the
historian to whose pen that task falls, a study of origins is
essential, for neither by its beginning nor by its history
alone can any movement be estimated, but by a true appre-
ciation of both in the light of the goal at which it aims.
Nor, whether Christianity is St. Paul rather than Christ,
on the one hand, or whether Paulinism is but a passing
phase in the development of Christian thought on the other,
can the student of Christianity in the widest sense afford to
neglect the meaning and bearing of St. Paul's influence.
In both these connexions Dr. Sanday's remark is just, " No
great movement can be rightly judged by its initial stages,
or apart from the impression left by it upon the highest
contemporary minds." 2 Amongst the latter we may without
hesitation and by universal consent class St. Paul.

1 History of Dogma, A. Harnack, vol. i. p. 136. " Paulinism
has proved to be a ferment in the history of dogma."

2 Outlines of the Life of Christ, Dr. Sanday, H.D.B.

6 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

(2) In the Religious Life — How far St. Paul's
Christianity is Ours.

(2) In the religious life of the believer. A right view
of St. Paul's Christology is also of deep spiritual value.
We may not go as far as Professor Bacon and say that,
" Christianity, as we know it, is Pauline Christianity." ^
That is a sweeping unconditional generalization and needs
explanation. In a sense, it is true, though perhaps not
quite in the way its author intends. The line between
Pauline and pre-Pauline Christianity cannot be drawn as
sharply as Professor Bacon seems to think. Nor can we
agree with those who, recognizing in St. Paul's doctrine
a step in the development from the primitive to Johannine
ideas, cast it aside as useless, unedifying, and of no practical
value now that the supreme heights have been attained
in the writings of the beloved Apostle.

Views of the Ritschlians Hereon — (i) English.

The Ritschlian school view the matter in two ways. The one
section, consisting for the most part of English theo-
logians, followers of the late Dr. Dale, aver that a personal
experience will bring to us the Exalted Jesus, who is the same
as the historical Jesus of Nazareth. Thus alone can we gain
any true knowledge of " the Living Christ." The evidence
of His divinity is such that it can be appreciated only by
one who has a personal relation to Christ. A " personal
relation to Christ " is in Dr. Dale's view a miraculous
revealing of the historic Jesus, now exalted in Heaven. ^
It was his belief "... that when the true members of the
Church are assembled, Jesus is present with them ; not
only in the sense that the Spirit that was in Jesus is in
them, but He is present as an individual, as* one of them.' "

1 Story of St. Paul, Dr. Bacon, p. 3.

2 See his book The Living Christ ayid the Four Gospels ; also
Dr. K. C. Anderson, The Larger Faith, p. 56.

INTRODUCTION 7

(2) Foreign.
The other section, consisting mainly of German theo-
logians, look upon it as impossible for us ever to attain to
any knowledge of the Exalted Christ, even by " judgments
of value " — the only valid judgments that, according to
them, we form. The Historic Christ alone is the object
of our knowledge. For them, indeed, as long as they refuse
the refuge of mysticism, there is little help in their reli-
gious life to be obtained from St. Paul's conceptions.

The True View of the Christ of St. Paul.

We must remember that in the New Testament there are
various interpretations of the Christ. There is no one view
which can claim to destroy another. In one sense all are
the same. He is the same Person throughout. But different
aspects of His Person, different phases of His work, have
impressed themselves on different minds as the depths of
individual lives have been sounded, and His appeal has
drawn all men, each with varying power and possibility,
to the Cross.

There is a Sense in which St. Paul was the " Creator "
OF Christianity : (i) In his Presentation of it
to the Gentiles ; (2) in his more Definite Formu-
lation OF THE Faith.

While we cannot say then that " Christianity, as we know
it to-day, is Pauline Christianity," without further explana-
tion, we may at least assert that in some degree the
Apostle was the creator of a Christian theology. First, in
the words of Weizsacker, " he has in fact considered and
elucidated the history of the world and the human con-
sciousness in all their aspects from the point which he has
chosen as his centre, i.e. the Person and the Work of Christ."
Through him, in the main, Christianity fulfilled its true mis-
sion, for it became not merely the tenets of a sect of Jews,
but a world-wide religion capable of appreciation and adop-

8 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

tion by the Gentile world. Though in all its fundamentals
held by the pre-Pauline Church, the Gospel was applied by
him to the needs of heathendom, its wider sympathies were
manifested, its real appeal to the heart of humanity was in-
imitably expressed. Secondly, though in his Epistles there
is no definitely formulated creed, almost all his statements
bear the impress of careful thought. ^ The necessity for a
detailed creed had not arisen, but the main beliefs of the early
Church were already in the process of being formulated.
Almost certain traces of this process can be seen in the
Epistles. The confession " Jesus is Lord," with all that it
implied, was the general confession of believers.^ There
is moreover the " theological argument " of i Cor. viii.
6, " To us there is one God . . . and one Lord Jesus
Christ " ; the Trinity of i Cor. xii. 4-6, "... the same
Spirit . . . the same Lord . . . the same God . . . " ;
and the final benediction of 2 Cor. xiii. 14. In the
Epistles of the Captivity, we have the wonderful Gospel of the
Incarnation (Phil. ii. 6-11), the Gospel of the Ascension
(Eph. i. 20-23), the Gospel of the Redemption (Col. i. g-ii. 23),
and the Trinitarian phrases of Eph. iv. 4-6, "... one
Spirit . . . one Lord . . . one God and Father of all,"
and of Col, i. 3, 4, 8, " Thanks to God the Father . . . faith
in Christ Jesus . . . love in the Spirit."

His Christianity was Derived from Christ Himself.

Though, then, in some degree, he was the first to formu-
late a Christian theology, this is far from implying that
St. Paul created Christianity itself. The one central fact
for him was Christ Crucified, Exalted and Glorified, the one
central experience was the shining of His glory on the road
to Damascus. On the basis of the one he founded his

1 E.g., as Dr. Bruce points out, the phrase " Him who knew no
sin, He made to be sin on our behalf " (2 Cor. v. 21) is so tersely
expressed, yet so full of meaning, that it must have been the result
of careful meditation. 2 gee i Cor. xii. 3 ; Rom. x. 9.

INTRODUCTION 9

faith, by the Hght of the other he was guided evermore.
From this point of view he looked back on history. He
saw its course elucidated and illuminated. He looked at
the age he lived in, he saw its need supplied, its yearnings
satisfied. He looked forward to the age to come. With the
"prospect of faith" he believed in the realization of the
high hope of his calling — the attainment of the measure of
the stature of the fullness of Christ ,1 and in the fulfilment of
His Master's purpose — the presenting to Himself of a Church,
holy and without blemish.^ Harnack may well say after
a consideration of St. Paul's influence, " Paulinism is a
religious and Christocentric doctrine more inward and more
powerful than any other which has ever appeared in the
Church." 3

Hence its Lasting Value. His Solution applied to
Modern Needs — The Value of the Study for the
Present Writer.

Such exalted views of life as St. Paul attained to are more
than ever needed to-day. When men see that all is summed
up in Christ, and realize that the heavenly vision, which
taught St. Paul Who He was, and what He came to do, may
be a living reality in the life, the oppositions and contradic-
tions of science and religion, of love and justice, of slavery
and freedom, of individual responsibility and inherited
suffering, of the Cross and God's love manifested, and the
greatest paradox of all — of Jesus Christ both God and Man,
will be dissolved in a higher Unity, in Him Who is all in all.
St. Paul has found that true secret of life which reduces all
things, joyful or sad, to a unity. He has seen the " one
unifying purpose running through all the range of life."
Tne whole of his experiences, even tribulation, anguish,
persecution, imprisonment and death was working towards
cne great purpose ioy " good to them that love God." The

1 Eph. iv. 13. 2 Eph. V. 27.

* Histtry of Dogma, Dr. A. Harnack, vol. i. p. 135.

10 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

study of Paulinism will bring its reward as it makes plain the
meaning of St. Paul's words " I live, yet not I ; but Christ
liveth in me." It will bring a faith strengthened, ideas clari-
fied, a heart more on fire with missionary zeal. It will bring
contact with one of the most earnest and truly inspired men
of all ages, whose struggle was ours, and whose victory may
be won if the secret of life in Christ make our weakness
strong. Dr. Somerville also was conscious of this when
he wrote the peroration to his Gifford Lectures. ^ " As long
as there are those who are burdened with memories that
are a continual reproach, and who feel the power of
evil appetites they are unable to rise above — as long as
there are those who tremble before that event that seems
to mock all their efforts after a higher life, and who crave
an assurance that death has not separated them for ever
from friends whom they have lost but cannot cease to love —
men will turn with thankfulness to this teacher who shows
us what God made Jesus to be when He raised Him from
the dead, who announces a Christ Who has put away sin,
Who has vanquished death. Who is now by the grace of
God the Head of a new humanity and able to repeat in as
many as believe in Him the wonder of His own Holiness and
Immortality."

General Plan of the Essay.

It is necessary to make one further remark. It appears
to the writer that the conception which St. Paul formed
of Christ may be conveniently considered as springing
from two relationships.

I. His relationship to man. This we hope to approach
by an estimate of those elements of the training and
reading of St. Paul's youth which remained as a per-
manent part of his Christology. Then it is proposed to in-
quire further into his ideas on this subject under the headp
of Jesus as the Messiah and of Jesus Christ as the Second
1 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, p. 9^g.

INTRODUCTION ii

Adam, A consideration of His Redemptive work will
complete this section of the essay.

2. His relationship to God, Under this head it is proposed
to study Christ as Immanent, Christ as Transcendent, Christ
as Eternal.

It is thus hoped to show how St. Paul regarded Jesus
(i) as the perfect embodiment of all that man should be to
his fellow-man, and to God ; and {it) as the Perfect God,
of the same essence as the Father, in Whom dwelt all the
fullness of the Godhead bodily. But we fully realize how
impossible it is to draw any rigid line between these two
trends of thought. They are interwoven inseparably
throughout.

As we cannot separate the Person of Christ from His
work, so we cannot separate His manhood from His God-
head 1 without the most careful safeguards. We shall find
such a conception of His manhood that the conviction that
Christ was God must lie behind, and such a work of Redemp-
tion wrought that perfect God and perfect Man must be
united into one Person in Him,

1 €v Su'o (^vaea-iv . . . dStai/aerojs. Definitio Fidei apud Concilium
Chalcedonense,

CHAPTER II

St. Paul's Religious Development

The Importance of this Introductory Study.

IF we would gain a true idea of St. Paul's conceptions
it is not only important but essential to consider the
course of his religious history. And this for two reasons.

First, by adopting the methods of historical inquiry
alone can we gain that true appreciation of 'and sympathy
with writers of bygone days, without which any attempt
to grasp their views must end in failure. This fact has only
been realized in any general sense during the last century,
and it is now the base from which all inquiry is made.
Especially is this the case with a writer like St. Paul. So
much depends on the interpretation of particular words,
on the exegesis of phrases and passages, and on our know-
ledge of the dates of the Epistles, and of the circumstances
which called them forth. Words of technical signification
such as Righteousness, Law, Justification, Adoption, Pro-
pitiation, occur again and again. Forms of thought and
modes of expression belonging to the period were used
by him. Failure to inquire what precise bearing these
had for writer and readers would be fatal to our purpose.
We should miss the gist of that which he intended to
teach by his special use of technical phrases if we did not
realize what particular meaning such terms conveyed to
him and them.

Secondly, for St. Paul, more perhaps than for any other
personality in history, " his theology was the outgrowth

X2

ST. PAUL'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 13

of his experience." ^ Entering on the responsibihties and
privileges of his Christian life without training in any
Christian creed, bound by no ties of sentiment to advance
one type of doctrine, he lived his doctrine before he formu-
lated and wrote it. His religion was subjective and reached
only after great personal struggle ; his theories were not
mere speculations but solutions of pressing and real problems
obtained after anxious and long sustained thought. He
was Christ-taught and Christ-sustained and a revealer of
Christ among men. His writings bear witness that they
come from one who wrote down what the inmost feelings
of his heart dictated, one who had been lifted from the sphere
of a narrower Pharisaism into the realm where Christ is all
in all.

His Tarsian Home — Its University and Philosophical

Schools.

St. Paul was born in Tarsus, the chief city of Cilicia in
ancient times. Since 170 B.C. it had been a self-govern-
ing Greek city. In it had grown up a university which
rivalled, and as Strabo says, even in some respects surpassed
those of Athens and Alexandria, and the other great uni-
versity cities of the Mediterranean. " Rome was full of
Tarsian and Alexandrian scholars," writes Professor Ramsay,
" so strong was the Tarsian love for letters ! " - Demetrius
the Scientist, Athenodorus the Stoic, Athenodorus Kananites,
and Nestor were amongst those famous throughout the
Empire for their learning and poetry. Of them all, Atheno-
dorus Kananites, the tutor to Augustus, was the most re-
nowned.^ He died about a.d. 7, after a long and busy hfe,

^ St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, Dr. A. B. Bruce, p. 26.

2 " Tarsus," art. H. D. B., Prof. W. M. Ramsay.

3 One of his sayings at least was quoted by Seneca. " Know,"
said he, " that you are set free from all passions when you reach
such a point that you ask nought of God that you cannot ask openly."
Seneca then adds, " So live with men as if God saw, so speak with
God as if men were listening."

14 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

leaving behind a reformed constitution in his native city,
and an honoured name. To him succeeded Nestor, whose
influence probably extended till some time after Christ.
" It is very probable," writes Professor Ramsay, " that St.
Paul may have seen and hstened to Nestor." The philo-
sophy cultivated in Tarsus in St. Paul's time was undoubt-
edly Stoic, and this fact, too, must be remembered in
considering his early training.

Here, then, in this busy seaport, with the continual
passage of merchantmen and merchandise from all parts
of the world bringing before his eyes the customs and pro-
ducts of many different races and countries, in a university
town with its constant influx of new learning and ideas
from its sisters, he grew from boy to youth. Can we at all
estimate the result of this early environment ? We have
a few indications of the direction of the answer, sufficient
perhaps to give us a very general notion. " In this apostle,"
writes Professor Findlay, " Jew, Greek and Roman met." ^
This sentence suggests three heads under which we may
consider St. Paul when, as Saul, he left his native city for
Jerusalem.

Influences of his Early Environment.
I. Jewish.

I. St. Paul as a Jew. First and foremost St. Paul was
a Jew. " The Jew in him was the foundation of everything
that Paul became." He was of the same nationality, a
member of the same theocracy, and he had the same share
in the Messianic hopes as his Judaising opponents of later
days. "Are they Hebrews? (in language and tradition).
So am I. Are they Israelites ? (in descent and creed). I
also. Are they seed of Abraham ? (partakers in the Mes-
sianic hopes). So am I " (2 Cor. xi. 22).^ To the Jews he

1 Art. " Paul the Apostle." H. D. B., Prof. G. G. Findlay.

cicriv ; Ktt-yoj.

ST. PAUL'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 15

was as a Jew (Iov8alo<;), both in nationality and education.
He was of the stock of Israel (e« yivou^ ^laparjX) ; "of
the loyal and renowned tribe of Benjamin " ^ ' (eV ^uX^?
/3€viafieLv). ^ He probably spoke the Aramaic tongue,
was a staunch adherent to Hebrew traditions (E^palo<i
i^ 'E/3paLcov).

But not only was he, generally speaking, a Jew, he had
also been brought up as a strict member of the sect of the
Pharisees. He was " a Pharisee, the son of Pharisees " '
(Acts xxiii. 6. Eycb ^apiaalo^; elpui, vl6<i ^aptcraicov). As
touching the law, he was a Pharisee, Kara vbjxov ^apL(Talo<i
(Phil. iii. 5). He was certainly surrounded by the
strongest Jewish influences all through the earlier part
of his life. We know that there were dpxt'O-vvdycayoi or
rulers of the Synogogue in Cilicia,* and there must almost
certainly have been a synagogue at Tarsus. In fact, so
powerful and loyal were the Cilician Jews that we find a
synagogue of theirs at Jerusalem mentioned in Acts vi. 9.
We may safely say that this groundwork of Jewish influence
and thought was never destroyed. It remained as a force
which affected the opinions of his later life, and determined
in some degree both the meaning and importance of his
religious experience and the manner of his presentation of
the Gospel to the world.^

2. Greek.
2. St. Paul as a Greek. How far did St. Paul come into
contact with the Greek philosophical ideas prevalent in

1 Philippians, Dr. Lightfoot, ad he. 2 phil. iii. 5.

' I.e. he was not a convert as so many Pharisees were.

* History of the Jewish People, Schiirer, vol. ii. Div. 2, pp. 63
and 222.

5 Harnack's remark " Pharisaism had fulfilled its mission to
the world when it produced this man " {History of Dogma, vol. i,
p. 94) is only true in a limited sense. The Pharisees effected a
great work in conserving Judaism after the destruction of Jeru-
salem under Hadrian.

i6 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Tarsus ? Was he educated in the Greek Schools or was
his training exclusively Jewish ? It is not very probable
that St, Paul was a member of the Schools in which the
Stoic philosophy was taught,^ though a certain amount of
the higher Greek culture must have found its way from
his environment into his thought.^ There are, too, traces
of a knowledge of Greek writers in St. Paul's Sermons and
Epistles, but only scanty traces which, likely enough, point
to Stoic contempt for literature. The two quotations ^
might easily be chance sayings remembered from conversa-
tions with Stoic contemporaries. No more would be needed
in a man of tact and sympathy to account for the Stoic
form of his address at Athens. He was not schooled in
Greek learning. He was only a o-Trep/ioXoyo? a " picker
up of learning's crumbs." * Indeed his style is not that
of one trained in Greek dialectic, though, of course, he spoke
Greek. There is no attempt to incorporate, except for

1 We are aware that Sir W. M. Ramsay holds a different opinion.
In his excursus " St. Paul and Seneca," Dr. Lightfoot deals fully
with the question. He concludes that the use of Stoic terms by
St. Paul does not prove that he had been a member of the Tarsian
Schools. " It was probable that Stoic philosophy had leavened
the moral vocabulary of the civilized world at the time of the Chris-
tian era." See also Expositor, Dec, 191 1 (Sir W. M. Ramsay), and
April, 191 1 (Principal Gar vie).

2 Platonic and Aristotelian phrases sometimes occur, e.g., 2 Cor.
V. 10, TO, 8ta Tov o-w/xaTos (a Platonic expression), also 2 Cor. ix. 8,
avrapKeiav (a word very common in Greek philosophy, particularly
with the Cynics and Stoics). Aristotle uses the word in a different
sense from the Cynic use ; and (as in 2 Cor.) very near to Trpoatpcicr^ai,
See Dr. Plummer's illuminating Commentary on 2 Cor. and Light-
foot on Phil. iv. 11.

^ I. TOV yap Koi yei/os icTfxiv : — " For we also are his offspring "
from the ra </)atvo/i,ci'a of Aratus of Soli in Cilicia, or from the
Hymn to Zeus of Cleanthes, the Stoic. Acts xvii. 28.

2. (fiOeipova-iv rjdr] xpy)cr& 6/i,iXtat KaKaC: " Evil communications
corrupt good manners " JFrom the " Thais " of Menander and sup-
posed to be a citation by him of a lost tragedy of Euripides.
I Cor. XV. 33.

* So Prof. Ramsay quotes Browning, An Epistle. Acts xvii. 18.

ST. PAUL'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 17

the purposes of the presentment of Christian behef , the lead-
ing terms and conclusions of Greek philosophy. Christianity
is a revelation. Its ethic stands upon its own basis. As a
revelation it is apart and supreme, independent of other
faiths, though it is their perfection and sum. The undoubted
influence of Hellenism over St. Paul may have been an un-
conscious one — the storing in the sub-liminal self of impres-
sions which in later days flashed back across the " threshold."
It may have been, however, at least in part, a directly
negative one leading him to look on these Gentile shows as
"philosophy and vain deceit." ^ One leading so strict a
Jewish life as he did in Tarsus might only have been aroused
to contempt of, or perhaps more probably in St. Paul's
case, active hostility towards the foolish speculations and
the brutal vices of his fellow-citizens. Certainly the idea
suggested in Pfleiderer's later exposition of Paulinism is
not favoured by our English theologians. He there ^
speaks of a " double root " of Paulinism. On the one hand
a " Christianized Pharisaism " embodied in the doctrine
of Justification by Faith, on the other a " Christianized
Hellenism " seen in the doctrine of salvation by the Risen
Christ. These grew side by side. The flower of Jewish
zeal is Justification by Faith, and that of the more delicate
and hidden Gentile growth is union with the Risen Lord.
This ingenious analysis of the sources of St. Pavil's funda-
mental doctrines will not, however, satisfy the demands
made upon a solution. We believe that an unbiased
study will lead to an endorsement of Harnack's words

1 See " St. Paul's Attitude to Greek Philosophy," Rev. A. Carr,
Expositor, 5th Series, vol. ix. ; also The Story of St. Paul, Prof. Bacon,
p. 19. " It is not impossible that the tendency to seek for philosophy
which St. Paul seems to reprove in the Corinthians in i Cor. i.-iv.
ought to be connected with the party of ApoUos," i.e. with the
allegorical and philosophical Judaism of Alexandria represented
by Philo {Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, Prof. K. Lake, p. iii).

2 Urchri stent hum Vorwort, pp. 174-178, and Paulinism (1890).

C

i8 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

" Notwithstanding Paul's Greek culture, his conception of
Christianity is, in its deepest ground, independent of Hellen-
ism."

Thus a formative influence was introduced into his life
which enabled him to take in his Christian days a broad
outlook on the world, which gave him acquaintance with
the diverse ways and opinions of men, which instilled into
his soul a passionate devotion for " Whatsoever things are
lovely," ^ a lasting horror of Greek vice, and something of
the hollowness of Greek philosophy, and which was there-
fore one of the most important though least evident forces
in the training of the Apostle to the Gentiles.

3. Roman.

3. St. Paul as a Roman. In a city where Greek influence
was predominant, but where the Roman rule held sway,
the environment must have been rather Graeco-Roman than
Greek and Roman.^ But distinctively Roman ideals
had a strong and definite appeal for him. He was proud
of his status in the Empire. " Civis Romanus sum " was
his boast. He had a strong feeling of patriotism toward
Tarsus. He was a " citizen of no mean city." With such
patriotic pride must have been born ideas of Empire and
of Citizenship, of Unity, of Faithfulness, of Discipline, of
the dignity and majesty of the Roman Law. It was prob-
ably now, at the age of the idealism of youthful vision
that the imagination was stirred by the spectacle of the un-
broken unity of Rome, by the constant interchange of
thought with the scholars of the West, by the sight of the
products of many lands conveyed by the long caravans
that wound along the roads of the Empire, or the merchant
ships that swept her waterways from Alexandria to Spain.

^ Trpocr^tXf/ (Phil. iv. 8).

2 It is doubtful whether St. Paul spoke Latin, though on the
whole it is probable he did. See a brief discussion in the Expositor,
8th Series, April, 191 1 (Prof. Souter).

ST. PAUL'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 19

He might easily now catch a first ghmpse of that Universal
Empire, which, spiritualized by the glowing visions of
imiversalism in the Hebrew prophets, and suddenly seen
to be built round Him Who alone was its Shekinah — the
Light of the World — ^he was to claim in later days with
all its demands of citizenship and loyalty ^ as a possi-
bility and a necessity for the Heavenly Kingdom of Christ.
The Empire was a living Body, Rome the heart, the Emperor
the Head, roads and seas the arteries, soldiers, sailors and
traders the life blood. So when all this was claimed for
the Christian Church, the " pax Romana " became the
peace that passeth all understanding. The breaking down
of barriers between race and race became a triumph dimly
foreshadowing the making of both Jew and Gentile one in
the blood of Christ. ^ The growth of equity became a
witness to that reign of the spirit over the letter which
maketh alive. The Church was the Body, Christ her Head.
The work of the Holy Spirit was to bind in the spiritual
union of an heavenly citizenship her scattered members.
However diverse in race and temperament, they were to
be One Family in Earth and Heaven.

1 TToXLTevecrde (Phil. i. 27), though the word in the New Testament
possibly loses some of its distinctive force. See Expositor, Dec,
1909 (Principal Garvie).

2 Prof. Gardner {Religions Experience of St. Paul, p. 93) thinks
the true parallel to or preparation for St. Paul's Universalism was
in the mystic worships of the time. The devotion of the sectaries
of Sabazius, Isis, or Mithras to "their divine patron and to their
fellow-believers laid a basis on which ultimately could arise the
idea of the Christian Church," binding all in "a mystic communion
with its divine Lord " (p. loi), wherein rank, colour and even sex
disappear (pp. 92, 93). Many, however, find a hkeher source in the
Stoic philosophy, the conception of the indwelling Spirit, the Trvcvfia
ay tor, the spark of heavenly flame, whereby we are all "members
of God." Bishop Lightfoot has pointed out (Pliilippians, Exc. St.
Paul and Seneca, p. 290) that this conception is almost purely a
physical one — regarding the Universe as " one great animal per-
vaded by one soul or principle of life." Probably all had their
influence, and all indicate how in different ways the ground of the
world was being prepared for the Gospel seed.

20 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

St. Paul, then, left Tarsus a Jew in the strictest sense of
the term. Greek Philosophy had not made him her son,
though it had influenced his thought ; and probably Greek
vice had found in him an open enemy. He had, and never
lost, a strong sense of his privileges and responsibilities as
a Roman citizen and a grasp of the lessons which the Roman
Law was teaching the world.

The Influence of Jerusalem and Gamaliel on St. Paul.
He was sent from Tarsus to Jerusalem to pursue his
studies under Gamaliel, the famous Jewish Rabbi. A
great deal of confusion prevails as to the identity of this
Gamaliel. There were three famous Rabbis of that name.
This one, the Elder, is Gamaliel I, the grandson of Hillel.
Though himself a strict Jew, he had read widely in Greek
literature and was the leader of the Pharisees of the more
liberal kind.^ Under him Saul was trained in Rabbinical
methods of thought and reasoning, in all the dialectical
subtleties of the Scribes, and in their interpretations of the
Law to meet the new conditions of the age. Of all his
contemporaries he was the most zealous for the Law. His
Jewish training in Tarsus was supplemented by the more
rigorous, narrower views of Palestine. He adopted the
Messianic hopes of his countrymen and saw, like them, in
the sect of the Nazarenes, blasphemers and upstarts ; in
their Saviour, a Crucified Messiah, a aKavSaXov of the
greatest magnitude.^ So fierce was his zeal that he even
broke away from the advice of his more tolerant master on
the occasion of the Apostles' trial before the Sanhedrin
(Acts V. 34) and took a leading part in the persecution of
" the Way." It has been suggested that at this time

1 The Mishna records that " Since Rabban GamaUel the Elder
died, reverence for the law ceased, and purity and abstinence died
away." This was, however, but an exaggerated expression of a
sense of loss.

2 Or the " dreamer of dreams " of Deut. xiii. 1-5. (So Johannes
Weiss, Pcnil cmd Jesus).

ST. PAUL'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 21

his mind reverted to the Stoic doctrines of Tarsus, in his
disgust at the " bigotry and provinciahsm " of Jerusalem.^
But there is no trace of this attitude on the part of the young
zealot.2 In fact, the only criteria point in the other direction,
that he himself was one of the most bigoted and narrow of
his contemporaries. At Jerusalem he had been caught by
the fierce impulse of Jewish zeal and lifted far above the
dictates of his better nature. In his enthusiasm he had
done deeds which brought the keenest anguish to his peni-
tent soul in later days. " His great aim in life was to be
legally righteous, and his ambition was to excel in the
observance of the law." How much this implies ! "It
means either that this man will never become a Christian,
but remain through life the deadly foe of the new faith,
or it means that the very intensity of his Pharisaism will
cure him of Pharisaism and make him a Christian of the
Christians." '

The Subjective Preparation for Conversion.
In Romans vii, 7-13 we find an autobiographical note
which in all probability refers to this time. He is writing
of a time when the Law of Moses was supreme in his life.

1 We note that Josephus compares the philosophy of the Pharisees
to that of the Stoics. Prof. Bacon holds {Jesus or Christ ? p. 223)
that " Paul and the Greek fathers who followed him seized upon
the Stoic conception of the Logos, which under the designation
Wisdom had long since begun to affect Hebrew, or at least Hellen-
istic thought." So his " Stoicism " came to him through Jewish
Channels. " Even the Avatar doctrine of the descent and ascent
of Wisdom is unmistakably adopted by St. Paul, partly in opposition
to, partly in rivalry with the widespread conception of the mystery
religion " {Story of St. Paxil, p. 316 ff.). See also Principal Car-
penter, Jesus or Christ ? p. 230.

2 Prof. Gardner {Jesus or Christ P p. 49) represents St. Paul
as caught by a spiritual movement in his day in Palestine. He
" felt the urgency of the flood of the Spirit." Its first result
was persecution of the Church, but his " line of defence was
suddenly stormed " and he became its devout adherent.

3 St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, Dr. A. B. Bruce, p. 28*

22 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

He discovered that coveting, a mere feeling, was condemned
in the Decalogue as sin. Then he knew that the keeping
of the Law was impossible. It pointed the way. It brought
no power. It coldly forbade, and so provoked to dis-
obedience. As this fact forced itself upon him, it brought
his Pharisaical outlook to the test of his unswerving sin-
cerity. He was passing in his own way through the plain
universal experience of the awakening of the soul. Con-
science awoke. The struggle began. " When the command-
ment came, sin revived and I died." Hope was dead.
When Christ was seen of him (i Cor. xv. 8), there had been
a subjective preparation in process in the heart before
the objective appearance of the Risen Christ. In an agony
of doubt he would attempt to silence all the internal conflict
by furious hostility, by active persecution. He hated the
sect of the Nazarenes as the rival of Judaism, yet he was
attracted by them. By one of St. Paul's nature,^ cherished
ideals are not easily abandoned, and such an one is never
less like surrendering than just before the crisis. But the
image of Jesus as the false Messiah, the Blasphemer, was
not yet displaced. Judaism had failed to satisfy his deepest
wants ; it had left him ready to receive the revelation of
his life's true mission, that work for which God had separated
him from his mother's womb.^- ^

The Heavenly Vision and Conversion.
When the revelation came on the road to Damascus,
when the whole mistake of his past, darkened with all its
horror, was realized, the agonized Saul could only bow in
humbled penitence before his crucified, risen, persecuted
Master, and cry, " Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do ? "

1 As Dr. Bruce remarks. ^ Gal. i. 15.

3 The account of the preparation for the Conversion given by
Dr. Bruce has been adopted. In itself it is a combination of the
points emphasized (i) by Pfleiderer — his previous knowledge
of Jesus ; (2) by Beyschlag — his intense hopeless struggle for
righteousness.

ST. PAUL'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 23

The crisis was over. The old was done. The new man
arose. One purpose henceforth filled his life, and made
him homeless, friendless, misunderstood, persecuted, and a
martyr. What other men prized, he resigned with joy,
Christ was his strength, his comfort, his hope, his eloquence,
his Gospel, his life. He was a new Creation in Christ.

Did St. Paul's Theology Develop ? (i) View of
Sabatier.

St. Paul had started on the Christian race. What signi-
ficance had this conversion for him ? What relation does
St. Paul's theology bear to the Revelation made to him at
this time ? In other words, was there development in his
views of Christianity, was there a growth in his perception
of the Person and Work of Christ, or did his system of Chris-
tian thought remain the same from this time onward,
formed and fixed in a moment ?

In answer to this question three views are advocated.
Of these the first was held by Sabatier, who supported the
theory of development.^ He tried to prove this by reviewing
successively the " Mission," " Controversial," " Christo-
logical " and " Pastoral " groups of St. Paul's Epistles, and
by endeavouring to show thereby that there was a marked
growth in the conception of Christ and an increasingly com-
prehensive view of His work. 2 " Having regard to such
facts, it is evident to me that St. Paul's mind underwent
a vital growth as the years passed, and new circumstances
arose to stimulate that ever active and powerful intellect to
fresh thought on the great theme which engrossed its atten-
tion." There is, as Dr. Bruce points out, no a priori
objection to the hypothesis of development. Growth in

1 See L'Apotre Paul, also in English translation.

2 The Apostle Paul, p. 8 ff. The " Mission " Epistles are those to
the Thessalonians, the " Controversial " Epistles are Galatians,
Corinthians and Romans, and the " Christological " Epistles are
those of the Captivity.

24 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

knowledge and grace is the ordinary law of life — in the
spiritual realm as well as in the natural. St. Paul was
indeed inspired, but God spoke in many parts and in many
modes by the prophets, and St. Paul may easily have
gained increased insight with his wider experience. Do the
facts, however, warrant such an inference as Sabatier drew
from them ?

Objections to this View.

There are two aspects of the matter to consider, (i)
There is the extant Pauhne literature. Does it afford
the alleged evidence of growth ? There is no doubt that
the earlier Epistles present the Gospel in a rudimentary
and simple form, and that the later Epistles gradually be-
come more abstruse and metaphysical in their language
and ideas. But does it at all follow that St. Paul at the
time he wrote the First Epistle to the Thessalonians had
not attained to the great conceptions, or thought out the
carefully expressed system of the later Epistles ?

We note many indications which lead us to form a different
conclusion — (a) St. Paul above all things was a careful stew-
ard of the mysteries of God. He delivered the message
best fitted for the people to whom he wrote, and he answered
their letters. {/3) His characteristic ideas are present even
in the Epistles to the Thessalonians, which are of the
earliest, if not the earliest, of his Epistles. Though the lang-
uage is simple, undogmatic, untechnical, such as " babes "
might understand, yet he called Jesus Christ both " Son of
God " and " the Lord." The Thessalonians are described
as " waiting for His Son from heaven." The Gospel is the
" Gospel of Christ." The " day of the Lord " is the term
applied to the irapovaia of the Lord Jesus and corresponds
to the Old Testament expression " the day of Jehovah."
(7) This is also true of other early Epistles than those of
the Thessalonians. We take, as an example, the idea

ST. PAUL'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 25

of the Pre-existence of the Messiah. ^ It is undoubtedly
taught throughout St. Paul's Epistles, not attained merely
by after speculation or thought.

Thus we find it not only in the " Christological "
Epistles, but also in such sentences as eVTw^^eucrej'
iT\ov(Tio<i wv (2 Cor. viii. 9), in the " Rock " that followed
Israel in the Wilderness (i Cor. x, 4), and in the
mention of the mission of the Son, " God sent forth
{e^aTriaretXev) His Son " (Gal. iv. 4). All these phrases
contain the doctrine by implication. Moreover this same
Gospel received " by revelation " (Gal. i. 12) he preached
to the Galatians (Gal. i. 8). It was Christ Crucified he had
" placarded " or " broadly sketched " 2 before their eyes.
It was Christ Crucified and Risen Whom he saw on the road
to Damascus. It was a matter of indignant surprise ' that
the Galatians were so ready to receive a different Gospel
(et? erepov evajyeXiov), which was not another (dWo), but
none at all, for there could only be one Gospel. " But
though we, or an angel from Heaven should preach unto
you any Gospel other than {irap' 6 ^ ) that which we preached
unto you, let him be anathema" (Gal. i. 8).

His message at Corinth was the same. It was Christ
Crucified Who was preached (i Cor. i. 23). St. Paul had not
another Jesus {dWov 'Irjaovv), or a different Spirit {trvevfxa
erepov), or a different Gospel {euayyeXcov ejepov)}

For the " Christological " Epistles the same Gospel is
still the theme. "Continue in the faith" (eVt/xei^ere rfi
TTiarei. Col. i. 23). " As therefore ye received {irapeXd^eTe)
Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him " (Col. ii. 6).

1 See hereafter more fully in chapters on " Christ as Messiah "
and " Christ as Eternal."

2 7rpo€ypd(pr], Gal. iii. I. 3 Gal. i. 6. Lightfoot ad loc.
* The context leads to this meaning, otherwise it might equally

well mean " contrary to."
5 2 Cor. xi. 4.

26 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

At least, then, we may say that the same fundamentals
of his faith, which appear elaborated in the fullness of their
appeal and power in the " Christological " Epistles, occur
also in the earlier and simpler letters. The development,
if there was a development, was not of the Content of the
Gospel.

(2) The other aspect referred to is the psychological one
and will be dealt with under the third head below. It is
sufficient here to point out that there is strong evidence for
believing that St. Paul's Gospel did not grow during the
time he wrote his Epistles. He came to his mission work
with the Gospel message and teaching very clearly in his
mind.

(2) The School of Pfleiderer.

The name of Pfleiderer represents a school of theo-
logians who also assert considerable growth in the theological
conceptions expressed in the Pauline Epistles. So great
indeed is the importance they assign to this, that they are
led to reject the Pauline authorship of the Christological
Epistles, though it is admitted that these belong to a Pauline
School. St. Paul himself, they say, did not develop so far.
He started a movement which his school completed, and to
which it gave effect, by producing the Christological Epis-
tles.^ We need not criticize this view further than to ob-
serve that to reject these epistles as un-Pauline in authorship
on such dubious, and in any case inadequate, grounds is too
arbitrary a position to win much support ; and it finds very
little favour with English, or even German, theologians of
to-day.

1 " Having regard to these phenomena," Pfleiderer writes, " I
have no hesitation in affirming that this Epistle to the Colossians
is not of Pauhne authorship, though I am sure it proceeded from a
PauUne School, for the affinities between it and the undoubted
writings of St. Paul are very marked." Cf. Hibbert Lectures, 1885,
p. 217 ff.

ST. PAUL'S RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 27

Most probable View of the Influence of St.
Paul's Conversion.

Most probably 'we may regard St. Paul's universalistic
Gospel as going right back if not to the moment of conver-
sion at least to the time of his retirement in Arabia.^ There
under the quiet stars, alone, under the spell of the " silence
and sounds of the prodigious plain," and above all in
constant communion with God, and under the tuition of
the Holy Spirit in the things of Christ, the future Apostle
must have learnt the truths which possessed his soul with
living power. His Gospel was revealed and intuitively
received. It was clearly before him within the first few
years or even hours of his Christian life. But there was
room for growth. The formulation of that Gospel may have
been worked out into tense pregnant phrases and sentences
by the slow process of time. Many of his short, concise
statements, as pointed out above, "^ bear the mark of careful
reflection, though we are apt to overlook this fact when
carried away by the rush of intense feeling that makes him
live in his letters. First came the intuitions, then the posi-
tive doctrines into which he formulated his religion, last of
all his " apologetic," probably worked out through painful
experience during his life of missionary service, or through
the application of his own critical faculty to the assailable
points of his teaching.^ The rehgious value of St. Paul's
doctrine is that it is a transcript of his life. Experi-

1 GaL i. 17. 2 p. 8 n. I above.

* So Weizsacker says, " His fundamental principles had been
furnished and stamped with the certainty of intuitions by his faith
and the manner of his conversion. These he wrought into consistent
systems of doctrine by the help of his formal presuppositions, and
these systems, in turn, guided him in arranging the material from Holy
Scripture, which served him for proof." "For him then every
doctrine had a religious value. Yet every religious value construed
itself to the mind as metaphysic." History of the Apostolic Age,
Weizsacker, vol. i. p. 138 ff.

28 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

enced in the depths of his soul, mounting to the sphere of
his intellect, it is there fashioned into theoretical form.
" Behind and in the Gospel," writes Harnack, " stands the
Person of Christ. . . . Theology attempted to describe in
very uncertain and feeble outline what the mind and heart
had grasped. Yet it testifies of a new life which . . . was
kindled by a Person." ^

We cannot believe that the sole result of St. Paul's con-
version was a mere conviction that Jesus was identical with
the Messiah, and that the rest is speculation, as many would
have us think.^ He was no mere metaphysician or philo-
sopher ; his religion was his philosophy, and his philosophy
the life of his soul. The central principle was the inner
revelation of Christ. The mystery of His Person could be
only comprehended practically. Indeed all knowledge of
the Old Testament prophecies, all theories of the origin and
future of the world and of the history of mankind were inert
and chaotic till Christ came to breathe into them the breath
of life and to shape them into meaning. It was St. Paul's
actual experience of the Living Christ, the life lived in Him,
that taught the Apostle the truths he made known to the
world with a a-o(f)ia that was r} (TO(})ia ©eoO.

" Christ ! I am Christ's ! and let the name suffice you.
Ay, and for me He greatly hath sufficed :
Lo with no winning words I would entice you,
Paul has no honour and no friend but Christ." ^

1 History of Dogma, A. Harnack, vol. i. p. 133.

' Cf. Principal Carpenter {Jesus or Christ ? p. 230), who, after
indicating the presence of all the elements for a doctrine of " de-
scent " like the Indian avatar as, writes " The elements of a Christ-
ology were all prepared. There was needed only a personality to
which they could be attached." See also p. 239 of the same
volume where the same Author commends Brijckner, Wrede and
Cheyne for aiming at showing that the Pauline Christology cannot
be wholly explained by inference from the Conversion.

3 St. Paul, F. W. H. Myers.

CHAPTER III

Jesus as Messiah

General Agreement that, for St. Paul,
Jesus was the Messiah.

AFTER obtaining this general idea of St. Paul's religious
history we are enabled to turn with greater penetra-
tion and sympathy to the particular subject set apart for
consideration, i.e. his view of the Person of Christ, Amid
the clash and discord of conflicting opinions the student is
cheered by finding one subject of common agreement.^ It
is a common acknowledgment that Jesus, whatever else
He might have been to St. Paul, was indeed the Christ, ful-
filling the Messianic hopes and ideals expressed in the Jew-
ish Scriptures. There had been dimly shadowed forth One
who was to come (>J2rT) who would display qualities more
than human, bring peace among the nations of the earth,
and establish a spiritual kingdom in Mount Zion into which
all nations should come. That ideal figure " projected upon
the shifting future " ^ had inspired with hope and courage
the sinking hearts of his countrymen for centuries, and car-
ried them through the depths of danger and distress. Now
the hope of the ages was realized. The Messiah had come
in the person of Jesus, and thus Christianity was the spiritual
descendant of Judaism, both child and heir.

Before his conversion, St. Paul's ideas of the coming Mes-

1 On the controversy Jesus or Christ ? see above p. 204 fif.

2 Isaiah, His Life and Times (Prof. Driver), p. 42,

30 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

siah were no doubt of the narrower type which many of his
contemporaries held.

The Ideas of the Messiah prevalent in Palestine

WERE SHARED BY St. PaUL BEFORE HiS CONVERSION.

Many of the true elements of Messianic prophecy
had been left out of account altogether, and others
were either disproportionately magnified or minimized in
the idea of the national deliverer prevalent at this time.
That St. Paul had not grasped the wonderful idea of a Suffer-
ing Servant, a Saviour made perfect through renunciation
and sorrow, seems clear from the fact that such a description
of the Messiah filled him with horror. Jesus had been but a
crucified failure. We can see how Christ Crucified and
Exalted shining in his heart must have taught him to set
aside for ever any Messianic expectations of a material
nature. He must have been led to search again the oracles
of God committed to the Jew, and as the new revelation
gave them a new meaning to him, fresh phases of
Messiah's Person hitherto unnoticed, a purified and
spiritualized view of what He came to do, lit their pages with
the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face
of Jesus Christ.^' ^

1 So he prays that his Colossian converts may be filled with all
spiritual knowledge and understanding (Col. i. 9).

2 The true secret of the spiritualized conception of the Messiah
after his conversion is to be found in his theocentric Christology.
Sabatier, Beyschlag, and Somerville all start from an anthropo-
centric standpoint and as a result find St. Paul's fundamental
idea in Christ as the Archetype of Humanity, the Second Adam.
On the other hand Professor Findlay (" St. Paul the Apostle,"
Art. H. D.B.) and Dr. Stevens [The Pauline Theology) hold that
the Apostle's doctrine is only anthropocentric in appearance. In
reality it is theocentric. Whilst, as a Jew, he would, in a real sense
naturally take a theocentric standpoint, yet the unique experience
of the " beaming forth of the illumination of the glory of the Christ "
(2 Cor. iv. 4 ; cf. St. John i. 14) produced a new conception of God
as of Jesus. His life was thenceforth " hid with Christ in God."
His previous training and habits of thought would help him to give

JESUS AS MESSIAH 31

The Effect of the Conversion on his Messianic
Conception — Immediate.

We naturally turn first to the scene of the Conversion.^
As the stricken persecutor lay prostrate on the ground on
the road to Damascus, with eyes blinded by the glory of
the Risen Christ, and heart humbled by His Presence, the
question had sprung to his lips, " Who art Thou, Lord ? "2
It was a question which half contained its own answer.
By the word Kvpioq the LXX translated the Tetragrammaton
mn\ Round it had grown up traditions and associations
connected with gracious condescensions of Israel's own and
only God, with objective visions and personal guidings in
the working out of God's purpose for His people. This

form and expression to the conception which he developed from
His theocentric and Christocentric standpoint. Behind all his
doctrine was his simple faith in Christ, the awful knowledge that
God had chosen him and spoken to him. When he takes and uses
the Messianic phraseology of his day, He fills it with a meaning new
and rich.

1 There are three separate accounts of the Conversion in Acts.
There is a difference, but not a vital difference, in detail. In the
first account in chap. ix. Paul saw suddenly a light shining from
heaven, he fell to the ground and heard a voice speaking to him,
but " the men that journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing
the voice, but beholding no man {v. 7). In the second account in
chap, xxii., the companions of Paul " saw the light, but they heard
not the voice of him that spake " {v. g). In the third account in
chap, xxvi., all the company fell to the ground, and the voice spake
in the Hebrewtongue {v. 14), probably also " It is hard for thee to
kick against the goads " (omitted from chap. ix. by L.T.Tr. WH,
R.V.) occurs in this account only. The first account is that of
the historian, the other two are reports of St. Paul's speeches.
The omission in the third account of the vision, visit and message
of Ananias is apparently a more important divergence, for Ananias
gives the same message (chap. xxii. 14-15) which came from the
Lord (chap. xxvi. 16-18). But the circumstances of the speech will
explain the omission. In either case he could say with perfect
truth that the revelation came from the Lord. The Conversion
is referred to in the' Epistles in i Cor. ix. i ; xv. 5-9 ; 2 Cor. iv.
4-6; V. 16-19; Gal. i. 11-17; Rom. i. 1-5 and other passages.

2 T6S il, Kvpic;

32 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

was indeed a manifestation of God. Saul was on holy
ground in a holy Presence, and he knew it. But to his
question came the clear definite reply, " I am Jesus, Whom
thou persecutest." Who was the Jesus suffering from the
persecution of Saul ? Surely a Jesus Who falsely, blasphem-
ously, impiously, as Paul thought, claimed to be the Messiah.
First, the revelation showed Saul his mistake. The veil of
nationalism is suddenly rent. The outlook is immeasurably
widened in a moment. He is blinded by gazing into the
infinity of God's purpose, dazed by the shock of sudden
revelation, and silenced by realizing swiftly God's will for
his life. God and Jesus Christ and the Jewish Messiah were
revealing themselves to him in that awful Presence. He
could not grasp its significance at once, but he rose from his
knees convinced that he had had a revelation from God,
that he had heard the voice of Jesus, that Jesus was the
Messiah of his race and a Light to lighten the Gentiles ;
and that somehow these three, the Lord Jehovah, and Jesus,
and the Messiah were one, speaking with the same authority,
summoning to the same service. This question indeed
" TiV el, Kvpte ;" as it was first on his lips, was of primary
importance to him. He could never have rested until
Christ had taught him all that lay in His words " I am Jesus,
Whom thou persecutest." The answer was the Christology
of St. Paul.

And afterwards in Arabia.
The revelation of Jesus was probably not completed in
the moments of the crisis near Damascus. Saul had still
much to learn of Christ, " For I will shew {vTroBei^o)) him
how great things he must suffer for My Name's sake." ^ Dur-
ing the three years in Arabia the fabric of his faith was slowly
formed. Rarely in the history of the chosen of God is that
sacred time of preparation laid bare to curious eyes. A

1 Acts ix. 16.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 33

single note suffices for the boyhood and early manhood of
Christ. A sacred mist hides Him from our view when He
climbs at nightfall the path that leads up the mountain to
that Holy of Holies of His life where He prepares for the
labours of the day. A Moses has for forty silent years the
consciousness of mission and of his nation's need as a burden
on his soul. An Elijah, a John the Baptist, spring suddenly
into history, prepared and ready for their work. We know
nothing of the silent days before, during which the dis-
cipline of thought and life had cleared the mental and
moral and spiritual vision.

His Missionary Preaching.

So it was with St. Paul. With doctrines matured and
clearly outlined he returned to Damascus. Here he would
seem to have established two main theses : (i) that Jesus
was the Divine Son of God ; ^ and (ii) that He was therefore
the Messiah. 2 The second position must, of necessity, have
been reached only in his Synagogue preaching and that to
Jews generally.^ So at Thessalonica he reasoned that "this
Jesus, whom I proclaim unto you, is the Christ." ^ At Cor-
inth, he testified to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ.^

Such in general terms was the message of his bold preaching
in the name of the Lord." In Dr. Westcott's words the
name " Christ " was " the seal of the fulfilment of the

iActsix.20. See below on the "Son of God, "p. 50. Cf. St. Matt,
xxvi. 63, the Confession of Martha (St. John xi. 27) and the question
of Christ — the basis of the Christian Church (St. John ix. 35).

2 Acts ix. 22, also cf. Rom. xvi. 25. to K-^pvyfxa 'b/croii Xpicrrov
is " the preaching which announces Jesus the Messiah " (Sanday
and Headlam, ad loc.) or " the preaching concerning Jesus Christ."
The latter is the better interpretation. The mystery of His working
was one that concerned Gentile as well as Jew, it was the breaking
down of the wall of partition " the message of obedience in faith."

2 Unless he showed the fulfilment of such Messianic aspirations
among the Gentiles are referred to in Suetonius' Life of Vespasian,
chap. iv.

* Acts xvii. 3. 5 Acts xviii. 5. " Acts ix. 27, 29.

D

34 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Divine Will through the slow processes of life." By this
title — Christ — " God teaches us to find the true meaning
of history."^ But the account of St. Paul's sermons and
the references in his Epistles show us that he emphasized
particularly certain aspects of Messiah's Person, and to the
study of these we propose shortly to proceed.^' ^

A Brief Account of Contemporary Messianic Hope.
Assuming a knowledge of the portrait of the Messiah in
the Old Testament, a brief delineation of the lesser known
development of the Messianic hope between the Return from
Captivity and the New Testament is, however, a further
essential preliminary. Professor Drummond thus sums up
the period after the captivity and before the rise of the
Maccabees. " The Messianic hope resolved itself into vague
anticipations of a glorious happy future, in which the
presence of God would be more manifest, but of which a
Messiah would form no essential feature " * being merely
God's instrument or vehicle.^ In the Sibylline Fragment
(c. 220 B.C.) there is a picture of a king sent by God, possess-
ing universal power, bringing peace, executing judgment,
fulfilling promises, and being subject to the Almighty.
It is thought by many that the Book of Daniel was written
in the Maccabean period, and, if so, the Apocalyptic nature
of the Messianic hope expressed there is possibly influenced,
humanly speaking, by Persian Mazdeism which held such

1 Westcott, Revelation of the Father, p. 25.

2 "The Messianic expectation presented no difficulties to those
who, since the time of Augustus, had learnt to believe that the
world-cycle was approaching its completion, and that a Deliverer
would soon appear to lead mankind into the glories of the golden
age of which the poets sang and the Sibyl prophesied." See Prof .
Kirsopp Lake's book The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, p. 43.

3 It must be remembered that we have no full account of his
missionary preaching, and that if we had it would not follow that
therein was contained all he saw of the fulfilment by Jesus of the
Messianic hope.

^ The Jewish I\Tessiah, p. 199. ^ So Philo.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 35

doctrines as the partial Resurrection and the Millennial
Reign. A little later (c. 166-161 B.C.), the Visions and
Dreams of Enoch were written. Dr. Charles thus sums up
their conception of the Messiah. "He is a man only, but
yet a glorified man ; and superior to the community from
which he springs. So far as he is a man only, he may be
regarded as the prophetic Messiah as opposed to the Apo-
calyptic Messiah of the Similitudes : and yet he is not truly
the prophetic Messiah for he has absolutely no function to
perform, and he does not appear till the world's history is
finally closed."^ The Book of Jubilees has only one allusion
to Messiah (xxxi. 18), who is to arise from Judah. In the
Similitudes of Enoch (95-80 B.C.) the " Son of Man " will
appear to judge. He is the " elect one " (xl. 5 ; xlv. 3,
etc.), " the Righteous One " (xxxvii. 3), the " Anointed "
(xlviii. 10 ; Hi. 4), and " the Son of Man " (xlvi. 2 ff. ; xlviii.
2). Messiah is (i) Prophet and Teacher ; (ii) Vindicator
and Ruler ; (iii) Judge. Thus Messiah is " The Super-
natural Son of Man, clothed with the attributes of Deity,
and separating the righteous from the wicked. Yet there
is no mention of a Second Advent. So to the first disciples
a suffering Messiah seemed a contradiction in terms."

The Psalms of Solomon or of the Pharisees do not actually
contain the title " Son of God," but one passage (xvii. 26)
clearly borrows from Psalm ii.^ There the Messiah is a
vassal king, not a supreme law-giver. He is God's vice-
gerent. He is not divine, though raised by God Himself
(xvii. 23) and endowed with divine gifts. There is no trace
of a supernatural birth or pre-existence, yet we have this
advance in the conception of Messiah that He is regarded
as personal, for the first time in Palestinian literature.^

We pass now to some of the most prominent points of
contact between the Pauline Christ and the Jewish Messiah.

1 The Book of Enoch, Rev. R. H. Charles, p. 30 ff.

2 So Prof. Sanday, Art. " Son of God," H. D. B.

3 Psalms of the Pharisees, Profs. Ryle and James, Introduction,

36 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

I. General Agreement with Old Testament Prophecy.

1. Generally speaking, Christ was He of whom the Old
Testament Scriptures spake. Briefly, we gather that St.
Paul saw the Messiah's life foretold not only as to His birth,
but also in His being condemned (Acts xiii. 27), in His death
(Rom. XV. 3, iii. 21-26), in His Resurrection (Acts xiii. 32,
33, Rom. iv. 13-25, X. 7), and in His being made a Minister
of the Circumcision (Rom. xv. 8). The followers of Christ
are the true heirs to the promise to Abraham (Gal. iii. 29).
In fact, all the promises of God were in Him fulfilled and
realized (2 Cor. i. 19-20). We are carried far beyond the
sphere of Jewish nationalism or Jewish hope, into the region
of spiritual perception where we can see the Jewish Messiah
as One in Whom dwelt all the Pleroma of the Godhead
bodily.

2. Christ the Holy One and the Righteous One.

2. Christ is the Holy One and the Righteous One.

{a) Christ is the Holy One. In his missionary sermon at
Antioch (Acts xiii. 35), St. Paul applies to Jesus the quot-
ation from the Psalm (xvi. 10), used also by St. Peter in his
speech on the Day of Pentecost : " Thou wilt not give Thy
Holy One (" rbv oaiov aov ") to see corruption." In St.
Mark i. 24 the word is a<yio<;. Professor Swete there sees
in the cry of the man with the unclean spirit a recognition
of the Messiahship of Jesus, of One Who was wholly conse-
crated to God and therefore a'^io<i} The word ocno<; was
used by the LXX translators to translate TOn, whilst
a7to9 translated ''D'T\'p. The former implies the idea rather
of ceremonial cleanness, sanctus, as opposed to pol-
lutus ; the latter implies separation and consecration for
God. The oai,o<i, writes Archbishop Trench,^ is one who
reverences those " everlasting sanctities," which rest on

1 St. Mark, Prof. Swete ad loc.

2 Synonyms of the New Testament, p. 314

JESUS AS MESSIAH 37

the " divine constitution of the moral universe." It is
this kind of " hoHness " that is imphed in the word and,
to one so famihar as St. Paul with the LXX, the distinction
must have been present.

All through our Lord's life, He fulfilled the Old Testament
idea of the Messiah who should perfectly keep God's law.
In the face of the terrible temptations that assailed Him,
He approved Himself ocrto?, and the Messianic prediction
of the Psalm was fulfilled when His body saw no corruption.

(b) The Righteous One. " 6 SUacoti " is used once by
St. Paul of Jesus Christ. During his defence on the stairs
at Jerusalem, in the narration of his conversion, he mentions
the words of Ananias, " The God of our fathers hath chosen
thee that thou shouldest , . . see the Righteous One "
{top AiKacov), Acts xxii. 14. Righteousness is intimately
connected with holiness. ^ " The Holy God shall sanctify
Himself in righteousness " (Isa. v. 16). In the prophets
righteousness was to be a feature of the Messianic reign,
" A king shall reign in righteousness . . ." (Isa. xxxii. i),'*
Moreover the " servant " as conceived by the deutero-
Isaiah is " the righteous servant who shall justify many "
(Isa. liii. 11). Righteousness has a twofold aspect : (i) It
is an attribute of God's nature (cf. Rom. iii. 5," the right-
eousness of God ") ; (ii) it is a character required by God
of man. " What God requires is grounded in what God is."
Accordingly Christ as the Righteous One is He Who per-
fectly fulfils God's law, whose character is that which God
the Righteous One (St. John xvii. 25) requires, and did
require throughout Israel's history. St. Paul sees in Jesus
the Righteous One of the prophets (as St. Peter did, cf. Acts
iii. 14). But he saw more than the Jews to whom he was
speaking would see. There was not merely superficial

1 The distinction often drawn between ocrtos as referring to duty
towards God, and St/cato? to duty towards men, will not hold of
New Testament Greek or Christian ethics. See Trench, Synonyms,
PP- 313. 314- ^ See also Isa. ix. 7 ; Isa, xi. 5, etc.

38 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

obedience to commandments or the observance of rites and
ceremonies, nor was there merely the legal conception of
one who through his righteousness was acquitted before
God in a forensic manner.^ There was the deeper, ethical
significance. Grace and faith have a prominence in his
conception which they could not have had for a Jew whose
experience was less intense than his own. The Old Testa-
ment leads us to think of righteousness as the judicial
attribute of God avenging Himself on wickedness and
delivering the righteous. When the latter aspect is de-
veloped the forensic idea must go.^ " The Old Testament
may be said to culminate in the thought of righteousness as
a gift of God," an idea appearing most clearl}^ perhaps in
Psalm xxiv. 5, Ixix. 28 ; Isaiah xlvi. 13, li. 5, 8, Ivi. i. This
brings us very near to the Pauline position that righteous-
ness is a free gift of God through faith in Christ Jesus. The
righteousness we acquire is an " imputed righteousness "
not by the Law, nor within the power of the will. But the
Righteous One, Jesus Christ, did not need this imputed
righteousness. He was perfectly sinless,^ and therefore
perfectly righteous. His own life was lived in perfect con-
formity to God's law. So in the Gospels, and as applied
to Jesus Christ, the word is used in a merely ethical sense
without such a distinctly technical sense as the Pauline use
establishes. Thus, with St. Paul in this sermon, it means
" God-like character," the qualities of a character accept-
able to God, which emanate from love as their root and
ground. It is St. Paul's testimony to the sinless, perfect
life of Christ on earth.

1 " The righteous were those who kept the Law of God. . . .
We are too apt to forget that the Pharisees and lawyers who are
held up to reprobation in tlie New Testament were only one side
of Judaism." — Prof. K. Lake, Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, pp.397,
398.

2 See St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, Dr. A. B. Bruce, p. 147.

3 2 Cor. V. 21.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 39

3. Christ as of the Seed of David.
3. He was of the seed of David. The conception of
Christ as descended from David, as the representative of his
house, and the occupant of his throne, was the most general
notion of Messiah since the ideal reign of the " man after
God's own heart." In times after Haggai (ii. 21-23) the
Messianic office of the house of David had fallen into the
background, e.g. Jeremiah " a faithful prophet " (i Mac.
xiv. 41), not David, appears to Judas.^ The word Christ 2
is used first of the expected deliverer in the Psalms of the
Pharisees (c. 70-40 B.C.). " It was from these Psalms that
the impulse, which, in the next generation, caused Davidic
descent to be regarded as an essential element of Messianic
claims, came." ^ St. Paul recognized the fact that Jesus
was born into the world, a descendant of David, according
to promise (Gal. iii. 19). He asserts it again in Romans i. 3,
" rov yevofievov eK airepiiarofi Aaveth Kara adpfca " ; also in
Romans ix. 5» " 'lo-parjKelrai . . . e^ wv 6 XptaTo^ to Kara
adpKa." This fact forms so fundamental a part of his
conception of Christ that it is in the forefront both of
his missionary preaching, and also of the most carefully
reasoned and systematized of all his Epistles. Sabatier
has pointed out how few writers on St. Paul realize that he
was first a missionary and afterwards a theologian. " To
people," he adds, " who had never heard the principal
gospel narratives, his Epistles would present insoluble
enigmas in every line." The very essence of his teaching
to both Jews and Gentiles, who had never heard of Jesus,
must have been the sinless course of His life on earth, His
death on the Cross and His elevation into glory. St. Paul
would, we believe, unhesitatingly assert the real nlcarna-
tion of the Son of God as Son of David " Kara a-apva." His

1 2 Mac. XV. 13 ff. Cf. St. Matt. xvi. 14 ; St. John i. 21, vi. 14,
vii. 40. 2 n^'P-

3 The Psalms of the Pharisees, Profs. Ryle and James. Introduc-
tion.

40 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

earthly life was not merely Docetic, the facts of His earthly
life were valued and formed part of missionary teaching.
We can see from the universalistic ideas of the Prophets,^
held together with a belief in the Davidic descent of Messiah,
how it was possible for the Apostle of the Gentiles to acknow-
ledge and to teach that the Lord Himself was born as the
prophets had foretold and as the Jewish race believed, of
the stock of David, the son of Jesse.

The following reasons seem to the present writer to point
conclusively to St, Paul's knowledge and deep appreciation
of the value of the earthly life of Jesus.^

(i) To preach " Christ crucified " imphed a reference
to the chief facts of the earthly Hfe. Much has been
written about the words of the Apostle in 2 Cor. v. 16,^
" Wherefore as for us, we know no man henceforth after the
flesh; even though we have known Christ after the flesh,
yet now we know Him so no more." ["flare ij/jbel-i aTro roO
vvv ov8eva olhai^ev Kara crdpKa ' el Koi eyvcoKafxev Kara
crdpKa Xptarov dWd vvv ovKeri ytvcoaKOfiev.]

1 The narrower national notions commonly attributed to all
Jews were peculiar to the Zealots.

2 Prof. Weinel {Jesus or Christ ? p. 30) writes, " The question
of the Law was precisely what Jesus left incomplete. . . . From
the content of our Gospels it thus becomes clear why, precisely in
the great struggle of his life, Paul was unable to quote Jesus."
The struggle about the Law took place probably before the words
of Jesus had a supreme importance in his life (see chap. ii. p. 21,
22). In any case it is at least arguable that St. Paul came to the
same point of view about the Law as his Master.

In the same volume {Jesus or Christ ?) we are reminded by Prof.
Bacon (p. 213) that " Mark is a thoroughly Pauline Gospel." He
is so struck with the subordinating of the precepts of Jesus to His
Person and Work that he regards that Gospel as a " drastic Pauline
recast of the primitive Petrine tradition." For St. Paul's use of
" Q " see p. 216 ff. of Jesus or Christ ? and p. 41 23 of this book.
So Wendling regards the " final redactor " of St. Mark as influenced
by the Pauline doctrines of the Atonement, and of the Church.
Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem, p. 398 ff.

3 Some (e.g. J. Weiss) regard this text as justifying the inference
that St. Paul had seen Jesus during His earthly life.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 41

What does knowing a Christ KaTa adpKa mean ? It is evi-
dently a knowledge which he has come to disregard, a view
of the Christ which has been cast to one side. He had
known before his conversion a fleshly Messiah, a national
Deliverer, the object of material hopes, the warrior king
of an earthly Zion. His conversion had changed all that.
" Now henceforth we know Him so no more." Now he
knew a Christ Whose love for him constrained him {v. 14),
Who died for all that all might live to Him. It does not
in the slightest degree imply that he despised the earthly
hfe of the Lord and had rejected it as unworthy of Him
Who was the image of the invisible God.^

(ii) Shortly after he wrote 2 Cor. St. Paul wrote to
the Romans that Christ was " of the seed of David," and
shortly before that He was " made of a woman, born under
the law." 2

(iii) Is there not really a stronger underlying agreement
between Epistles and Gospels than we are sometimes led
to expect and more reference to the earthly life of Jesus
than superficial readers discern ? ^

1 As Weizsacker strongly holds. See The Apostolic Age, vol. i.
p. 142. Sir J. C. Hawkins has lately pointed out the intense interest
the stories of the Passion and Crucifixion must have had for St. Paul
and his followers [Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem, p. 92).

2 Gal. iv. 4. Cf. Rom. i. 3 and Rom. ix. 5 where the birth and
life of Jesus are referred to. In Rom. i. 3 the reference is to " the
Son," in Rom. ix. 5 to " 6 Xpto-ro's," i.e., S. Paul's change in view
was rather of " the Messiah " than of Jesus.

3 See The Testimony of St. Paul to Christ, Dr. Knowling, pp. 179-
350. So close is the correspondence between the teaching and words
of St. Paul and Jesus that -it has been affirmed (by Resch) that
St. Paul used some document which St. Mark also used. "It is
probable that much more of the common teaching and even phrase-
ology of the early Church than we are accustomed to imagine goes
back to the teaching of Jesus " (Sanday and Headlam, Romans,
p. 382. See also Dr. Knowling's Messianic Interpretation, p.
85). Dr. Sanday points out that in two passages at least St. Paul
appears to show detailed knowledge of the Gospel story ; the Lord's
Supper (i Cor. xi. 23-34), ^^'^ ^^i^ Appearances of the Risen Saviour

42 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

(iv) This matter was no subject of dispute between St.
Paul and the Apostles of the Circumcision.

(v) Jesus Himself, Who had Hved His life on earth,
was the teacher of St. Paul. Can we fail to believe that the
magnificent conception of the Incarnation set forth in
Philippians ii. 5-11 came from this Source ? Jesus Himself
tells us that certain events of His life will stand for ever,
such as that He is the Revelation of God the Father.

The moral sacrifice and negation expressed in 2 Cor.
viii. 9, " Though He was rich, yet He became poor," ^
the entreaty — in 2 Cor. x. i ^ — " by the meekness " and
" sweet reasonableness " of Christ can refer to nothing else
than this earthly walk amongst men. Then, too, there
was the " sinlessness of Christ." ^ " Him Who knew no sin

(i Cor. XV. 3-8). Could he not have described other passages oi -the
Lord's Ufa also with equal accuracy ? Cf., too, the " words of the
Lord," I Cor. vii. 10 ; ix. 14 ; expressions similar to Gospel
phrases Rom. xii. 14 ; i Cor. iv. 12, 13 ; vi. 3 ; xii. 2, 3 ; the char-
acter of Jesus in St. Matt. xi. 29 with that of 2 Cor. x. i ; Phil,
ii. 5-1 1 ; the " Love " of the Gospels with that of i Cor. xiii. Did
he use " Q " ? See {Diet, of C. and G., Art. " Paul ").

^ iTTTM^^vcrev TrAowcrtos wj'. It deals with the motive not the
method of the Incarnation. 2 gj^ ^^^ irpavTrjro'i Kai eViet/cetas.

^ Tov /J/r] yvovra afxapriav vrrlp y^jxuiv dpMprLav iTTOirjaev. Amongst
other attacks upon the sinless character of Jesus is that of Prof.
Schmiedel {Jesus or Christ ? p. 67 ff.), who writes, " Jesus would
not have had the feeling that His mission was withdrawn from
Him unless sin had kept Him for some length of time removed
from the face of His Father." The Rev. R. J. Campbell writes,
in the same volume (p. 191), " To speak of Him as morally perfect
is absurd ; to call Him sinless is worse, for it introduces an entirely
false emphasis into the relations of God and man." He later defines
" Christhood " as " manhood at its highest power." This surely
is moral perfection, which, in so far as it means " being sinless,"
and is for the individual, he yet denies is the great end of spiritual
endeavour.

The term " sinlei-.ness of Jesus " (made familiar by Ullmann's
book of that name) is sometimes objected to as implying a merely
negative conception, the absence of evil. As Mr. Martin {Diet, of
C. and G., Art. " Divinity of Christ ") points out : His moral self-
witness is in the liighest degree positive. The term indicates the

JESUS AS MESSIAH 43

He made to be sin on our behalf " (2 Cor. v. 21). In St.
Paul's eyes the whole value to the Father of the death of
Christ lay in that it was the death of a sinless being, Who,
though He had taken upon Him our flesh and endured the
temptations that throng our life, yet had never fallen from
the loftiest conceivable ideal of man.

(vi) Were the theory we are discussing true, we should
expect to find St. Paul gnostic and docetic in his views.
His very assertion that Christ was " of the seed of David,"
" made of a woman, born under the law " is a negation of
Docetism." ^ Matter is rather that in which evil has its
home, the agent through which it acts. Christ became
(" ey€vr]d7j ") man. He was " this (man)." 2 Yet He was the
Creator and Sustainer of the Universe, Who in His great
love came to earth, and assmned our flesh, in itself good ;
and, despite His outward temptations, He conquered by
the grace of the Holy Spirit.

(vii) The keynote of St. Paul's preaching — the suffering
Messiah — precludes any belittlement of the value of Christ's
earthly life. Christ was a minister of circumcision that
the promises might be confirmed (Rom. xv. 8).

(viii) The Pauline School, in which we may, perhaps,
include St. John and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews,
are clearly and definitely against such view. They were
continuing his teaching not revolutionizing it.

4. Christ the Suffering Messiah.

4. Christ as the suffering Messiah. To recognize in
Jesus the Messiah of their hopes, after the terrible mental
anguish and bodily suffering during His earthly life, and
especially during His last week on earth, meant a recognition
of suffering as an integral factor in the Messiah's appearing.
It was indeed the main object of the Apostolic teaching to

stainless purity of Christ. To give the conception accurate expres-
sion is, perhaps, impossible.

^ Cf., too, I Tim. iii. i6. 2 3,^^ tovtou. Acts xiii. 38.

44 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

show how the Christ Who was to come should suffer, con-
trary to popular expectation, but completely in agree-
ment with the Old Testament Scriptures. Who was this
Messiah, this Jesus, Whom they were preaching ? A
crucified Messiah ? St. Paul knew what a stumbhng-block
{(TKcivhaXov) that was to the Jews, as well as foolishness
{ijbwplav) to the Gentiles.^ Accordingly he made it his first
aim to prove that " it behoved the Christ to suffer " (Acts
xvii. 3) and then proceeded to show that " this Jesus . . .
is the Christ." Once the fact of the sufferings of Jesus was
seen to be foreshadowed in the Old Testament,^ the proof
was clear to him. So prominent did the thought of
the sufferings of the Christ in His earthly life become in
St. Paul's Christology that he recognizes in his own life the
same kind of sufferings which abounded in that of His
Master (2 Cor. i. 5). Nay more, he filled up on his part
" that which is lacking (" ra vareprnxaTa ") of the afflictions
of Christ " in his flesh for His body's sake which is the
Church (Col. i. 24). -

Without the conception of a suffering Christ, of glory
reached through suffering, the life of Christ and the death
of the Cross would have been alike inexplicable. The
whole of the early Church must have fought their way to
this position. St. Peter, representative of the best of
Christian Judaism, had done so, when he wrote, " searching
what time or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ Which
was in them (the prophets) pointed unto, when It testified
beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that
should follow them " (i Pet. i. 11) ; and, " Christ also
suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous,
that He might bring us to God " (i Pet. iii. 18) ; and " For-
asmuch, then, as Christ suffered in the flesh, arm ye your-
selves with the same mind [ewoiav] " (i Pet. iv. i).^ In

^ I Cor. i. 23. ^ Particularly in Isa. liii.

3 I.e. as Jesus. Cf, i. Pet. iv. 2 and Rom, vi. 7.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 45

the fiery trial {" rr} iv vfjitu Trvpoja-ei") his readers of the
Dispersion are to rejoice because " they partake of Christ's
sufferings " (i Pet. iv. 12, 13). Once the fact was there
in the Hfe of Jesus, and the proof from the Old Testament
was forthcoming and convincing, the missionary to Palestine
and the Dispersion had a clear, logical message for the
Jew. To preach Christ crucified at all to a Jewish audience
was a "stumbling-block " ; to attempt to preach Him without
showing His relation to the Old Testament Scripture
would be foolishness, too.

5. Jesus Christ as the Rock, the Deliverer and the
Lord of Peace.

5. In the imagery of the Old Testament, the Rock and
Deliverance are frequently and intimately connected. The
hot, dusty desert, and the mighty rock for shadow and pro-
tection ; the devastating hosts of enemies, and the rocks
and caves for a defence and hiding place ; the attacking
armies and the fortress built upon the rock for a stronghold
and refuge are familiar conceptions in Hebrew poetry.
The Lord God was their Rock. The title implies the
" strength, faithfulness and unchangeableness of Jehovah." ^

Moreover, the Rock had been to their nation one of the
chosen instruments of the Revelation of His lifegiving
power and guarding love, for it was the rock in the wilderness
that enabled the fainting people to quench their thirst ; ^
" He clave the rocks in the wilderness and gave them
drink as out of the great depths." ^ Round this incident
many traditions gathered.^ It is with St. Paul's reference
to it^ that we are primarily concerned. He writes, in

1 Cf. Psa. xviii. 2. Kirkpatrick (Camb. Bible) ad loc.

2 Exod. xvii. 6. 3 ps^ Ixxviii. 15.

^ Amongst them a Rabbinical legend related that as the multitude
of Israel moved on its march a stream of water followed from the
rock throughout their wanderings. It has accordingly been asserted
that St. Paul is here taking this rabbinical legend and applying
it to Christ. ^ i Cor. x. 4.

46 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

1 Cor. X. 4, " For they drank of a spiritual rock that
followed them, and the rock was Christ." ^

How far St. Paul had contemporary Rabbinical legends
in mind it is hard to say, but there seem to be at least two
interesting ideas in the reference : —

i. It undoubtedly teaches the Pre-existence of Christ. 2
The Targum on Isaiah xvi. i, " Afferent dona Messiae
Israelitarum, qui robustus erit, propterea quod in deserto
fuit Rupes Ecclesia Zionis, expresses " this.

Wisdom X. 15 ff. relates that the wisdom of God {ao4>la
©eou) was with Moses and led the Israelites through the
wilderness. It was a common belief that the Messiah, the
Angel of the Covenant, was present with the chosen people.
At all events, Christ is regarded here as existing before
His Incarnation, not as an Idea but as a Person, and as
watching over and sustaining His people in days of danger.
Dr. Inge writes that it reminds him of Clement's language
about the Son as " the Light which broods over all his-
tory." 3

ii. The Jews had frequently been led, by their sense of
the importance and ofhce of the Rock, to designate even
Jehovah Himself by that title, cf. e.g.. Psalm Ixxviii. 35,
" And they remembered that God was their Rock, and
God Most High their Redeemer." Cf. Psalm xviii. 2 ;

2 Samuel xxii. 2, etc. St. Paul must have been conscious
of this when he wrote. Yet he applies to Christ a name
which is used in the particular personal sense of the Old
Testament application of it to Jehovah. By this is implied
not merely the pre-existence of Jesus as the Angel of the
Covenant, but as One in Whom Israel trusted as in a Rock.
He sustained them spiritually, as the waters out of the living

1 iTTivov yap £K TTveu/xariKT^S aKoXov6ov(rrj<; Trcrpa?, 17 Trirpa oe rjv 6

Xp/<TT09.

2 See hereon below in chapter Christ as Eternal, p, 103 ff.

3 Christian Mysticism, Dr. Inge, p. 66.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 47

rock had refreshed them physically.^ Both these ideas
of Messiah, Pre-existent and Divine, were present in tenta-
tive, speculative, forms in certain contemporary schools
of thought.

The Deliverer.

Another Old Testament conception taken up by St. Paul
has reference rather to the Work than to the Person of
Messiah. Deliverance was the first step in the establishment
of the Messianic Kingdom. So Messiah was not only Pro-
tector, He was the active Saviour [6 pvofxevo^), the Rescuer,
He Who frees (1073) captives. In this sense there was fre-
quent combination of the word with the Rock. " The Lord
Is my Rock in Whom I take refuge, my Deliverer " (Ps.
xviii. 2 ; cf. 2 Sam. xxii. 2 ; Ps. xl. 7 ; Ixx. 5.) It is un-
likely that the views of Castelli (advanced in II Messia
secondo gli Ebrei, p. 164), and Dalman {Worie Jesu, p. 242)
are correct. They assert that, according to the original
conception, the Messiah is never the deliverer.^ God de-
livers, and then Messiah reigns. Psalm ii., however, as
Professor Stanton shows, strongly militates against that
view ; though, as he points out, the actual relation of the
Messiah to the estabhshment of the Messianic Kingdom
cannot be precisely determined.^ Nevertheless in Rom.
xi. 26,* St. Paul quotes Isa. lix. 20, " Out of Sion ^ shall
come 6 pv6ixevo<;." ^ Jesus was indeed the Redeemer, the
Goel. The Rabbis interpreted the passage Messianically,
and so St. Paul applies it. To Christ pertained the active
work of redeeming Israel and humanity, as well as of sus-

1 Cf. Isa. Iv. I ; Ps. xxxvi. 9 ; St. John iv. 14 ; Rev. xxii. i, 17.
also see St. John ix. 7 and vii. 37 f., with Westcott's note thereon.

2 " Messiah," Art. H. D. B., Prof. V. H. Stanton.

3 The Jews did not presume to dictate to God about the future
as so many think. 4 q{ also i Thess. i. 10.

* In original " 1V>7 X21." e jn original 'PNlil.

48 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

taining and protecting them. The whole idea is, of course,
raised into the spiritual realm in the New Testament. ^

The Lord of Peace.
After the work of deliverance is done, under the protection
of the Rock, there is Peace. The Messiah is accordingly
" Prince of Peace" (Isa. ix. 6).^ His kingdom shall be
filled with harmony and happiness. ^ Discord shall be no
more. Even the " red tooth of nature " will cease to draw
blood (Isa. xi.). " This man shall be the Peace," after
delivering Israel from the hand of the Assyrians (Mic. v.
5, 6). The coming Messiah was to be the bringer of peace.
Though this peace was as a rule material and the vision
was of a country free from war, fertile and flourishing,
and of a people living on the fat of the land, it was not
entirely so. For the wicked there could be no peace (Isa.
xlviii. 22 ; Ivii. 21). Peace is coupled with truth as a
revelation (Jer. xxxiii. 6). It is to the faithful remnant
that peace will come. In the New Testament, Jesus Himself
is the Peace-maker, Who, reconciling to God him that is
near and him that is afar off, has become our Peace (Isa .
Ivii. 19 ; Eph. ii. 14 ; cf. Mic. v. 5). He is the Prince of
Peace, " The Lord of Peace give you peace at all times "
(2 Thess. iii. 16). " Peace be unto you from God our Father
and the Lord Jesus Christ " (Rom. i. yet passim). But we
discern here a fuller and deeper spiritual meaning. It
is no longer so much a future blessedness as a present posses-
sion of the individual Christian.* " The mind of the Spirit

1 By this phrase it is not imphed that the Christian had the
monopoly of spiritual things, but that, for St. Paul, the image stood
for a purely spiritual office in that land of eternal reality "beyond
the show of a passing world " — the home land of the Spirit. For
expectation of a Deliverer among the Gentiles, see p. 34, n. ^

2 Possibly Solomon, son of David, is referred to in the first instance
(so Philo).

2 See also Isa. Hi. 7, liii. 5, Ivii. ig, Hag. ii. 9, Zech. ix. 10.
* Though in Rom. ii. 10 it is referred to with " glory and honour "
as the reward of the good man at the Trapona-t'a. Cf. St. John xiv. 27.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 49

is life and peace " (Rom. viii. 6). " We have peace with
God through our Lord Jesus Christ " (Rom. v. i).^ It comes
from the redeemed soul abiding in Christ. We are at
peace with God. So we get the technical meaning of
Thayer ,2 as " the tranquil state of the soul assured of its
salvation through Christ, and so fearing nothing from
God and content with its earthly lot, of whatever sort that
is." Of such a Peace was the Risen Saviour Lord and
Prince. To His coming had the prophecies of old pointed
in their deeper meaning, and even as St. Paul's experience
of a Peace that passed understanding transcended the idea
of the Old Testament, so must the Being in Whom that Peace
was to be found have transcended in spirituality and in
power the foreshadowed Messiah of the Jews.

To sum up the foregoing remarks we may say generally
that Jesus was the Messiah. We have seen that He was
the Son of David, that in His ministry to the circumcision,
in His condemnation, death and resurrection. He was
fulfilling the promises of the Father. As He was the Holy
One and the Righteous One, so He suffered according to the
Scriptures. As Messiah He brought Deliverance, Pro-
tection, Sustenance and Peace. In fact, every spiritual
ideal and aspiration was fulfilled in Him. Whether St.
Paul could have had such high ideas of the Jewish Messiah
without attributing something of the divine nature to His
Being is a question we shall be in a better position to answer
later. At present we are forced to postulate for the Christ
a nature, in its humiliation and suffering human, in its sin-
lessness divine, a life that was truly lived, and a resurrection
which proved God's especial favour.

But we have further to consider three points of St. Paul's
Christology, on which there has been shed much light by
the recent study of contemporary documents.

1 Reading ex^fxev for ex'^"-^^ ^^ 'the authority of Cremer, though
the latter reading is better attested.

2 Lexicon of the New Testament, 4th edition, p. 182.

E

50 THE CHRISTOLOCxY OF ST. PAUL

6. Jesus Christ as " the Son of God." The Title in
THE Old Testament.

6. Jesus Christ as " the Son of God." The conception
of God as Father is first prominent in history in the intimate
relationship between God and the whole of His chosen
people. Israel is His son and firstborn (Ex. iv. 22. Cf.
Hos. xi. i). The term then acquires a more individual
application to the theocratic king as representing the nation.
So in Nathan's vision David's cry to God would be, " Thou
art my Father" (Ps. Ixxxix. 27). Of David's seed God
said, " He shall build an house for my name ... I will be
his Father, and he shall be my Son " (2 Sam. vii. 13, 14 ;
cf. Heb. i. 5, where it is Messianically interpreted). It is
in the Psalms that this relationship between God and the
whole people, and the theocratic king and his line as repre-
sentative of them, is beginning to be withdrawn and is
more and more applied to that dim figure yet to come,
even now in a vision " projected, as it were, upon the
clouds," and " invested with all the attributes of a person," ^
the Messiah. Such seems to be the reference in Psalm ii. 7.
Whilst there is probably an historical foundation for this
Psalm, there are three instances ^ of a Messianic inter-
pretation, and St. Paul quotes v. 7 as fulfilled in the Resur-
rection of Jesus Christ (Acts xiii. 33). The Resurrection
is the declaration {opicrOevTos) of Sonship (Rom. i, 4),
but His Sonship is concerned with the whole of His earthly
life. It is " the Son " Who was born of a woman ; i.e.,
took upon Himself our human nature {'yevo/Mevov e/c ywai-
K6<i, Gal. iv. 4), lived an earthly life in the likeness of sinful
flesh (ev ofJbOLwixari aapKO'? ajxap^ia^, Rom. viii. 3)» died
upon the Cross as an offering for sin [irepi afiaprias;), thus
condemning sin in the flesh, and finally was declared to be
Son of God in the Resurrection (Rom, i. 4).

1 Art. " Son of God." Prof. Sanday, H. D. B.

2 See Dalman, quoted by Prof. Sanday in above article.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 51

What, then, would the phrase " Son of God " mean for
St. Paul ? We are forced to inquire for answer into the
current use of the phrase in his time.^ It had long had
amongst the Jews a distinctly Messianic connotation. The
Messiah was " 6 vlo'i tov deov," the supreme representative
of God to Israel, and of Israel to God. He was endued
with divine powers by the Holy Spirit, beyond any of the
sons of men ^ (Enoch cv. 2). But writings contemporary
with St. Paul's day, apart from the Gospels and Epistles,
give us little information. It is therefore to the latter
that we turn for guidance as to the meaning of the phrase.

The meaning of the Title to Jesus and St. Paul
and their contemporaries.

It is clear that such an inquiry must first of all take into
account the different classes of persons who used the term.
Prof. Sanday has done this so admirably in his article on
" The Son of God," ^ that we cannot forbear quoting
extensively from it.

a. Contemporaries, Jewish and Non- Jewish.

1. The Populace. The confessions of the demoniacs
Mark iii. 11 ; v. 7, he writes, " looked at psychologically,"
could not mean more than that they believed themselves
to be in the presence of the Messiah. If we read into the
words a higher meaning we assume a providential extra-
ordinary action (which could, however, readily be felt by a
will that was dormant).

2. The Centurion (Luke xxiii. 47). Because of conflicting
parallels, doubt has been expressed as to whether the words

1 It is not likely that the cult of the Roman Emperors suggested
either word or idea. The Emperor was called "god " because his
father after liis death had been ranked among the gods. (Messianic
Interpretation, Prof. Knowling, p. 58.)

2 See Grimm-Thayer Lexicon, note on vlos.

'In H. D. B. See also his book Chrisiologies Ancient and
Modern, p. 180.

52 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

were really used. If we grant their genuineness, yet the
sense in which they were used would depend partly on the
nationality of the centurion, a point as to which we are
uncertain.

3. The Ruling Classes. The chief evidence is the question
of the High Priest, " Art thou the Christ, the Son of the
Blessed?"^ The reply contained two assertions, (i) the
admission of the charge, which was evidently regarded by
the Jewish audience as blasphemy. " Still it would not
follow that this was taken as an assertion of full Divinity.
It was probably taken as a claim to be the Messiah,"
superhuman indeed, but not strictly Divine, (ii) There was
the prophecy of the second Coming of Christ as a Judge.

4. The Disciples. St. Peter's confession, ^'^. " The Son "
(as distinguished from all others who may be called " sons ")
" of the Living God " (Matt. xvi. 16) is as much as to say
" the Son of Jehovah Himself " (the God of Revelation and
Redemption). "We are on the way," writes Dr. Sanday,
" to the airav'yaa^a 'rr}<i S6^r](; Koi ')^apaKrr]p t>}9 vrrocTTdcreu)^
of Heb. i. 3.

/3. To Jesus Himself. At the very least the title means
the expected Messiah.* It was the claim which the popular
mind understood Him to make. But for Jesus it meant
something far more. As He took up the conception of the

1 St. Mark xiv. 61. Cf. Parallels St. Matt. xxvi. 63 (" Son of
God "), St. Luke xxii. 70 (" They all said, ' Art thou then the Son
of God ? ' ")

2 Cf. Parallels.

3 Prof. H. Jones {Jesus or Christ P p: 10 1 ff.) insists upon the
sonship of all by denying the uniqueness of the Sonship of Jesus.
" The claims of Jesus are rendered meaningless, reduced into
mere playthings of the superstitious imagination, by being thus
made exclusive." As has been pointed out by the Rev. C. A.
Scott (/, T. S. xi. p. 302) it is through Christ historically that
humanity is convinced that it and the divine are " on one side."
Prof. Schmiedel refuses to use phrases such as " Son of God,"
which would make Jesus unique or the Mediator [Jesus or Christ?
p. 76). * See Heb. i. i.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 53

Son of Man, applied it to Himself, and filled it with living
meaning, so He took the title " Son of God " as the one
which covered " the relationship of the perfect man to God
— the perfection of Sonship in relation to God." ^

So with St. Paul. " Paul does not call Jesus the Son of God
because he has found in Him the Messiah. . . . Jesus is
the Son of God because, being the Spirit of Holiness, He
proceeds in His essence from the Divine nature." ^ It was
to prove that Jesus was " the Son of God " that St. Paul
laboured at Damascus.^ This meant both proving that He
was the Messiah, and further, setting forth a new conception
of Messiah.*

7. Jesus Christ as Judge.

7. We pass now to St. Paul's conception of Jesus Christ
as Judge.

Contemporary ideas on this subject are very important.
In the Similitudes of Enoch (c. ist century B.C.) Messiah sits
on the throne of His glory beside the Head of Days, judging
both men and angels (xl. i ; Ixii. 2, 3, 5 ; Ixix. 27, 29).

Imagery from Daniel is most certainly employed, though
in Daniel it is God who is judge, " the one like unto a Son
of Man " only then appearing to take the kingdom. The
idea of Messiah coming in the clouds of Heaven seems to
have been combined with the idea of His judgeship in 2 (4)
Esdras xiii. 3, etc., which is possibly pre-Christian. In any
case the Similitudes would probably be known to Jewish
scholars, and the conception therein of the august, super-
human Being, seated on the throne of the Almighty, and

1 Cf. The Chrisiology of Jesus, Dr. Stalker.

2 The Apostle Paul, Eng. trans. A. Sabatier, p. 334.
2 Acts ix. 20.

* Though Christ is not called " 'Son of God 'in2Thess. ii., He is
regarded as the opponent of Anti-Christ and so is the consubstantial
representative of God." Cf. Col. i. 12-15 '• Heb. i. 2-8; iii. 3. [Diet,
of C. and G., Art. " Divinity of Christ," Rev. A. S. Martin.)

54 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

judging all men would have been fairly familiar to St. Paul's
mind. We " wait for His Son from heaven whom He
raised from the dead, even Jesus which deUvereth us." ^
He is to come " with all His Saints." ^ He is to be
" revealed from Heaven with the angels of His power in
flaming fire, rendering vengeance to those that know
not God." ^ When the Lord comes, He will bring to
light the hidden things of darkness and make manifest
the counsels of the heart.'' It is before the judgment scat
of Christ that we shall all be made manifest.^ It may thus
well be that the idea of Christ returning to judge the world
shows a point of contact with the Jewish conceptions of
Messiah, and that St. Paul was led by his Lord to see herein a
true and abiding idea, which, if purified and vivified, must
take its place in Christian eschatology.^

8. Jesus Christ as " The Beloved."
8. " The Beloved," (6 j)<ya7rr]/jLevo<;) is an Old Testament
title for Israel. So it might easily come to be employed
of the Messiah (cf. " The Servant," " The Elect," " The
Holy One"). Moreover, we note that the titles, "The
Beloved," " The Elect," " Christ," were interchangeable at
this time.' Further, in the Ascension of Isaiah 6 ayaTnjTO'i of
the Messiah, and in early Christian literature 6 'Hyairrjfxevo'i
of our Lord, are frequently used.
We therefore conclude that the term was commonly applied

1 I Thess. i. lo. Cf. the expectation that Messiah would abide
for ever as king over an earthly kingdom.

2 1 Thess. iii. 13. Cf. Dan. vii. 13.

3 2 Thess. i. 7. * i Cor. iv. 5. '^ 2 Cor. v. 10.

* For the recent emphasis on the eschatological side of the beliefs
of the early Church see below, p. 212 ff. Prof. K. Lake thinks
that the Sacraments were the centre of Christianity for the Gentile
Christian and the expectation of the Parousia for the Jewish Chris-
tian.— Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, p. 437.

' Cf. Isa. xlii. i. in Heb. and LXX ; and see Eph. i. 6 where Iv
TO) 'ilyaTn]ixa'oi refers to Christ.

JESUS AS MESSIAH 55

to the Messiah at the time of St. Paul. Its probable meaning
cannot be disconnected from the Gospel phrase 6 vl6<i
fiov.oayaTTTjTO';," which means " My Son, the beloved," that
is " beloved " is a separate title. ^ He it is Who is especi-
ally the object of God's love (nirrJ^J), So the title is adopted
by St. Paul (Eph. i. 6), who sees in it a fitting expression for
the perfect relation of love between the Father and His only
Son. 2

Summary and Conclusion.

Looking back upon this chapter, containing many points
of contact with Jewish Messianic hopes, we are struck especi-
ally with one characteristic. It was, generally speaking,
the case that Jewish ideas of the Messiah started from the
human side. Their speculation proceeded KarwOev, in
contradistinction to that of Greek thinkers who, starting from
the Divine, may be said to have proceeded a I'w^ey. So it is
rather on the human side that we find Jesus Christ fulfilling
the highest conceptions of the Messiah that Jewish prophecy
or Apocalypse had expressed. It is His historical mission
that is pointed to : " The wonderful birth, the wonderful
works, the crucifixion, the resurrection, and the ascension
may be viewed as aspects of the work of the Son of Man and
of the Son of God — they are aspects of the work of salvation,
and of the coming forth from, and return to, the Father ;
but as enacted in time and space, they might be more appro-
priately described as belonging to the manifestation of the
Messiah." ^ We can thus see that, however else St. Paul
thought of Christ, He was in his eyes truly human, His life
was really lived on this earth. He had established for His
people a kingdom of Peace. Yet he was convinced that
Jewish scriptures and speculations carried us further. He
was the Holy and Righteous One. He was the prc-existent

^ See Ephesians, Dr. A. Robinson, p. 229.

2 Cf. The Doctrine of the Trinity.

3 Art. " The Son of God," H. D. D.. Prof. Sanday.

56 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Rock, the Son of God, the Coming Judge, the Beloved. The
Jews had vaguely conceived of one, who though human
was something more. In Him were to dwell attributes that
were Divine. St. Paul, even without the vision and con-
version, must have thought of the Messiah as God-sent and
God-strengthened. With the central experience of his life
behind him, every conception of his early days which was
seen to be fulfilled in Christ was purified and filled with the
loftiest and fullest meaning ; for his vision of Christ was a
vision of God. At the lowest estimate this conception of
Jesus Christ was as high as the highest estimate of the Mes-
siah among his people. At its true estimate, it implied that
God's eternal purpose was established through Christ, and
that the guiding hand of God in the history of the Jews was
recognized for the past and assured for the future. He real-
ized at last what Israel's mission to the world was, when he
flung aside the fetters of a narrow Judaism and went forth
to proclaim to mankind the Gospel of God and His Anointed.

CHAPTER IV

Jesus Christ as the Second Adam

General Remarks on the Source of the Doctrine.

ST. PAUL'S lofty conception of the Messiah as Incarnate
in Jesus Christ has impressed itself on most students
of his theology. It has, however, been regarded by many
of those who have been equally impressed by the very exalted
Messianic dogma of contemporary Judaism as merely a
development from that. The early Christians, believing
Jesus to be Messiah, attributed to Him the ideas then cur-
rent, and so created a superhuman person. Jesus is great
and heroic and divinely controlled.^ Further it has been
held that views so lofty cannot be developed from, or sup-
ported by, those which the Old Testament Scriptures reveal.
Wernle takes this view. " The Pauline gnosis claimed to
be a revealed exegesis of the Old Testament. But this
Christology cannot possibly have been obtained by exegesis
of the Old Testament, seeing it had been wrongly inserted
into every text." We cannot agree that such was the
relationship of St. Paul's doctrine either to current Messianic
thought or^ to the Old Testament writings. The one fails
to perceive the lofty spirituality of St. Paul, the other the
depth and meaning of the inspiration of the Old Testament.
Surely an accurate analysis of St. Paul's doctrine of the
Messiah must take account of both. There is no doubt
that Rabbinism and traditional influences affected St.
Paul's mind especially in the phraseology and thought-forms
1 So Bousset in his book Jesus.

57

58 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

of his Christology.^ There was a Jewish background to his
conceptions, a background in which the Old Testament was
prominent ; his habits of thought were in no small degree
Jewish ; and he dealt with existing contemporary thought
in a way that transformed it without destroying it, and
extracted all that was best, impressing upon it the stamp
of his own individuality as he saw in it something to which
the teaching of Christ led him. But he was by no means
a slave to Jewish tradition, nor is it possible to explain
his conceptions merely as the adoption of contemporary
Jewish thought.

May we, then, not discover another source outside, which,
alone or in combination with Jewish sources, would account
for St. Paul's spiritual conception of the Person and office
of the Christ. Prof. Pfieiderer thinks so. In the 1890
edition of his book on Paulinism he states that St. Paul
derives one part of his theology from the Jewish synagogue,
another from Alexandria, another from Hellenistic sources
such as the Book of Wisdom.^ Again, in his later book,
Early Christian Conceptions of Christ, he seems to reduce the
Christ of the earliest disciples to a kind of demon god, whom
he calls an " animistic personification." ^ Now such a line

1 As the Talmud says " A convert is a palimpsest."

2 The labelling of separate sources in this way is apt to be mis-
leading. There was a considerable intercourse between Egypt and
Palestine and Greece. E.g. under Ptolemy II, Jews were in import-
ant commands in the Egyptian army and the court of this king
afforded an excellent meeting ground for Jewish and Greek ideas.
In Philo we have a Jewish Platonist. " The Egyptian " (Acts
xxi. 38) could obtain a following in Palestine as a prophet.

3 Prof. Pfieiderer strikes a truer note in his " conclusions " when
he thus describes the value of parallels : — "The religious interpreta-
tion of those spiritual experiences . . . was the expression of the same
eternal law, whose sacred truth had impressed itself upon mankind
from the beginning — the law that the corn of wheat must die in
order to bring forth fruit, and that the Son of Man must suffer that
He may enter into His own glory " {Early Christian Conceptions
of Christ, p. 164).

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 59

of thought, however interesting and vahiable, may be in-
vested with a quite mistaken vahie. Prof. Bruce, in his
clear and valuable work on St. Paul, sees the " dull pedan-
try " into which this extreme tendency carries the critic.
" It is a mistake," he says, " to be constantly on the look-
out for sources of Pauline thought in previous or contem-
porary literature " ; and again (quoting Giinkel), " The
theology of the great apostle is the expression of his experi-
ence, not of his reading, a remark which applies both to the
Old Testament, the Apocrypha, Philo and the Scribes."
So Dr. Kennedy avers that he has no sympathy " with those
who reduce great factors in the spiritual or intellectual
history of the race to mere bundles of influences which can
be discovered and classified by minute analysis."

It is with the conviction that we cannot thus satisfactorily
analyse St. Paul's conceptions, nor indeed understand them
at all, except in view of that experience by which all the
different converging lines of thought were at last united in
the single portrait of the Christ, that we turn to a con-
sideration of the characteristic Pauline expression of the
work and person of Christ as " the Second Adam." It is
not without connexion with the last chapter, but the phrase
has a history, a value and a teaching of its own.

Contemporary Jewish Ideas on the Subject.

The general idea of the Second Adam was by no means
unknown in contemporary Jewish literature. We first turn
to Philo. In his system the highest and most generic of all
was God as pure being. Then came His Logos, the real
unifying principle of all below. " It was by virtue of His
Reason that God was both ruler and good, or in other words
creation and providence were both expressions of reason." ^
So, avoT^To? /cocr/io9 must have existed in the mind of God
before the world came into being. The Logos is the IBea

1 Philo, Prof. Drummond.

6o THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Twv IBecov, the supreme, archetypal idea. He is image of
God, and archetype of man. In his interpretation of Gene-
sis, moreover, Philo distinguishes between the Adam of
Genesis i. 27 and the Adam of ii. 7, finding in the first the
ideal man after God's image, remaining with God as a
heavenly pattern. The second is the earthly man.

Turning to the Talmud, we find passages ^ to the effect
that Adam's sin is his own, not the sin of the race. Yet
the death sentence went forth on the race as a result of that
sin ; and, moreover, the tendency to evil lying dormant
in the flesh was aroused and fostered. We must, of course,
remember that the Talmud did not come into being as a
connected and definite whole till about 200 a.d.,^ when there
had been room for development in Jewish theology ; and
it is for experts to determine how far St. Paul borrowed or
adapted the Talmudic ideas of his time. The " Last Adam "
seems, however, to have been a familiar title for the Messiah
in his day. Contemporary thought, following Philo, dis-
tinguished the first and second Adam in creation, but it is sig-
nificant that it went further and identified the " last Adam "
with the Messiah. Schottgen quotes {inter alia), " quemad-
modum homo primus fuit primus in peccato, sic Messias
erit ultimus ad auferendum peccatum penitus " and " Ada-
mus postremus est Messias " from " Neve Shalom " (ix. 9).
Thus in Alexandrian speculation there was the idea of an
archetypal man existing before the imperfect, earthly
representation should come into being, and in Palestinian
Rabbinism there was a distinct approximation to the Apos-
tle's idea of Christ as the Second Adam and Messiah.

In describing St. Paul's use of this phrase, two passages
will come particularly before our notice. The first gives
prominence more especially to the work of the Second Adam,
the second lays the emphasis rather on His Person.

1 Quoted by Weber.

2 Though naost of the material is much older.

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 6i

(i) The term is used in that section of the Epistle to the
Romans in which St. Paul proves that justification can never
come by the Law.^ His argument is a fourfold one. First
of all, he appeals to universal experience. It is a matter
of common observation that sin is widely, or, as the Apostle
certainly believes, universally prevalent. He then pro-
ceeds to show how the Law brings a knowledge of sin,
" For by the law is the knowledge of sin." A further stage
in the proof is reached in the passage where Christ is spoken
of as the Second Adam ; and by giving his argument a
personal turn the final step in the demonstration of the in-
herent sinfulness of humanity is reached as he sets forth
his own experiences and struggles to show how sin works
even now in man.

The "Adam-Christ" section of "Romans." A
Parallel and a Contrast.

It is of the "Adam-Christ " Section alone that we can treat
here. Wherein does that proof consist ? It starts from
the fundamental assumption that death is the result of sin.
Death is universal and therefore all have sinned. In what
sense are they sinners ? ^ The answer lies in the truth that
in mankind there is a moral unity and soHdarity. We know
from his other arguments that St. Paul recognized that the
law and, before the law, conscience roused the immediate
knowledge of sin into being ; but here the thought is the
physical, organic connexion of generation with generation.
One man, Adam, sinned, and so death passed upon all,

1 Rom. iii. 20. " Therefore by the works of the law shall no
flesh be justified."

2 Prof. Gardner {op. cit. pp. 163, 164) suggests that St. Paul took
two views in regard to sin, one " quasi-historic," concerned with
the idea of the Second Adam ; and one " anthropologic or mystic,"
that man is by nature prone to sin. The Church by the doctrine
of original sin endeavours to reconcile the two.

3 Rom, V, 12 . . . . €<^' (S 7ravT€s ijjxapTov. The Vulgate renders

62 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

even upon " them that had not sinned after the likeness
of Adam's transgression," ^ and thus including children
dying in infancy,^ But, in all this, Adam was only a figure
of Him Who was to come (tutto? tov /ieWoi/ro?) . St. Paul
is thus brought to the idea of the Second Adam, Whom he
saw in Jesus Christ. This conception implied a likeness and
a distinction, a parallel and a contrast between the First and
Second Adam. They were parallel in the scope of their
influence. The work of each was to influence the whole
human race. They are contrasted and directly opposed in
the nature of that influence. " How superior the work
of Christ ! (i) How different in quality ; the one act all
sin, the other act all bounty or grace ! (v. 15). (ii) How differ-
ent in quantity or mode of working ; one act tainting the
whole race with sin, and a multitude of sins collected together
in one only to be forgiven ! (v. 16). (iii) How different and
surpassing in its whole character and consequences : a reign
of Death and a reign of Life ! (v. 17). Summarising : Adam's
Fall brought sin : Law increased it : but the Work of Grace
has cancelled, and more than cancelled, the effect of Law." ^

A Consideration of i Cor. xv. 45, 47.

(ii) We are thus naturally led to the thought of i Cor.
XV. 45, 47. There it is shown that it is only in the
spiritual life, in vital relation to Christ alone, that this grace
is obtained, just as our vital relation to Adam physically made
us what we are. The first Adam indeed became living soul

it " in quo peccaverunt," i.e., " in whom.". . . But ^^' <L means
" because." Nevertheless the Vulgate is right in idea ; ■^/j.apTov
is Aorist indicating a single act at a definite time. We may perhaps
take the difficult phrase, with Drs. Sanday and Headlam (p. 134) on
" Romans," as meaning " If they sinned their sin was due in part
to tendencies inherited from Adam."

1 Rom. V. 14.

2 Following Professor Bruce we would take " death " throughout
this passage as physical.

3 Ep. to Romans, Drs, Sanday and Headlam, p. 138.

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 63

i^^^Xn) when God breathed into him that breath of hfe, which
was psychical rather than spiritual (i Cor. xv. 45). He
was "of the earth, earthy" (e« 7)"}?, xo'Cko^;). He was in
a " natural," sensuous, undeveloped condition. This was
his nature as distinguished from his work. It is not that
he was therefore mortal. Death was the wages of sin.
He was capable of immortality as well as death. It is that
" he was man as nature presents him to our experience." *
But the last Adam^ was constituted a life-giving spirit.'
He was the Second Man from Heaven.^

On these words many theories of St. Paul's view of Christ
have been built. They may conveniently be classed under
four heads ; —

First, the Pre-existent Man Theory.

The theory of the Pre-existent Man is upheld by
Baur, Holtzmann, Schmiedel, and many others. Inter-
preting these two verses in the light of the Philonian and
Rabbinical quotations mentioned above, they see in them
a reference to Jesus Christ as the Archetype of humanity,
the ideal Heavenly Man, the divinely-constituted Lord of
the human race. As such He was Pre-existent. In his
essential being He was man, and no more. As " Pneumatic
man " He existed in a celestial body to be in due time
manifested on earth as the Pattern Man, "6 /jieWcov" (Rom.
V. 14). Ritschl too inclines to this view. He holds that
the " fiopcfyrjv SovXov " of Phil. ii. 7, would have been
" /jLop(f>T]v avdpcoTTov " if Christ was man on earth only.^

1 Art. " Adam," H. D. B., Dr. Denney.
^ 6 €o-;^aTos 'ASa/x,.

' iyivero . . . ets 7rvevfJ.a ^oiorroLovv I Cor. XV. 45.
* 6 ScwTfpos av^pcoTTOS e't ovfiavov I Cor. XV. 47.
^ But, surely, the use of " ixop4>iiv Soi'Aou " is amply explained
by the context as meaning His Humanity.

64 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Some Objections to this View.
This theory as a whole has justly met with strong opposi-
tion, Haupt on Phil. ii. 5-1 1 says he cannot discover
the Pre-existent Man-Christ in St. Paul's writings. Both
Klopper and Schmidt also oppose it. Weizsacker denies
that any trace of the idea is to be found. Numerous argu-
ments occur to us which seem to raise too great a barrier
to its acceptance. Such are : —

1. It is in disagreement with other passages which teach
pre-existence and which will be dealt with later, e.g. Col.
i. 15, 16, where Christ is the instrument of creation. The
h fiop^fj Oeov of Phil. ii. 6 seems to be impossible for One
Who was merely a created model.

2. Prayer to a creature would be impossible to St. Paul.
It would be equally impossible to worship any one not
essentially God. His whole training, based as it was on
uncompromising monotheism (which neither Jesus nor St.
Paul gave up ^) forbade it. Moreover it was one great sin
of the Gentile world to worship and serve the creature " to
the neglect of " [irapa] ^ the Creator. St. Paul takes up his
polemic against those who, professing themselves to be wise,
became fools and changed the glory of the uncorruptible
God unto an image made like to corruptible man. What
the experience of his Jewish youth had taught him, his words
as a Christian Apostle show is still, and for ever would be,
true for him. God is " all in all," and to Him alone was due
worship, honour and praise from the creature. We are
reminded of the weighty words of Sabatier, " There is in
every human personality a negative element, a residuum
which our admiration sets aside. This limitation separates
the adherence of the disciple from the faith of the believer.
It distinguishes enthusiasm from adoration."

1 Cf. The VW of Deut. vi. 4 with St. Mark xii. 29 (and Parallels),
" *Akou€, 'lo-paT/Xj Ki'ptos 6 ©€0S i^/xaiv Kv/dios eis Icttlv," and with
I Cor. viii. 4 " ouSeis ©eo9 erf/sos ct jxrj ct?."

2 So Drs, Sanday and Headlam hereon, p. 46.

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 65

3. By the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ the law
of Redemption was made clear to St. Paul. This law could
hardly be universal if Christ was merely the " Heavenly
Man " in the sense we are considering. Christ is the agent
in the creation of the universe, " the vital principle uphold-
ing and pervading all that exists." " The Son is the image
of the invisible God, the first born of all creation, for in
Him [iv avTw) were all things created in the Heavens and
upon the Earth. . . . All things were created through Him
(St' avTov), and unto Him (et? avrbv). And He is before
all things {-Trpo irdvTwv) and in Him [iv avrw) all things
cohere {awearriKe) " (Col. i. 16 and 17). All things are
summed up in Christ (Eph. i. 10). " Christ is all, and in
all " (Col. iii. 11). Lastly, in the same passage from which
the phrase under consideration is taken, occur the verses
(i Cor. XV. 24-28) where the reign of Christ is regarded as
co-extensive with all history, and with the universe, not
only with mankind and the earth. ^ So in the Redemp-
tion wrought by Christ, the earnest expectation of the
creature, even the brute and unintelligent creation, waiting
with eager straining longing for the manifestation of the
sons of God, will be answered. The dumb and the unin-
telligent, creation [icTia-i^) as well as the " sons of God,"
creation in its imperfection and mystic beauty, its kindness
and its cruelty, its perpetual decay and renovation, shall
share in the blessings of Redemption. The old shall be
transformed. " New heavens and new earth," a new abode
shall be prepared ^ for the new man in Christ Jesus. Re-
demption is a movement that is " truly cosmic." "The
sons of God are not selected for their own sakes alone,
but their redemption means the redemption of a world of
being besides themselves." ^ Such a cosmic view of the

1 The writer is indebted to Dr. Inge {Christian Mysticism, pp.
55, 56) for much of this note. 2 ^,.oi'7y. Cf. St. John xiv. 2-23.
3 Sanday and Headlam, Ep. to Romans, p. 212.

F

66 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

relation between Christ and creation, and between creation
and redemption in Christ, is incompatible with the theory
of the pre-existent man. The imiverse is created, living
through, and sustained by, the eternal word iv ^op(f>T}
deov. It is the Universe redeemed that demands an incarnate
Sa\dour presenting the paradox of the Universal and Absolute
manifested in space and time, a hvmian life and death, of
a union between the finite human and the infinite Di\'ine.
The redemption of material things, the restoration of nature
is a corollary- from the Christian doctrine of the Resurrection
of the body. " In the consummation of man lies also the
consummation of cdl created things." ^ The Redemption,
if it is an act of utmost love, is not only the Incarnation of
a Being, previously himian ; it is rather a voluntary hum-
bling and emptying, and a taking of humanity to Himself,
as never before, by a union of two natures. If such a
union did not take place at the Incarnation, this loses its
moral appeal as well as its efficacy, and the Church's reading
of the Scriptures, and interpretation of Christian teaching
have been, throughout the ages, mistaken.

It is commonly asserted that the natural meaning of " the
Second Man from Heaven " is " One ^^^lo was pre-existent
as man." This however is by no means admitted. We
shall discuss the probable meaning below.

4. According to Philo, whose speculations the supporters
of this theory- say that St. Paul adopted, the Ideal Man is first
in order of time.^ Afterwards comes the carnal, psychic,
imperfect man. But St. Paul's order is the reverse, as has
been frequently pointed out. " That is not first which is
spiritual, but that which is natural." It would rather seem
that St. Paul is here directly attacking Pliilonism, and con-

1 Westcott, Gospel of Life, p. 237 ff.

* Philo was ciiming at reconciling the Old Testament with the
Platonists. The Philonic doctrine was of man as we know him ; St.
Paul's of man looked at in the light of his own experience in Christ.

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 67

tradicting its tenets. F®r these reasons, then, we are to
reject the theory of the Pre-existent Man as quite inade-
quate to meet the facts.

Secondly, the Ideal Pre-existence.
A second theory regards St. Paul as teaching that Christ
in His pre-existent state was Head and Archetype " in
posse "only, not " in esse." The " Idea" alone pre-existed
in the mind of God. Jesus Christ is the temporal mani-
festation of the Eternal Idea of the Sonship of man to God.
In the same way, in the passage in Rom. v. 12-21, Adam
as an historical person is not compared with the historical
Jesus. It is the sinner compared with the Ideal Man. St.
Paul is there, as in i Cor. xv. 46, speaking of ideas not facts.^
So Weizsacker, in dealing with Rom. v. 12-21, writes, " The
last Adam had been from the beginning, yet He was not merely
last in earthly history, but His essential nature, hitherto
latent, only became active from and after His resurrection."
W^eizsacker also prefers to look for this conception rather
in contemporary Palestinian theology than in Philo. There
is found in the Talmud and in the Targums the idea that
God was preparing the Messiah in Heaven, reserving Him till
the time of Revelation, and in that sense He was pre-
existent and " from Heaven." ^ In Rabbinic literature
there was the notion of One born of David's line caught up
from earth and kept in Heaven or Paradise till the time for
His advent. This conception seems to have been before the
authors of the Jewish apocalyptic literature. For instance,
in 2 (4) Esdras the Son of Man is regarded as a man coming
from the sea flying with the clouds of Heaven. After aveng-
ing the enemies of God He is to reign for a long time in peace

1 So Wernle, Beginnings of Christianity, vol. i. p. 249.

2 When the Jews wished to speak of anything as divine, they
endowed it with some definite attribute of God ; e.g., the Law was
said to have pre-existed. So of Messiah the idea of a man, sinless
though tempted, and consistently inspired, was expressed in this
way.

68 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

and prosperity, and then He and all flesh will die. Then
comes the general resurrection, the judgment by the Most
High, and a new world.^ St. Paul was familiar with these
speculations, and they point to his real meaning when he
uses the phrase " The Man from Heaven."

The Raison d'etre of this View.
The comparison on the whole, however, tells against this
interpretation. In fact, the whole justification of this
position lies in the belief of its supporters that it preserves
" the religious interest in a form more consonant to the
modern consciousness." The modern consciousness, how-
ever, cannot claim to be the interpreter as well as the test
of St. Paul's ideas, and to read its supposed conclusions into
them is bound to lead to misunderstanding. The highest
tendencies of the " modern consciousness " will find their
truest satisfaction in wise and sober scholarship and exege-
sis far more surely than in the theories of any biblical
Procrustes, however ingenious or brilliant he may be.

Objections to this View.
The majority of modern scholars, including Beyschlag,
have now abandoned this view. Beyschlag affirms that
such statements are " an imperfect mode of setting forth
the truth that the temporal appearance of Christ must be
traced back to an eternal basis." Amongst the many rea-
sons that have been suggested, or suggest themselves, for a
rejection of this theory, we note the following : (i) The fact
that it does not accord with the rest of St. Paul's writings.
This is admitted by all, and, in answer to it, the plea of the
" modern consciousness " is advanced. We can immedi-
ately perceive upon what a wide sea of difficulty and doubt
we are cast loose by a refusal to attribute even that value
which historical criticism, sober exegesis, and personal
experience lead us to assign to our sacred writings. Moro-

1 Art. " Messiah," H. D. B., Prof. V. H. Stanton.

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 69

over, to reject one portion of the undoubted writings of an
author in the explanation of another portion thereof seems
arbitrary and unreasonable in the extreme. In the inter-
pretation of this passage we are concerned rather with what
St. Paul really meant than with what certain interpreters
of the " modern consciousness " believe he ought to have
meant.

(ii) When one thinks of St. Paul as a mystic and remem-
bers his wonderful " life in Christ," it seems impossible
that the object of his faith was an " Idea " however elevated,
however sublime. Christ was not merely for him an exam-
ple, a pattern of how earthly life should be lived ; otherwise
the parallelism between the first and second Adam would
fail at the crucial point. Our nature is Adam's nature and
derived from him. Jesus Christ was a Person in whom the
Apostle found the consummation of his own being. Whose
riches of wisdom and power were unsearchable. Whose
grace could make the weak and trusting more than con-
querors in the strife. If Christ may be seen and perceived
by the soul, if the Divine light is already shining within us,
if the heart is pure and there are love and faith to guide us
on the path that leads to Him, it is impossible, as a matter
of simple experience, that the object of our hope should be
merely an Idea. Only in a Personality can our personalities
find their ultimate source and perfection.i To regard Christ as
a mere embodiment or illustration of a living Idea, and then
to assert that " I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me " 2
would be the hallucination of a madman or a fool. Even
Schleiermacher, though he thought that it is not essential
for a Christian to believe in the literal Resurrection, empha-
sized the fact that His Person is pre-eminent over all, and
that He is the Creator of a new and spiritual race. So

1 See Moherly , Atonement and Personality, lUingworth, Personality,
Human and Divine c.u., Von Hiigel, Mystical Element in Religion.

2 Gal. ii. 20. See Moberly, op cit. pp. 254, 255. See also below,
p. 217 fi.

70 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Somerville clearly and forcibly writes of " Christ as Eternal."
" The mind seems to demand that He should be in His own
Person distinctive, should be more and greater than they
who are to benefit by their connection with Him, and the
Scripture representation of Him as eternally pre-existent,
descending into a connexion with us from a higher life, best
meets that postulate." ^

(iii) The Incarnation is itself a revelation of God's love.
So St. Paul believes (Phil. ii. i-ii, also 2 Cor. v. 19 . . .
Oeo^ ■^v iv XpccFTQi Kocr/Jiov KaraWda-croyv eavTM ; and
2 Cor. viii. 9). The Christian revelation that God is love
postulates One eternally begotten from the Father before
all worlds, the object — the Son — of the Father's love.^ The
Incarnation is robbed of its meaning if Christ was but the
illustration or incarnation of an Idea.

(iv) It is inconceivable that the Word of God, the Logos,
ever became a Person. He was either a Person from all
eternity, or remained for ever an Idea.

Thirdly, The Pre-existent God-Man,
Dr. Edwards' clearly-written and suggestive Davies
lectures on " The God-Man," state the theory next to be
considered. In his excellent summaries, he thus defines
his position. He is considering the relationship of the
Son in the Trinity.

(i) The Son, as God, is co-eternal with the Father ; as
God the Son, originated from the Father.

(ii) The Son, as God, is co-equal with the Father ; as God
the Son, subordinate to the Father. The Son as co-eternal
and co-equal with the Father is God, as originated from
and subordinate to the Father He is in idea Man. So, in the

1 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, Dr. Somerville, p. 198. Sec
particularly Illingworth, Personality Human and Divine, Lect. I.
p. 22; Lect. II. p. 26 ff. (Macmillan & Co., 6d. edition).

- See Illingworth, Divine Immanence, and Gore, Creed of a Chris-
tian (Dialogue on the Holy Trinity).

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 71

Trinity, the Son is Archetypal Man. The Incarnation is
the birth of the Son of God as actual man in ethical obedi-
ence to His Father. The immanence of God in Man alone
makes this possible for " finitumcapax infiniti " ; just as
man, if he is to know God at aU, must be a partaker of the
Divine nature.^ Thus Christ pre-existed not as God alone,
nor as man alone, but as God and man in essential union.
So Christ was from aU eternity God-Man, eternally in God,
yet the ideal Man, the archetype of humanity.^ In the
image of Him our race was made. The Incarnation is thus
only a change of state — an assumption not of our nature
but of our flesh. In the main this is the view held by many
English thinkers, including such of exceptional brilliance
as Professor F. D. Maurice and Dr. Dale. The ground
principle which supports this theory is really an attempt to
account for the kinship between God and Man, to explain
the immanence of God in Man and Man in God, the essential
correspondence between the Human and the Divine.* In
support of this idea Dr. Edwards cites i Corinthians xv.
45-47, the passage now under consideration. He refuses
to accept the view * that Christ acquires a glorified body in
heaven after the Resurrection and comes therein at the
" irapovaua."

For his own interpretation he gives the following reasons,
on which we will comment in turn : —

(i) i/c 7^9 when used of Adam refers to his original state,
and therefore " dvdpfaTroc; e| ovpavov " refers to the pre-
incarnate state of Christ. We do not, however, grant the
hypothesis. Are not " i/c 77}? " and " e^ ovpavov " descrip-
tions not of a state, but of nature or origin ? Adam
was typical of, and the head of, a race, of psychic, carnal
origin. He was " ^otVcd?." Christ was " heavenly " in

1 Cf. lUingworth, Personality Human and Divine, Lect. V.

2 So Professor F. D. Maurice and Dr. Dale.

3 See John i. 18. * Of Meyer, Weiss, Pfleiderer, etc.

72 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

His origin and nature. He was " iirovpavLo^." He was
pre-existent indeed but not necessarily pre-existent as man.
All that the words tell us is that He, Who, in the fullness of
time, took upon Him our flesh, and so became the Second
Adam, and the Head of a race of spiritual men, was in His
origin and nature divine (e| ovpavov).

(ii) St. Athanasius says that " e| ovpavov " means
eTTovpdvio'i, and is used of the Logos coming from Heaven.
We have already implied that this may be so, but we still
fail to see how the phrase " The Heavenly Man " would
necessarily imply more than a Person who, though he
became Man, yet was in origin Heavenly,^ The Person of
Christ, perfect God, perfect man, was " eVoi/pai/io?,"
Heavenly, and it is perfectly natural and justifiable to speak
of Him as the " Man from Heaven " (o avdpwiro'i e| ovpavov)
without postulating a pre-existence as God and man. More-
over, St. Athanasius is not the only early Father who men-
tions the text. A reading by no means uncommon which
became inserted into the Textus Receptus (occurring in
Origen, Chrysostom and Theodoret) is " 6 KvpLo<i e| ovpavov."
The phrase was evidently not understood in later time to
refer to Christ's pre-incarnate existence as archetypal man.
It was the " Lord from Heaven " who was the Second Man.
He, Who now is exalted. Lord of Lords and King of Kings,
sitting on His Father's right hand in Heaven is at the same
time Head of the new race of mankind.

(iii) In the last place " from Heaven " cannot, it is said,
refer to the Incarnation, for St. Paul says that " Christ was
made of a woman, born under the law." It must refer
then to Christ in the pre-existent state as man. It is
pointed out that the idea of the passage is change. The
words cannot imply that Christ's body was actually from
Heaven. St. Paul must therefore mean that He is the Ideal

1 We remember that " Children and the fruit of the womb are an
heritage from Jehovah."

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 73

and Archetypal Man. We venture to doubt whether the
phrase " e| ovpavov " as interpreted of the Incarnation is
necessarily in conflict with the other statements which St. Paul
made concerning the Incarnation of Christ. If he believed
that the Eternal Son of God became man, and was born of
a human mother, it would not present a contradiction to
him to call Him both " from heaven " and " born of a
woman, born under the law."

A Further Objection to this Theory.
There is one other objection which suggests itself. The
theory is built upon the belief that Christ was pre-existent as
G od as well as man . 1 1 is agreed that there were not two Per-
sons in Christ. That is inconceivable ; but on this theory
it seems an unavoidable conclusion, unless there is no dif-
ference between being perfectly human and perfectly
divine, that is, unless " Perfect man " and " Perfect God " are
merely descriptions of the same nature from different points
of view.i His nature is twofold not single. He is both
perfect God and perfect man. Existing before the Incar-
nation 2 He emptied Himself, taking the " fiop(f)j]v SovXov,"
being made^ in the likeness of men, and, being found in
outward resemblance as a man. He humbled Himself *
(Phil. ii. 7), These words and the view we are at present
considering, seem to be irreconcileable. If we hold that
" fiop^ri " has reference not to accidents but to " essence,"
the teaching of this passage seems clearly to be that Jesus
Christ, in essence before the Incarnation God, by a process
of self-emptying,^ took ^ the essential being of a servant,
and so humbled Himself, being further obedient even to

^ We are conscious that a great deal of the vague thinking about
the subject is influenced by the philosophical and poetical panthe-
ism of many teachers and poets popular to-day. E.g., Swinburne
writes in Hertha, speaking as in the person of God —

" Man, equal and one with me . . . man that is I."

* €v fiopcfir] 6eov-

* yevdfievos. * tTaTretVujJ'ci' iavTov. ^ eairrov iKevtoaey, • Xa^wV'

74 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

the death of the Cross, Not a word or hint is here given
that, before the " Kenosis," Christ was existing essentially
as man as well as " iv fj'Op(f)f} deov."

We therefore hold that little or no support will be found
in St. Paul's writings for this theory ; and that Weiz-
sacker was right when he says, " There is no trace in Early
Jewish Christianity of a theology in which Jesus was held
to have existed as a heavenly man." ^ God pre-existed
ah aevo and God was in Jesus.

The Real Meaning of the Passage.

It seems best then to take the words " from Heaven "
as indicating merely " origin '" and " nature." This as
we have seen may, perhaps, indirectly imply the pre-exist-
ence^ of the Person spoken of as the " second man," but
not the pre-existence as Man. Of the particular form
of His Pre-existence, the passage teUs us nothing. We are
left to gather that from other passages and accordingly
conclude that it was " eV /iop^?; deov," not " eV /Jiop(f)fi
deov Kol avdpcoirov." The whole passage (i Cor. xv. 45-47)
might refer to the Exalted Christ,^ a view which the
context appears to support. The Second Man would then
be the Risen, not the Pre-incarnate, Christ. He is the " Son
from heaven " for Whom we wait (i Thess. i. 10). As such,
He is clothed with His spiritual body, the " house from
heaven." Indeed the use of the phrase " from heaven "
in this and other passages ought to make us cautious how
far we apply it to the idea of pre-existence. For if we say
that the " Second Man from heaven " implies " Pre-exist-

1 See The Apostolic Age. Weizsacker, vol. i. bk. ii. c. ii. §xi. (" The
Nature of Christ "). On this quotation there are two remarks to be
made ; (i) The statement applies to St. Paul whether included in
" Early Jewish Christianity " or not in the intention of its author.
(2) When Weizsacker adds " or Divine Being " we should join issue
with him. ^ gee below p. 103 ft. ^ Amongst those who take

this view is Holtzmann, who nevertheless, strange to say, upholds
the idea that Christ was essentially man and no more.

JESUS CHRIST AS THE SECOND ADAM 75

ent Man " must we not say that the body which is " from
heaven " Hkewise imphes a " pre-existent body " ? ^ Of a
pre-existent body we cannot conceive without soul and
personahty. So that by applying a like exegesis to the phrase
" body from heaven " we arrive at the theory that we are
incarnations of pre-existent personalities. It is, however,
the fleeting fashion of the body of our humiliation that is
fashioned anew}

We are inclined to think that here, as so often, too much
has been read into a simple phrase, and great theories have
been constructed on a basis far too slender to uphold them.

The Bearing of this Doctrine on St. Paul's
Christology.

We come then to consider positively how far we are
helped in our understanding of St. Paul's Christology by
his doctrine of the Second Adam.

(i) In the firstjplace we learn to look on the Second Adam
as the " life-giving Spirit." Christ is the Head of a New
Humanity. Each member of Him is filled with and Hves
His life. He alone is the source of all spiritual life. The
believer is baptized into His death, is buried with Him,
and rises in Him to newness of life.^ In him Christ is
formed until he attain to the fullness of His stature.*

1 So in St. John iii. 13, " o Ik tov ovpavov Karaf^d^ " "he that
descended out of heaven (even the Son of Man) does not mean
that the Son of Man as such pre-existed in heaven. It is an asser-
tion of the directness of His knowledge by nature, and " immediate
vision." The expression ' He who being Incarnate is the Son of Man '
" preserves the continuity of the Lord's personahty, and yet does
not confound His natures " (see Westcott, ad loc).

2 And though this house is " eternal," " in the heavens," it is
not reached until this body of humiliation is transformed and fixed
in the permanent form of His own body — that of His risen glory.
St. Paul leaves no trace of a doctrine of existence in a body before
life on earth, and such an interpretation as the one we are refuting
would lead us to speculations rather Buddhist than Christian.

3 See Rom. vi. 1-14.

* See below on " Christ as Immanent," p. 130.

76 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

(ii) As has been pointed out above, and as follows from
the fact that the Second Adam is the life-giving Spirit,
Christ is regarded not merely as an example ; otherwise
the parallel between Him and the first Adam would break
down just where the argument demands it. If Christ has
entered as deeply into our nature as Adam does, we shall
attain in Him to the new spiritual manhood of which He
is the Archetype.

(iii) We may gather from the whole conception that no
one less than a Being essentially God could, in St. Paul's
eyes, have accompHshed the work which the Second Adam
did. St. Paul is here approaching Christ on the human side.
Christ as Man was the Head of a new Humanity, a spiritual
race. He was indeed truly Man, but St. Paul's very con-
ception of Him as Man postulates a Person who was far more.
" It sets Him," says SomerviUe, " on a platform where he
stands apart, superior, supreme. We are forced back on the
recognition of a nature in Him that is an absolutely new
fact, and is identified in a special way with the life of God." ^
We would go further and say that only by first realizing the
absolute Divinity of Jesus Christ can one understand and
appreciate the Pauline doctrine of the Second Adam. Such
an exalted view of Christ as Man could only emanate from
an intense conviction that Christ was actually and in essence
God.

1 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, p. 69.

CHAPTER V

Christ the Redeemer

The Relation between St. Paul's views of the Redeem-
ing Work and the Person of Christ.

'^F^HE deeper the personal experience of our redemption
X in Christ Jesus, and the wider the significance we
assign to it, the more we shall be impressed and awed by
that central miracle and mystery of our faith — the per-
sonality of the Redeemer. It was so in the Primitive
Church. As long as Jewish Christians looked for an exter-
nal material deliverance, as long as they failed to perceive
the deep, spiritual significance of Christ's life and death,
so long did their views of His Person remain crude, mater-
ialistic and national,^ so long would they see in Him merely
a wonder-worker, approved indeed of God, but, it may be,
not intimately concerned with events on the earth until
the day when He should be revealed in all His power to
deliver His people. The primitive Church as a whole had,
we may well believe, got far past this stage. There was
naturally among Jewish Christians a clinging to ancient
forms of belief, to old ideas and undeveloped conceptions ;
but, as the force and beauty and spiritual demands of the
Christian life were felt by them, these influences must have
tempered or destroyed all their cruder notions by the new
light they shed upon life. When we come, jndeed, to study

1 The Jewish Christians from the Dispersion had, however, a
more spiritual view to begin with. They could not go up to the
Temple, and there was also the constant influence of Greek thought.

77

78 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

St. John and St. Paul, we can see how that process had
reached its consummation in them. Though imagery from
Jewish eschatology had been largely adopted in the Early
Church, the letters of St. Paul bear evidence that Chris-
tianity and legalism had entered upon a death struggle.
In spite of all the points of contact with Judaism, the
Christians were living a new life. " It was a life of forgiven
sin, of filial trust, of brotherly service, of present com-
munion with Christ. . . . The sanctification, without
which no man shall see the Lord (Heb. xii. 14) was not
only the ideal, but to a large extent a characteristic of their
daily living. Thus the life experiences of the Early Chris-
tians, even as revealed in such books as the Acts, are truer
to the teaching of the Master than a superficial study of the
use of such theological terms as " Salvation " and " King-
dom " would seem to indicate. Much more shall we find
this the case, when we pass to the more developed concep-
tions of St. Paul and St. John." ^

Preparation for the full Christian Doctrine of
Redemption.
It is our business first of all to obtain as clear a concep-
tion of St. Paul's idea of Redemption as his writings permit.
We can then estimate more accurately the Christology
which that idea presupposes. As we consider the history
of God's chosen people, we see how the New Testament
idea of Redemption is the consummation and crown of
the ideas of Salvation and Redemption to which the Old
Testament gives expression. 2 As a Jew, St. Paul would

1 Art. " Salvation, Saviour," H. D. B., Prof. W. Adams Brown.

2 It is true that the Greek pagan and mystic Societies had as
their deity a ^cos crwrr/p, " and the Society sought through fellow-
ship with him to reach a state of (XMr-qpia, safety or salvation "
{Religious Experience of St. Paul, Prof. Gardner, p. 82 ; Earlier
Epistles of St. Paul, Prof. Kirsopp Lake, p. 45). The real root of
St. Paul's doctrine lay, however, in the Old Testament, as the
following detailed examination attempts to show.

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 79

inherit the grateful love of his race to Jehovah for deliver-
ance past, and their steadfast hope of salvation for the future.
He had read, in early days, the account of the deliverance
of Israel from Egypt, how Jehovah redeemed (^^^J) them
with a mighty hand and with a stretched-out arm (Exod.
XV. 13). He had followed the story of their salvation from
danger and distress, from defeat in battle when " Jehovah
of hosts " ^ (of the armies of Israel) raised up " saviours "
in the days of the Judges. The Psalms had sung their im-
passioned music to his soul, now plaintive like the cry of a
bird with a broken wing, now tender with compassion for
the poor and the sad, now charged with the burden of a
conscience-stricken heart, now glad with hymns of deliver-
ance, now glowing with visions of material splendour for
the Remnant of Israel. Thus the awful universal need of
Redemption must have pressed its mystery upon him as a
problem without answer. He felt the " world's sad heart "
beating, and caught the " still sad music of humanity "
sighing through the immortal strains and pilgrim hves of the
poets and ancestors of his people.

In Jeremiah and Ezekiel individualism is developed.^
In many of the later Psalms the Messiah is the Saviour of
the poor and needy,' of the upright,* and of the contrite.^
These Psalms are written by writers who speak from the
very depths of their hearts, from their intense experiences
of the love and tenderness of God for the individual soul.
To them had been brought home the meaning of repentance.
For with the lifting up of the cry for deliverance from the
punishment for sin goes the prayer for help to repent from
the sin itself. " Create in me a clean heart, O God, and
renew a right ^ spirit within me." So salvation is regarded

1 Jehovah E15he SabbaSth.

' Cf. Jer. xxxi. 29, 30 ; Ez. xviii. 3 g.g. Ps. cix. 31.

* E.g. Ps. xxxvii. 39, 40. 5 E.g. Ps. xxxiv. i8.

8 Ps. h. 10 ff. "right" is in original " I"133 " i.e. "steadfast."

8o THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

by men who voiced the aspiration of earnest souls of their
time, as not only national, but individual ; not only material,
but spiritual. The forgiveness of sins is the chief blessing
of the age to come. The prophet's cry is " repent," for only
for those in Jacob that turn from transgression shall the
Redeemer come to Zion.^ It is the broken and contrite
heart that God requires.^ After the close of the Old Testa-
ment canon, individualism was still more emphasized, and
the idea also became more transcendent. In the Apocalyptic
literature the material and the spiritual are blended in
startHng and unexpected combinations.^ The growth in
transcendent individualism is seen in the doctrine of the
Resurrection, which became universal among the Pharisees.*
Therewith grew up the doctrine of rewards and punishments,
of Paradise on the one hand, and of Gehenna on the other,
instead of Sheol with its " aspect of colourless monotony."
" Summing up the conceptions of salvation which we have
met thus far, we find that they are four : (i) Salvation in
this life, in the sense of deliverance from present danger or
trouble ... (2) The salvation of the Messianic Kingdom, to
be enjoyed by all the righteous who may be alive at the
time, as well as by the risen saints ; (3) Salvation after
death, in the sense of a preliminary foretaste, by the right-
eous, of the enjoyment of the age to come; (4) The final
salvation of the heavenly world, when the present earth has
been destroyed . . . Into such a world of thought, con-
fused, changeful, yet rich with germs of fruitful and in-
spiring life, Jesus came with His Gospel of salvation." *

1 Isa. lix. 20. 2 ps_ ii_ 17 and 19.

3 Art. " Salvation " and " Saviour," H. D. B., by Prof. W.
Adams Brown. He gives a number of quotations in illustration.

* It was developed especially through the persecutions and martyr-
doms under Antiochus. It is clear from the mysteries that the hope
of immortality was wide-spread in the pagan world.

5 Prof. W. Adams Brown's summary of these conceptions in
the article cited.

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 8i

The Meaning deepened by Jesus.

The name " Jesus " is the Greek form of i^ti^'iny He
deepened and vitahzed and set in their true bearing the
current ideas of the time in both their transcendent and
their individuahstic tendencies. In the first place His idea
of the Kingdom of God was of a kingdom not only future
and heavenly, but present and on earth. Salvation is a
present experience, and whosoever is living the Christian
life of faith and love is "safe," " He that hath the Son hath
life." 2 In the second place Jesus lived to teach and died
to prove how infinitely precious in the sight of God is a
single human soul.

It is not to the righteous man expecting salvation as a
result of perfect conformity to the ceremonial law that
redemption comes. It is for the poor and outcast, ^ for all
who in lowliness and contrition seek the Divine forgiveness.
Moreover it was purchased by the Redeemer Himself
through suffering and death. So what was at first deemed
the failure of His mission, was in reahty the only possible
fulfilment of it.

St. Paul's Doctrine.
As we turn to St. Paul we find these truths unhesitatingly
emphasized. " Salvation " is a term with a purely moral
and spiritual content. It differed from the " salvation "
of the pagan mysteries in that its effect and test was a
life lived on the highest plane. It is deliverance from sin.
The flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and is the " body of
this death." It is not, as in the Orphic Mysteries, the source
of evil, but through it sin works, and the deeds of the flesh
are set over against the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. v. 19-24).
Redemption is the crucifixion of the flesh — the conquest of

1 Later abbreviated to i^-lt^'."! (Joshua or Jeshua), and meaning
" Whose help is Jehovah," or " The Lord (Jehovah) is Salvation."
It is probably derived from the Hiphil of V^*\"

2 I John v. j2, 3 Cf. St. Matt, v. 3, St. Luke vi. 20.

Q

82 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

the power of sin through and in the body. In this connex-
ion the significance of Christ's death is insisted on, and a
strong eschatological element prevails.^ Yet here, as in
every case, St. Paul's doctrine is by no means a simple
adoption of current notions from Judaism. The form may
be Jewish indeed, but he had experienced already the
blessedness of this fuller salvation, ^ for him the chains of
slavery to sin had already fallen off,^ for him life had become
new because he dwelt in Christ,* for him there was already
redemption and sanctification.^ Whatever the formula-
tion of these truths, it was the expression of vivid religious
experience. He could now see in the death of Jesus on the
Cross, and in the suffering of His life on earth, the workings
of the Divine Purpose, and that

"Through the Shadow of an Agony
Cometh Redemption."

Once grasped, it was no more a cause of stumbhng ^ to him,

but an experience through which each would-be disciple must

pass, if there was to be participation in the blessings which

Christ brought. Mystically united with Him, the behever dies

(Rom. vi. 2), is buried (Rom. vi, 4), rises (Rom. vi. 5,6), with

Him. He must share the sufferings of his Master (Col. i. 24 ;

2 Cor. i. 5). Nothing can separate us from the love of Christ,

nor things present, nor things to come, because He is God.

For St. Paul the death of Christ has acquired the greatest

value. His whole aim is "to point out the significance for

faith of an unique experience befalling One believed to be

personally sinless, Who could not therefore be conceived of

as in His passion suffering for His own sin." ' As repre-

1 St. Paul's Conception of the Last Things, by Dr. Kennedy, deals
fully with the subject. Prof. Gardner {op. cit. p. 89) asserts that
it was " really the influence of his preaching which finally turned
the eyes of Christians from the hope of a millennial reign of the
saints towards a spiritual heaven above the sky."

* Rom. viii. 2, 23 ; vi. 2 ; xiv. 17. ^ Rom. vi. 2.

* 2 Cor. V. 17. * I Cor. i. 30. ^ o-KavSaXov.

* St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, Dr. A. B. Bruce, p. 166.

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 83

sentative of humanity he died a death of saving efHcacy to
all the race, and even (St. Paul beheved) to the whole
universe.^

Three Prominent Thoughts Therein.

In the death of Christ the Apostle saw three things pro-
minently brought before him.

(i) There was the revelation of the wrath of God against
sin. God was reconciling the world through Christ.2 By
the death of Jesus, God is really showing what He thinks of
sin. His wrath is revealed from Heaven against all ungodli-
ness and unrighteousness of men.^

(2) But there was another and more prominent aspect of
His death. It was a revelation of the Love of God. It
was not of course the creation of it; but in the death of
Christ providing us with the way of escape, St. Paul saw a
manifestation of an eternal and abiding love. " God com-
mendeth His own love towards us, in that, while we were
yet sinners, Christ died for us " (Rom. v. 8).

(3) Thirdly, on the part of Christ he saw an accomplish-
ment of forgiveness for sin, of justification, of sanctification,
of moral renewal, of a world reconciled to God through the
Son. That precious death and its wondrous benefits were
proclaimed and kept in remembrance, till He should come
again, by the Lord's Supper (i Cor. xi. 24-26).

Why was the Death of Christ Efficacious for this ?
Dean Everett's Theory.

It is when we ask wherein the death of Christ was efifi-
cacious that we find difficulty. Why should the death of
Jesus suffice, or be required at all, for the working out of
God's purpose of reconciliation ? To this there have been
many replies. A recent one is Dean Everett's The Gospel
of Paul.

1 Rom. viii. 21. ^ 2 Cor. v. 19. ^ Rom. i. 18,

84 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

His is quite a new reading of St. Paul's doctrine, based on
an interpretation of Galatians ii. ig-20 and iii. 13. Christ
did not come to redeem man from sin by enduring its penalty.
This doctrine has no support either from heathen or Levitical
sacrifices or from the New Testament. The immediate
effect of His death was not the removal of the penalty of
sin, but the abrogation of the Law ; and then followed the
remission of sin as a result. This is the gist of his explana-
tion. Christ died by crucifixion, and was therefore accursed,
or ceremonially unclean. We are crucified with Him and
therefore also ceremonially unclean. We are thus out-
lawed, excommunicated from the Law. Christ was accursed
because crucified, not crucified because accursed. So by
the Law's own act every man crucified with Christ is free
from legal claims.

Objections to Dean Everett's Theory.

The following objections to this theory are urged : —
(i) Even were it admitted that Dean Everett's inter-
pretation of Galatians iii. 13 is permissible, we cannot
accept that of Galatians ii. 19, 20. What is true of St. Paul
(" I am crucified with Christ ") is true of all Christians.
But the excommunication of Christ by the Law which might
be implied in the former text cannot mean that therefore
ceremonial uncleanness is a necessary result of faith in
Christ. A glance at the history of the Church will show
how untenable Dean Everett's view is. The early dis-
ciples generally could not have held it. Peter and John
went up to the Temple daily to pray. It is true that St.
Paul kept his vow in the Temple (Acts xviii.18) and joined
in ceremonial observances of purification (Acts xxi. 26). But
this was not because he believed he was ceremonially
unclean in Christ. His view of the Law was not that Christ
and those united with Him were unclean in the eyes of
the Law, but that they had outgrown the need of such a

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 85

7raiSa7<u769,i and that the old Law was fulfilled, its aim
was accomplished, now that they had been led to Christ.

(2) Christ redeemed men from the law by coming wider
the law (Gal. iv. 4), not by being excommunicated by the law.

We do not mean to imply that we can speak of Christ
redeeming us by His life on earth, though He came not to
destroy but to fulfil the Law ; not to be excommunicated by
it but to accomplish its demands. But we must remember
that the life during which He was under the Law, His death
and resurrection had all their place in the work of Redemp-
tion. For a very long time attention was concentrated
entirely on the redemption of humanity by the death of
Jesus Christ. Under the influence of Bishop Westcott's
teaching, has come, like a fresh revelation, the marvellous
meaning of the Incarnation with its vast issues for all
human aspiration and thought. Thus, there is perhaps a
danger lest the Pauline and Biblical doctrine of the redemp-
tive efficacy of the death of Christ should be obscured. We
believe that a redistribution of the emphasis and a recovery
of balance in our system of doctrine is a pressing and an
immediate need, for we shall err greatly if we attempt to
separate the birth and life of Christ from His death and
resurrection. The explanation of the efficacy of His death
lies in the manger cradle at Bethlehem, the meaning of Christ-
mas is hidden till Easter and Ascensiontide and Whitsun-
tide add their message. Whilst all are necessary, all are
one, indivisibly one, even as He is one Person through them
all.2 Yet all centre upon and illuminate that great redemp-
tive sacrifice on the Cross. We are redeemed by the blood
of the Son of God shed for us.^

Dean Everett's theory neglects the fact that St. Paul's

1 Gal. iii. 24 fi. 2 ci. St. John vi. 46, 62.

3 Cf. Church of England Prayer Book ; e.g. the Consecration Prayer
(Holy Communion) and the " Salvator Mundi " (Office for Visita-
tion of the Sick).

86 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

conception of Redemption goes far further back than the
Jewish law to the birth of the human race, and that he saw
upon the Cross not One Who abrogated the law by being an
outlaw from it, but One Whose death was efficacious for
the Jew because He perfectly fulfilled the law by living
under it, and for the Universe because He paid the universal
penalty of sin by death. Hs result for the Gentiles was
that upon them might come the blessing of Abraham in
Christ Jesus ; and for both Gentile and Jew that they might
receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.^

(3) Dean Everett regards the persecution of Paul before
conversion as due to the Christians being excommunicated
" because of the pollution that came from the Cross resting
also upon them." But if so persecuted for this reason,
would not the Early Church have recognized this ? We
find no trace of such a motive animating the violence of
their accusers. These latter would hardly comprehend the
meaning of spiritual union with Christ.

Nor is it likely that they persecuted the Apostles simply
because these followed One Who was crucified and therefore
unclean. The Jews had known what it was to build up the
tombs of the prophets they had murdered. H was because
the active preaching of the Apostles was manifestly destruct-
ive of the precious tenets of the hierarchy, such as the denial
of the doctrine of the resurrection ; and finally because the
Christian came to see not that he was ceremonially un-
clean, but a free man in Christ Jesus.

(4) Why were Christians freed from Law ? Not because
they were ceremonially unclean in the eyes of the law, for a
few sacrifices could have remedied that ; but because of the
reign of Grace. ^

(5) The Crucifixion of Christians was a moral one. Would
this have brought down the condemnation of the Law ?

1 Gal. ii. 16, iii. 2.

2 Cf. Romans, especially chap. viii.

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 87

Three Aspects of St. Paul's Doctrine of Christ's Death.
(a) He regarded it as Vicarious.

The above reasons are in the main adduced by Dr. A. B.
Bruce 1 and seem to the present writer conclusive against
Dean Everett's theory. If we look carefully at St. Paul's
view of the death of Christ we find three aspects which
seem to suggest tentatively and in different directions some
reasons which might explain his view of the efficacy of the
death of Christ in the sight of God.

a. It was regarded as vicarious. So Jesus Christ dis-
tinctly taught. He is the good shepherd who lays down
His hfe for {y-nep) the sheep.^ He fulfils the whole con-
ception of vicarious sacrifice found in Isaiah liii. He
is the Man of Pains familiar with sickness. He is pierced
for crimes that were ours. By His stripes we are
healed.3 It is the will of God that through His soul mak-
ing a guilt- offering (an atonement for sin), because in His
innocence He " gives His life as satisfaction to the Divine
law for the guilt of His people," ^ so shall He see a seed. In
His own words, He gives His life a ransom for many {Xvrpov
avTi iroWwv).^ As a Pharisee, St. Paul was acquainted
with the Jewish doctrine of the availing merit of the Patri-
archs and of the Saints of God. But its fundamental truth
had never gripped him before, and he awoke in the new life
to find in the death of his Master what Jesus Himself knew
was necessary for its efficacy, as well as its significance and
value — vicarious suffering for sins.

This is the meaning of St. Paul's words in Galatians iii.

1 St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, p. 184.

2 St. John X. II.

3 Isa. liii. (see G. A. Smith, Isaiah, vol. ii. chap, xx.) ; St. Matt.
viii. 17.

* Isaiah, G. A. Smith, vol. ii. p. 364.

6 St. Matt. XX. 28 ; cf. St. Mark x. 45 and i Tim. ii. 6. Also
Gwatkin's Knowledge of God, vol. i. p. 217, and Hope Moulton,
Prolegomena, p. 105.

88 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

13, " Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, being
made a curse for us (uTrep rjfiwv)," and of those in 2 Cor.
V. 21, " Him who knew no sin He made to be sin for us

{vTTep rj/jLwv)."

It is not, however, universally admitted that St. Paul
teaches the vicarious death of Christ. For instance, Somer-
ville^ denies that he does, and it will not be unfruitful to
consider his reasons carefully. For five reasons he refuses to
find any vicarious meaning in Gal. iii. 13 : —

Somerville's Position Criticized.

(i) It refers to the Jewish law for Jews. It is a Rabbinical
argument. How then can we give it universal scope ?
The hanging on the tree is not a sentence of death as a
universal fact, but a sentence of death threatened under
special laws of the Jews. In reply, we would observe :

(a) An obvious criticism to be made upon this first reason
is that it does not show in any way why we should deny the
vicarious teaching concerning the death. Because we may
not personally be able to regard that death so, is no reason
why the conception should be denied to St. Paul. We are
concerned with what St. Paul thought, not with what in
the opinion of some interpreters is vital in his thought for
us to-day.

(/3) This view is denied to St. Paul not even because it
is unscriptural or does not fit in with modern ways of thought.
It is because St. Paul has clothed his argument in Rabbinical
dress. On the same principle we should reject almost the
whole of St. Paul's conceptions. " The denial rests on
dogmatic rather than on exegetical grounds." 2

(ii) How did Christ's bearing the curse result in its re-
moval ? Whilst we are deeply and humbly conscious of
the mystery, does not the only line of explanation seem to

1 So also Schmidt.

2 Art. " Sacrifice," //. D. B., Prof. W. P. Paterson.

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 89

lie in the vicarious suffering of the Saviour for the sin of
the world ?

(iii) \\'as it a substitutionary infliction of punishment or
a moral equivalent for it ? Most probably it was the
former, but the question is too complex to be discussed
here, and whichever answer were given, the main issue of
the question under discussion would not be affected.

(iv) If it was to the Law as a personified power that this
homage was paid, what relation does that power bear to
God ? St. Paul elsewhere discusses the whole relation of
the Law to God and Israel, and of its place in the economy
of God's dealing with mankind. It is improbable that the
Law was regarded by him as a personified power.

(v) How did His Son becoming a curse (Gal. iii. 13)
affect God ? In this and other questions, difficulties
are raised which are rather objections of modern thought
than deduced from a study of Pauline conceptions. St.
Paul was not unaware of the paradox of God's Justice and
His Love, nor of the difficulty which human thought en-
countered in trying to fathom its meaning. But still he
insists that " God was in Christ reconciling the world unto
Himself." ^ The effect of that reconciliation, in Christ,
of His becoming a curse and being made sin, was a restora-
tion of Fatherhood to God and of Sonship to man.^

We venture thus to remove the bar which Somerville
would place upon our progress towards the perception of
St. Paul's views. We admit the difficulties, fully and
humbly. We deny their cogency to the point at issue.
We do not think that we must solve their mysteries,
as Somerville urges, before we can use Gal. iii. 13 to
support a dogmatic conclusion. Taking this text in con-
junction with 2 Cor. V. 21, " Him who knew no sin He
made to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the
righteousness of God in Him," we gather that Christ

1 2 Cor. V. ig. 2 2 Cor. vi. 18.

90 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

endured in death the doom of sin, the curse of the law.
He thus met the utmost claims of the law as setting forth
God's Holy will. Somerville indeed says that the effect of
Christ being made sin is the same as " obedience." Jesus
was not made a sinner, but placed in the position of a sinner.
Why this redeems is not stated, though St. Paul writes to
the Romans that " through the obedience of the one shall
the many be made righteous " (Rom. v. 19). Yet we
cannot forget the other side of His redemptive sacrifice.
Christ died to sin (Rom. vi. 10). Sin ceased to have
any claim over Him. He had become sin for our sake,
and the power of this sin culminated in His death, when it
came to an end for ever. So it was " for us," virep rjiMOiv,
" on our behalf ; and though ami rjfiwv is never used by
St. Paul, there is an unmistakable exchange between Christ
and man. The death of Christ is the penalty of our sins,
not of His. Our righteousness is obtained by faith in Him.
It was by vicarious suffering that Christ became the expia-
tion and propitiation of our sins, and that idea underlies
his use of sacrificial language. Though it does not exhaust
the whole or even the greater part of the conception of
sacrifice, yet the vicarious aspect of the latter was once and
for all revealed in Isaiah liii.^ " The great mystery of the
idea of Sacrifice itself ... is founded on the secret truth
of benevolent energy which all men who have tried to gain

1 See especially vv. 4-6.

" Surely our ailments He bore.
And our pains did He take for His burden. . . .
Yet He — He was pierced for crimes that were ours,
He was crushed for guilt that was ours,
The chastisement of our peace was upon him,
By his stripes healing is ours.
Of us all like to sheep went astray.
Every man to his way we did turn.
And Jehovah made light upon him
The guilt of us all."

(Prof. G. A. Smith's translation.)

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 91

it have learned — that you cannot save men from death but
by facing it for them, nor from sin but by resisting it for
them."i

{/3) And as a Propitiatory Sacrifice.

(/3) His death was a propitiatory Sacrifice. Through
His death behevers have forgiveness of sins. So we are
brought to the much discussed passage (Rom. iii. 25),
" Jesus Christ . . . whom God sent forth to be a propitia-
tion" [ov Trpoedero 6 Geb<i iXaarripLov'^). 'IXaaTt^piov VCidiy he
taken in three ways : —

i. The " mercy seat," after the usage of the LXX, which
so translates /T)33 from "1DD (in Piel) " to cover," " expiate
for sin." In the same sense we might supply eirideixa as
the LXX of Exodus xxv. 17 does.

ii. Supplying dvjjia or dvcWrjfia we should translate " a
propitiatory offering." ^

iii. Taking i\aaTi]ptov as a verbal adjective with
Somerville, Sanday and Headlam, Bruce ^ and most recent
commentators, it would mean " that which serves the pur-
pose of " propitiation. There was therein some vicarious
endurance, which made propitiation for, and expiated, our
sins.

Somerville asserts that St. Paul does not teach that
Christ's death was a sacrifice in the sense of an offering
for sin. " We have nothing of sacrifice in the Bible. If

1 Ruskin's Slade Lecture, p. 14 (also quoted by Drs. Sanday and
Headlam on Romans, p. 93).

2 Rom. iii. 25. ^ Also see von Adolf Deissmann hereon.

* Prof. Gardner [op. cit. p. 194 n.) translates the word " a way
of reconcilement," a " person who reconciles." He also supports
the interpretation of dTroXuVpajcris which makes it equivalent to
deliverance merely, with no notion of a price paid. Sanday and
Headlam, however, conclude against this [Romans, p. 86). There
is not of necessity any reference to the person to whom the ransom
is paid, but " the whole emphasis is on the cost of man's redemption,"
that is on the death of Christ. Cf. Light from the Ancient East, von
Adolf Deissmann, p. 331 ff.

92 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

we had, it would be unwarrantable to apply it to Christ.
The sacrifice of Christ was the offering of Himself to God."
On the contrary, we venture to think that both St. Paul's
language and ideas are sacrificial as Somerville half admits
in another place — " being the very truth they (the legal
precepts) dimly shadowed forth " . . . " being the spiritual
reality prefigured by the ceremonial cultus." The pro-
pitiatory death is frequently and clearly set forth by St.
Paul.i Yet though we accept its truth, we are driven with
him to cry that we cannot fathom the unsearchable riches
of Christ. The idea of Propitiation is too deep for us. " \^'e
speak of something in this great sacrifice which we call
'Propitiation.' We believe that the Holy Spirit spoke through
these writers, and that it was His Will that we should use
this word. But it is a word which we must leave to Him
to interpret . . . The awful processes of the Divine mind
we cannot fathom. Sufficient for us to know that through
the virtue of the One Sacrifice, our sacrifices are accepted,
that the barrier which Sin places between us and God is
removed." -

(7) AND AS Representative — The Principle of Solid-
arity.

(7) The death of Christ was representative. Somerville
finds herein the explanation of all St. Paul's language, the
true centre of his doctrine of the Redeemer. There is no
doubt of its prominent place in St. Paul's thought. The
death of Christ was the death of the race. It is the same
principle of solidarity which we discussed under the head
of the Second Adam.^ The death of Christ was an act of
perfect obedience to the Father's will, and it has the efiicacy
of a moral act. " So we in Him have obeyed to the utter-
most and are established, saved, and redeemed in a new
relation of life." Thus it is as Representative of our race

1 E.g. I Cor. XV. 3 ; 2 Cor. v. 21 ; Eph. i. 7.

2 Epistle to the Romans, Drs. Sanday and Hcadlam, p. 94.
'^ See Rom. v. and p. 57 ff. supra.

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 93

that His death has efficacy for us. Christ our Passover
was sacrificed for us (i Cor. v. 7). In Him we all die. In
Him we all rise to newness of life.

The Connection between the Life of Jesus on Earth
AND Redemption.

But there is one aspect of Christ the Redeemer which has
come more and more to the front of late years. Bishop
Westcott, influenced by the whole trend of his theological
thought/ found the centre of the conception of sacrifice
not so much in the death of the victim as in the offering of
its life. And so St. Paul lays no little stress on the value
and the nature of the earthly life of Jesus. ^ Not only must
he have done so for purposes of missionary preaching,
but also in forming his conception of Redemption through
Christ. " God sent forth His Son " in the fullness of time
" made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them
that were under the law." ^ The life of Christ — His whole
state of humiliation (so runs the argument of those who follow
Bishop Westcott herein), was "theransom" {"Xvrpov") which
redeemed us and brought us Redemption {" dTro\vTpcocn<i").
The truth in it is well expressed by Bruce, " The principle
is that at whatever point Christ touched men in His state
of humiliation. His touch had redemptive effect."* He was
made under the Law by circumcision. We are redeemed
from subjection to the Law. He was made a curse and so
are we redeemed from the curse of the Law. He was
made sin that we might become a righteousness of God in
Him. He suffered the penalty which sin entails and so
forgiveness is held out to us. All this again is true.

But surely it is on the Cross that redemption from the Law is

1 See above, p. 85. Cf. The Gospel of Creation. See also his
additional notes on i John i. 7 and on Heb. ix. 12.

2 See Christ as Messiah (above), p. 40.

3 Gal. iv. 4.

* St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, Dr A. B. Bruce, p. 186, n.

94 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

effected. The bond of the requirements of the Law of Moses,
against us by its decrees (" to KaO' 7]/j,a)u ■x^eipoypacfiov rol^
BSy/xaa-i," Col. ii. 14), has been taken out of the way and
cancelled, because Christ nailed it to His Cross. It was upon
the Cross that He was made a curse for us (Gal. iii. 13). He
was made sin in that last dread hour, when His cry, " that
last, lone cry of innocence," rent the air, " My God, My
God, why hast thou forsaken Me ? " He suffered by His
death the penalty which sin entails, " The soul thatsinneth,
it shall die " ; ^ and only then did He cry "It is finished,"
and the great Redemption was complete.

An example of the error into which a mistaken emphasis
upon the life of Jesus (as distinguished from His death)
may lead us, is to be found in Dr. Bruce's interpretation of
Romans viii. 3, " God, sending his own Son in the likeness
of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh " 2
(Rom, viii. 3). The ordinary interpretation of this is that
the condemnation took place in the death of Christ " Trepl
dfiapTLa<i " being a sin-offering. From the context, however,
Dr. Bruce judges that it refers rather to Christ's life. The
Apostle is speaking of the need of help to conquer the law
of sin ruling in the members. Dr. Bruce holds that St. Paul
conceives it to be in the sinless holy life of Christ that this
is rather found. He had successfully resisted the bondage
to the flesh. God sent His Son into the world " with refer-
ence to sin " {-Kepi dfjuaprla^). Every part of His earthly
experience was a contribution towards the destruction
of sin. So men may be " TrvevfiariKOL," may fight and pre-
vail through Him Who loved us, even though temptations
thick assail us through the adp^. This is Redemption.

Such a lamentable misunderstanding of St. Paul's meaning
destroys the appeal of the Gospel, as it fails to recognize

1 Ez. xviii. 4. Cf. Rom. vi. 23.

^ 6 ®€os Tov lavTov Yldv Trifjixj/a^ ev ofxoiwfxari aapKos djUopTi'as Kai
Trepl ap.apTLa'i KureKpcve tyjv d^aprt'av iv ry aapKL,

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 95

the source of its power. St. Paul did not and could not
teach this. We may with confidence translate " Trepl
d/xapTLa<i " as " sin-offering," for which it is used constantly
in the Old Testament, " more than fifty times in the Book
of Leviticus alone." ^ Such was the Sacrifice of Christ,
making atonement for the sins of the world. It was only
on the Cross that St. Paul regarded Christ as condemning
sin in the flesh (Rom. vi. 7, 10. Cf. Col. i. 13, 14). That
the power by which we conquer sin in the flesh comes from
the holy example of the sinless life of Jesus is not a Pauline
doctrine. His stainless life is our example, and it is that
which makes His death efficacious for the washing away of
sin (2 Cor. v. 21).^ But it is not therefrom that we derive
the power that makes our weakness strength. Hero-worship
is not the motive force of the Christian hfe. It is the " power
of Christ " {2 Cor. xii. 9), the love which Christ has towards
us, which constrains us (2 Cor. v. 14). That love was shown
not only in His taking our nature upon Him, but pre-
eminently in His death on the Cross, where Christ gave
Himself for {vnep) us (Gal. ii. 20) ^ an offering and a sacrifice
•jrpoacjiopav koI dvaiav) to God (Eph. V. 2). It becomes a
power in the life through the Holy Spirit's presence whereby
Christ Crucified and Risen dwells in us, and the deeds of the
body are mortified (Gal, iv. 8 ; v. 16). Through the Holy
Spirit, we are organically united with Christ. We are buried
with Him by Baptism into death. His Resurrection and
the power of it * (Phil. iii. 10) is ours by personal experience .

1 Sanday and Headlam, Romans, ad loc.

2 Cf. Heb. vii. 26-27. 3 cf. St. John xv. 13.

* Prof. K. Lake points out that Jewish Christians would regard
the Resurrection " either merely as the proof that the Christian
view of Jesus was correct, and the Divine confirmation of His
message, or as the means whereby He had attained (or, possibly,
resumed) the heavenly nature of the " man " who was to appear
at the coming of the Kingdom as the divinely appointed King."
Gentile Christians saw more, and this more easily. There was a
special significance and unique efficacy in the atoning death and

96 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Its source is from (e«) God, Who raised up Jesus from the
dead (2 Cor. xiii. 4) and glorified Him (Phil. ii. 9).^ So
was Christ " designated " ^ by the Father to be the Son of
God with power (Rom. i. 4). Our power is Christ's power,
and His power is God's power, even as we are Christ's, and
Christ is God's. Thus that constraining love which first
drew us unto His Cross, and from which only the human
will can separate us (Rom. viii. 35) awakens the response
of that love wherein we shall be holy and blameless before
Him (Eph. i. 4), and forms that atmosphere of divine appeal
and human answer in which the body of Christ's Church is
being built up (Eph. iii. 14-19). It is when we draw our
spiritual strength in such a way that we have the power
of Christ working in us through the Holy Spirit (Rom. i. 4).
By such an indwelling of Christ, as well as a dwelling in
Christ is the reign of sin ended (Rom. vi. 12) and the
body of sin destroyed. Then only do we walk in newness
of life, and live " in Christ."

The Physical Death of the Redeemer and the Moral
Death of the Redeemed.

One objection rises readily to the mind in this connexion.
The death of Christ on the Cross was physical. Our death
to sin is moral. How then can the one result from the
other ? If our crucifixion is ethical, must not His have
been ethical also ? So Somerville writes : " He was heir
in His own Person to the weakness of the flesh and its
temptations. Christ found the dying to it an essential
element of holiness, and, in so far as His death on the Cross

resurrection of Christ. The analogies of the mysteries accustomed
a Greek convert to continue "to think along the lines already
familiar to him " even if he did not " borrow " from those doctrines.
See Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, pp. 408-411.

1 Cf. Eph. i. 20; Col. iii. i ; Rom. viii. 11.

2 Not "proved" or "instituted." See Sanday and Headlam
ad loc.

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 97

was the final triumph of His hohness over all the desires
of the flesh that furnish to men unregenerate the motive
power of life, it possesses a moral efficacy that constitutes
Him leader of all His brethren." ^ So we bear about in
the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of
Jesus might be made manifest in our body.^ In other
words, " Whosoever would save his life shall lose it ; and
whosoever would lose his life for My sake shall find it." ^

Was the Death of Christ Moral as well as Physical ?

The death of Christ is thus from this point of view moral,
as well as physical. He died to sin in the flesh, and it is
this death that we share. He certainly regarded the death
of the believer as primarily moral. " The reason for dying
in the one case is a transcendent theological one, in the
other moral. On this account the dying to live, to which
the Christian is summoned, loses the impetus arising from
its being presented as the ideal and universal law of all true
life, and is based on the weaker though not lower grounds
of a believer's sense of congruity and honour." ^ For St.
Paul, however, did not the secret of his vivid religious life,
his intense fervour and energy of faith lie in the absolute
devotion of the heart and life to God, in his entering into
mystic union with Him Who was the Representative and
Brother not only of the spiritual race of men, but of the
whole of mankind and the universe ? In other words,
was it not to Him both the universal law of Hfe and God's
appeal to the conscience, the heart and the will. Not
only is salvation a death unto sin (Rom. vi. 2) and a
new birth unto righteousness, for it is the law of life that
it is reached through death (Rom. vi. 7); but also it is clearly

1 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, Dr. Somerville, p. 100. See
also Prof. Green's book. Witness of God, works, vol. iii. p. 230.
; 2 2 Cor. iv. 10. 3 St. Matt. xvi. 25.

* St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, Dr. A. B. Bruce, p. 180.

98 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

only in union with Christ, in the answer of the will guiding
the heart and mind, that life is gained (Rom. viii. 2). We
cannot, and I believe that St. Paul did not, distinguish
thus the physical from the moral death of Christ. Indeed,
we may say that where sin had never reigned, there was
no death to sin. The death of the believer is not only moral
and spiritual, but it rises into the perfect newness of life
when the body, too, is redeemed and transformed (Rom.
viii. 23 ; Phil. iii. 21). The cry for complete union with
Christ is not fully answered till then. Even then, though
the death of Christ and the death of the Redeemer were
placed by him in different categories of thought, his faith
was such that he could lay hold on Christ, die and rise
with Him, so that he became partaker of his Lord's exalted
life. It was Christ crucified in the flesh on the Cross
(Gal. ii. 20, cf. iii. 13), and Christ risen from the grave (Col.
iii. i), as in the vision on the Damascus road, with Whom
he was united. Salvation for St. Paul meant, essentially,
union and present union with the living Head — a union
consummated by a life not only ethical and spiritual but
also physical, for his body had become the Temple of the
Holy Ghost (i Cor. vi. 19).

The view of the Person of Christ postulated by St.
Paul's Doctrine of Redemption.

W^e are now in a position to estimate what view of Christ
this conception of Him as Redeemer involved.

We have seen that for St. Paul no merely forensic concep-
tion of the death of Christ is adequate. As Redeemer
indeed Christ submitted to death and thereby redeemed
us from the curse of the law. Christ was thus the Head of
mankind as an ideal unity. In objective identity with
Him, our sin passes to the Sinless One, His righteousness
to us. There was more. Between the Redeemer and the
Redeemed there was a subjective identity. An inward life

CHRIST THE REDEEMER 99

was lived in Him. He was one with men, they were one in
Him. This other aspect of St. Paul's religious life is ever
present. " As Christ in love made His own every detail in
our unredeemed state, so faith in the exercise of its native
clinging power makes its own every critical stage in Christ's
redeeming experience. His death, burial, resurrection and
ascension, and compels the redeemed man to re-enact these
crises in his own spiritual history." ^

It was, moreover, Christ as Sinless, Perfect, Man abso-
lutely obedient to his Father's Will, Who, by His humiliation
and perfect walk in the likeness of sinful flesh, and by His
suffering life offered up in His death on the Cross, has pro-
cured for us redemption by His blood, entrance into the
mystical life with Him, and the sure hope of the Resurrec-
tion. So it is only as Perfect, Sinless, Obedient, Man that
His death was efficacious for this.^ St. Paul has grasped
the truth which his Master taught, the truth of " Life through
Death." As life " in Christ " brought ever new light
upon the mystery, St. Paul could see in the Person of his
Lord the working out of the eternal principle. " The
Death and Resurrection of Jesus were the visible embodi-
ment of the law of all spiritual being that death is the true
road to the higher life." ^ Yet more than that comes with
the Redemption in Christ Jesus. The power to live the
new life is given as the eyes are opened to see the vision
of its beauty. The Christian is enabled in the strength of
his Redeemer to follow in the footsteps of that stainless
patient life, and to live his years like those his Master passed
beneath " the Syrian blue." He knows the power of His
Lord's Resurrection,* the soul is justified,^ sin is conquered,

1 St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, Dr. A. B. Bruce, p. 179.

2 That the character of Christ was St. Paul's ideal for himself
as for all is seen in such passages as Col. iii. 12, Phil. ii. 5, i Cor.
xi. I.

3 Art. " Jesus Christ," H. D. B., Prof. W. Sanday.

* Phil. iii. 10. See Lightfoot, ad lac, ^ Rom. iv. 24, 25.

6Q41G2 A

100 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

immortality is sure. No ordinary man ever did this ; no
teacher before or since, however closely to his maxims he
might live, ever accomplished this. He was indeed Man,
and as such He was the Head and Representative of a new
and spiritual Humanity. He was Perfect Man, and His
manhood was lived in complete obedience to God's will.
By such a life offered on the Cross for our redemption, a
vicarious, propitiatory sacrifice was made to God in perfect
obedience to His counsels, a ransom for the whole world.
He who died this death must have been Man truly and
completely, representing and containing in His nature the
very essence of our manhood ; so alone the race of which
He was representative might hope to be lifted up in their
Head till they should attain the stature of the Perfect Man.
But the Redeemer must have been more than this. That
love beyond death which wrought so great a salvation for
the universe is something we can recognize though not
comprehend. Its constraining power lifts us beyond any
Unitarian or Pantheistic explanation of His Person, as
it carried St. Paul far from the narrow limits of popular
Messianic opinion and kept him from the errors of Cerinthus
and his Ebionite followers. Christ is more than man. He
is a " pre-existent Divine being, coming into the world
from a higher realm, and imparting to those who are sub-
jected to the law of sin and death, the new spiritual vitality
without which deliverance is hopeless." ^ St. Paul in this
soteriological conception of the Redeemer draws very near
to the doctrine of the Logos as expressed by St. John. In
this Heavenly Man, in this Redeemer Who brought deliver-
ance from the bondage of the world, the flesh and the devil,
he saw not only the Perfect Man but the life-giving Spirit. ^
In One Whose saving grace went out to still the groaning
and travailing of the whole creation he must have recognized

1 Art, " Salvation, Saviour," H. D. B., Prof. W. Adams Brown

2 J Cor.^xv. 45.

CHRIST THE REDEEMER loi

a Person transcendent as well as immanent, Divine as well
as Human, God as well as man ; for through Him was
worked out God's eternal purpose " to reconcile all things
unto Himself whether things upon the earth or things in
the heavens." *

Brief Summary of the First Section, Christ from the

STANDPOINT OF HiS PERFECT MaNHOOD.

Up to the present we have regarded St. Paul's Christology
rather from the human standpoint than the Divine. By
that is meant that we have briefly tried to bring together
and examine some of those aspects of the Person of Christ
which are particularly prominent in his thought and which
refer to Christ primarily as Perfect Man. In Christ as the
Messiah we have seen One Who took unto Himself many
of the current and forgotten Messianic hopes and aspirations
of the Jewish race, illuminating and transforming them
by the process. Behind these was the fundamental expecta-
tion that the Messiah would be really and completely Man.
This basis Jewish speculation never left, though the Messiah
was sometimes prefigured as a Man with many Divine
functions and attributes. This basis, moreover, St. Paul
never forsook, however different it looked in the new light.
For him Jesus was the Messiah, Holy, Righteous, Sinless
Man. He came to earth as the " last Adam," the " Second
Man from Heaven " to found and perfect a redeemed Hu-
manity, to be the firstborn of many brethren. As the
Second Adam, too, we have seen Christ primarily as truly
man. One who could never have performed the ofhce which
the Man from heaven came to fulfil had He not taken upon
Him our nature and lived out His life on earth amongst
mankind, and died for our Redemption. Yet He is more to
us. There is postulated a nature Divine in Him Who fills
these Messianic conceptions with the fullest and loftiest

1 Col. i. 20.

102 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

meaning, in Him Who interprets this our life for us in won-
derful and unique terms, and as our Head, makes it possible
for us also to pass through our earthly span of years freed
from the bondage of sin. The whole of our future lies in
Him. It is the pledge of our continual growth in grace
that He should have infinitely great possibilities in store
for us. As we ever advance, and grow more and more like
Him in His infinite beauty and holiness, we shall find new
graces to be acquired, new depths to be sounded, new
heights of life revealed for aspiration and attainment.
His Redemption and our life in Him convince us of far
more than His Perfect Manhood. They demand from us
the worship, the reverence, the love, the surrender which
we can only give to One in Whom our restless hearts have
peace because they have at last found God. We have
arrived at a point whence we may tread, though still with
cautious and hesitating footsteps (for the ground is very
sacred and not smooth for sin-blinded men), the path which
leads us ever higher to the sublime truths, which God
through His Apostle proclaimed to His Church, truths
which may be summed up in the words of the Nicene Creed,
" I beheve in God the Son, Redeemer of the World."

CHAPTER VI
Christ as Eternal

WE have now come to consider Christ as an Eternal
Person. On this subject the minds of Christian
thinkers have been especially engaged throughout the history
of the Christian Church. On our view of the eternal Being
of the Immanent and Transcendent Christ, must ultimately
depend our conception of His Person. It is the check by
which speculation with regard to the nature of Christ is
guided and restrained. So Arius, when, after arguing from
the subordination of Son to Father, he arrives at the con-
clusion " '^v TTore 6t€ ovk rjv " {" there was once when He
[the Son] was not") was seen to be teaching a Christ not
consonant with the Christian Faith. Speculation, directed
by experience, finds here a subject on which it legitimately
may exercise itself, but finds„at the same time limits beyond
which it may not pass.

St. Paul's Conception of Christ as Pre-existent.
The Three Alternatives.

The subject resolves itself, in the main, into an inquiry
into St. Paul's conception of the pre-existent Christ. Many
have asserted that this doctrine forms no part of the Christ-
ology of the Church for all time, and the}^ explain it as " the
intellectual clothing of faith in the moral and spiritual
supremacy of Christ."

But what did Sf. Paul believe ? Can we say that for St.
Paul Christ is eternal ? Or are we to believe with Dr. Ander-

103

104 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

son, that " Paul's Christ began to be " ? Or, for this is the
third alternative, holding that love must always seem to us
"invisible, insoluble, superior to all analysis," do we there-
fore conclude that St. Paul was " indifferent alike to ques-
tions that related to His human birth and His eternal pre-
incarnate nature ? " ^ The last of these opinions has a
considerable following among the advanced thinkers of the
day. New schools of thought have arisen, standing for new
and illuminating conceptions. But is there not the danger in
every period of transition such as this, lest men, dazzled by
the sudden glare, should lose their hold on truths which have
stood the test of time, lest , tempted by the opening up of
other realms of thought, they should be easily led to abandon
ancient strongholds of the Faith which have lived through
battle and storm ? Is it not wise to be conservative in
these matters and to make sure that the ground in front is
firm before the old position is left ? We must advance, but
true advance is slow. The creeds are a heritage to be
valued and not despised, and we believe that, if rightly
understood, they will still prove to the majority of Christians
the greatest help in their spiritual lives.

The Doctrine of the Pre-existent Christ and
I. Palestinian Ideas.

The doctrine of the Pre-existent Christ has been regarded
as merely a combination of ideas from two sources : —

(i) From Palestinian theology, e.g. Harnack asserts that
the Jews " were in the habit of supposing that every im-
portant person or thing, which has successively appeared,
or is to appear, on the earth, has first existed in heaven ;
and that such a heavenly pre-existence was assumed in the
case of Messiah in accordance with this mode of thought." ^

1 So Soraerville, St. Paul's Conception of Christ, p. 214.

2 Art. " Messiah," H. D. B. (Prof, Stanton), where this passage
is quoted.

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 105

But, as Prof. Stanton points out, Dalman, the chief expert
we have in Jewish literature, does not allow that the in-
stances given of heavenly prototypes of the Holy City and
Temple establish this principle. He emphatically denies
its prevalence among Jewish, or, at all events, Palestinian
circles. " The older Rabbinism," concludes Prof. Stanton,
" seems to have contented itself with the idea of the pre-
existence of the name of Messiah " (Ps. Ixxii. 17). ^ In later
days there developed the idea of One Who had been born on
the earth previously of the seed of David and had been
caught up to Heaven, and Who was waiting till His manifes-
tation to Israel as their Messiah. So then the traces of
a definite doctrine at the time among the Jews are but
doubtful. 2

II. Heathen Ideas.

(ii) From heathen beliefs. As pointed out above, the
prevailing aspect of the Deity for Eastern and Egyptian
thinkers was that of transcendence. The Creature and the
Creator needed some intermediary to bring them together.
This postulated the '' Logos," or " Word " of God, which,
for Plato, comprehended all the inferior gods of heathenism.
The influence of the idea was seen in Palestine in the Tar-
gums in the doctrine of the " Memra " (Verbum — \6<yo<i
irpo^opiKO'^), and of the " glory " where the thought was that
of " verbum." In Alexandria Philo stands for the com-
bination. He was more of a Platonist than a Jew, and terms
God "to 6v ' instead of the " 6 wi^ " of the Alexandrian trans-
lators. The attributes which Plato assigns to his " Logos "
are assigned by Philo to the " Word of God," " Wisdom,"
and " Spirit," in the Old Testament, and these latter become
hypostatized. So, too, there came to be attached to faith
in Jesus Christ, a belief in His existence before Incarnation,

1 Art. " Messiah," H. D. B., Prof. Stanton, p. 356.

^ See The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, Prof. Stanton, p. 130.

io6 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

possessed of such Divine attributes as St, Paul in his later
Epistles especially seems to ascribe to Him. Thus a syn-
thetical, speculative, doctrine of Christ's Pre-existence was
produced, unimportant, because only of that age, and not
for all time, with no religious value, because a mere meta-
physical speculation.

But this explanation does not satisfy us. " The Christian
consciousness has acquiesced in this doctrine as not only
consonant with its convictions of the Divine greatness of
its Master, but as required by those convictions to justify
them to itself," ^ Our Faith necessitates the Pre-existent
Christ ; for One Whose Person and Work are so unique,
must have existed before He came to earth. This conclu-
sion is strengthened by an examination of St. Paul's teaching,
to which we now proceed.

St. Paul's Teaching, the " Logos " in his Epistles,

AND in St. John's Writings.
The subject of the Pre-existent Christ is intimately con-
nected with that of His cosmic work, Dr, Lightfoot
pointed out the lamentable result which has attended the
neglect by Christian teachers in the past of the wealth of
cosmic teaching in St. Paul's epistles.^ As modern theology
realizes afresh the greatness of its inheritance, the idea of
Christ as the centre and goal of all History, as the perfect
manifestation of the Logos, the eternal Reason, finds no
small place in the deeper and richer truths that issue from
the obscurity with which Latin influences, =^ it may be, have
surrounded them.

1 So Somerville in St. Paul's Conception of Christ, p. 197.

2 The Apologists of the second and third centuries allowed cos-
mology to displace soteriology from the foremost place. St. Paul
emphasized both in their balance and mutual helpfulness in building
up a scheme of thought. (See Christologies Ancient and Modern,
Dr. Sanday, So Loots and Harnack there referred to, pp. 16, 17.)

3 See The Christ of English Poetry, Hulsean Lectures by Dr,
Stubbs, p. 170 ff.

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 107

It is proposed to consider, first, Christ as " Logos," and then
to pass briefly in review texts definitely bearing on the doc-
trine under consideration, dwelling especially on the " Gospel
of the Incarnation " contained in Phil. ii. 5-11.

(i) Christ as Logos does not come before us in St. Paul as
a doctrine so definitely and clearly taught as in the Prologue
to St. John's Gospel. The references which might imply that
the ideas of the Logos current at the time supplied a phrase-
ology in which to express certain truths about Christ are
rather incidental than direct. Consequently it has been
stated that St. Paul does not go quite as far as St. John
— there is " a step to take " from the highest point reached
in the Pauline conception to the Johannine elevation.^ It
is asserted that we do not find St. John's universalistic
teaching in St. Paul. " Christ was the sustainer of the
Jewish nation (the Rock) and the centre and root of the
social unity of the Christian Church . . ., but I can see no
trace that he had learned to extend the same truth to the
whole world of heathen humanity, that he had grasped the
fullness of St. John's teaching." 2 Is it not, however, more
accurate to say that St. John and St. Paul were expressing
the same thoughts, the only difference being that St. John
has used expressions of them which St. Paul, writing under
very different circumstances, has not adopted ? Let us take
for a moment the " Logos " conception in St. John. As it
presents itself it seems to be a development of the Palestinian
" Logos " doctrine. But it contains new elements : {a)
The Logos is at once essentially Divine and an eternal Person ;
(b) the Logos became incarnate; (c) the Logos is identified
with the Messiah. (3) The Messiah of the Old Testament
is identified with the historical Jesus of Nazareth. We
think that these ideas are found in all their fullness in the
conceptions of St. Paul, and, generally speaking, the corre-

1 So Sabatier in St. Paul the Apostle, p. 262.

2 Mr. Hutton in Essays.

io8 THE CKRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

spondence of idea throughout is so striking that Dr. Salmon
could account for it only on the supposition that "St. John
read and valued St. Paul's writings."

Particular Coincidences in Idea.
This coincidence in idea may, moreover, be traced out
in numerous details. Dr. Bacon has recently done great
service in his book on The Story of St. Paul by pointing
out more fully and clearly the great part which the Logos
played in St. Paul's conception of Christ. The Logos was
the Wisdom Spirit from God, and the unifying principle
of the Universe. For St. Paul this Spirit is the Spirit of
Christ. In Christ, by Christ, for Christ, the universe is har-
monised. He is the bond of all things. In Him all things
cohere and are summed up. It was the purpose of God,
avaK6(f)d\,aico(7aadai ra rravra iv ru) XptcrTcp (Eph. i. lo).^
He is the Creator as well as the Goal of creation, the A and
the n. " Just as a Stoic might say : ' The Logos is the
rational element of creation, accounting for it as a cosmos ;
therefore the creation must achieve its ideal by this Logos
element pervading and dominating all its parts, as man
achieves his ideal when the Logos element in him fully
dominates,' so St. Paul too conceives of the universe as
an organism, but the Logos-Christ is the unifying, vitaliz-
ing element, corresponding to the blood or Spirit." ^

Coincidence of Terminology.

Turning to the Epistles ^ we are struck by the remarkable
coincidences in terminology with the Wisdom and Logos
hterature. Christ is the " image of the invisible God " : " the
firstborn in respect to all creation {irpwroTOKo^ Trda-T]^

1 The doctrine of " recapitulatio," " the summing up of all things
in Christ," as expounded by early Apologists, e.g. Justin Martyr
and Irenaeus, goes back to St. Paul's phrase and thought.

2 See The Story of St. Paul, pp. 323, 324, Dr. Bacon.

3 Especially those to the Colossians and Ephesians.

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 109

KTLo-eo)^), " For in Him all things were created, in the
heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things in-
visible." ^ The life of Christ pervades the universe. ^ " All
individual existence will be subjected to that. . . . This
intermediate Being demanded by philosophy as the agent and
medium of creation, revelation, and redemption, is nothing
else than the Spirit that was in Christ, called ' Wisdom '
in the Jewish literature, called ' Logos ' by Philo and the
Greeks." ^ It is the " Wisdom of God in a mystery " that we
speak,* a mystery which is the revelation of God's purpose
in creating the Universe, hitherto from all ages hidden in
God, Who created all things.^

So IT IS ESPECIALLY WITH REGARD TO CREATION

THAT St. Paul regards Christ as " Logos."

It is then perhaps especially with regard to creation that
St. Paul looks at Jesus as Logos. He is the Creator of the
world, and Himself the firstborn of all creation. He is the
pervading Logos principle in Whom the universe finds har-
mony and co-ordination. He is the Goal to which the whole
creation moves. He is, moreover, both the Word living in
the closest relationship to God (the X6709 evhidOeros:),
Wisdom dwelling with God,^ in Whom are hidden all the
treasures of Wisdom ; "^ and He is also the Word mani-
fested, Xo'709 irpo^opiKOi;, for Jesus Christ Himself had
spoken in the Old Testament, and Jesus Christ was the
revelation of God on earth. In Him dwelt all the fullness

1 Col. i. 15. See Wisdom vii. 26.

2 Cf. Wisdom i. 7. *' The Spirit of the Lord filleth the world,
and that which upholdeth all things together hath knowledge
of the voice." Also Wisdom vii. 24. " Wisdom passeth and goeth
through all things by reason of her pureness."

3 Story of St. Paul, p. 332, Dr. Bacon.
* I Cor. ii. 7.

^ Eph. iii. 9. It is noticeable, as Dr. Bacon points out, that
where St. John's Gospel and the Epistle to the Hebrews use " Logos,"
St. Paul uses the Palestinian term " Wisdom," p. 331 n. 2 of The
Story of St. Paul. s i Cor. i. 24. ' Col. ii. 3,

i

no THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

of the Godhead bodily. In Him hath God made known
the counsels hidden from the foundation of the world. We
can speak with \" the mind of Christ." ^ Hence we can
speak " God's wisdom in a mystery." All the problems
of the " Logos " doctrine and of cosmogony are solved in
Christ. The keynote to his solution is the word " Love." ^
We cannot enter into mystic union with the Logos-Wisdom-
Spirit by an intellectual process. It is " love," " the will
of God," not yvMai^, " enlightenment," by which we
come to know Him. " Therefore," concludes Dr. Bacon,
" the pre-existent Christ-Spirit is indeed to be identified
with the Wisdom of God and the Power of God, but above
all and beyond all with the Love of God." Moreover, we
must remember that the pre-existent Christ existed before
the Creation in a state of the closest intimacy with the
Father (for He was Son as well as Word). He is no longer
the impersonal semi-divine Logos of Philo. He is identified
with the Messiah, He is identified with Jesus Christ, He is
a person and absolutely Divine. Such, until further study
brings new light on this conception, are the ideas expressed
in St. Paul's Epistles in the highly technical language of
the Wisdom literature. They lead us to conclude that he
adopted that language to formulate in the dress most
familiar to himself and his readers the truths which Christ
Himself had taught him in the days of retirement and pre-
paration in the deserts of Arabia.

Col. I. 15-20 AND ITS Teaching about Christ as
Pre-existent.

We now turn to consider some of the texts bearing on
Christ as Pre-existent. The " Locus classicus " is of course
Col. i. 15-20.^ The first three verses, 15, 16 and 17,

1 I Cor. ii. 1-16.

2 So Dr. Bacon, The Story of St. Paul, p. 350.

^ OS icTTLV eiKwj/ Tov fe)£oS ToO" aofjuTOV . . . dnoKaTaWti^ai to. Truvra

U<; CLVTOV,

CHRIST AS ETERNAL iii

describe the relation of Christ to God and the world. We
note here especially the following phrases, (i) The image
of the Invisible God (et/cwy rov Qeou rov aopdrov ").
In the word image eUoov there are the three ideas of Repre-
sentation, Manifestation and Likeness.^ Dr. Lightfoot's
remark is just, that " the idea of perfection does not lie in
the word itself, but must be sought from the context, e.g.
'all the fullness' {irdp t6 TrXi^pofx^a v. 19)." Nor does
I Cor, xi. 7 allow us to see in the word alone what
Christian antiquity has ever regarded the expression " image
of God " as denoting, that is " the eternal Son's perfect
equality with the Father in respect of His substance,
nature and eternity." 2 Philo often used this word of the
" Logos." Still there is no doubt that the new meaning
of the Logos-doctrine to Christians filled the Logos-phrase-
ology with far deeper significance, and we may understand
the phrase when interpreted by the context, as implying
perfect Likeness, perfect Representation, and perfect Mani-
festation of the Invisible God.

2 "Firstborn of all Creation (Tr/jcoToTo/cofTracrT;? /cTio-eco?).^
The word " firstborn " Trpwroro/co? (like et/couz^, a Messianic
expression and applied even to God by R. Bechai)
conveys the ideas of [a] Priority " in respect of all creation,"
()8) Distinction from " the genus KrlaL^," * and perhaps
therefore implies the meaning " Heir and Sovereign." At all
events Christ's absolute pre-existence is here clearly taught.

(iii) "Who is the beginning" (09 eVxiv ap-^-q), i.e.
" in that He is apx'n-" The ideas underlying this word are
(a) Priority in time, (/3) the source of life. " The term is
here applied to the Incarnate Christ in relation to the

1 Colossiatis, Dr. Lightfoot, pp. 142 ff.

2 So Dr. Ellicott, Co/ossfans, p. 123. See Ephesians and Colossiavs,
Dr. T. K. Abbott, p. 210.

* Dr. Lightfoot's note hereon (p. 144 ff.) is excellent. He is in
the main followed by Dr. Abbott.

* Ephesians and Colossians, Dr. Abbott, p. 212.

112 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Church, because it is appHcable to the Eternal Word in
relation to the Universe.^ In each of these three words
{eUcov. irpcoToTOKOi;, apxv)> and indeed throughout the
passage, the idea of pre-existence is prominent.

Other Passages.

Some other passages in St. Paul's writings ought to be
mentioned, and it is noteworthy in referring to them that
as Beyschlag remarks, " especially in the earlier Epistles,"
St. Paul " presupposes (the doctrine of the Pre-existence)
as familiar to his readers and disputed by no one," e.g. we
find such texts as " God sent forth His Son " ^ ; " God send-
ing His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an
offering for sin, condemned sin in the flesh " ; ^ " Though
He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor " ^ ; " For
they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them, and the
rock was Christ." ^ So too we may see a deeper meaning
than is sometimes found in the words " and One Lord Jesus
Christ through Whom are all things and we through Him "
(St' ov TO, irdvra koI '^fieU Sl auTov).^ Weizsacker trans-
lates the phrase " The mediator of all things. Who is also
our mediator." It seems, writes Somerville, to point to a
wider activity, " to base Christ's present mediatorship in
regard to men on a prior one in regard to creation." He is
now the Lord and mediator of the Human Race. This
relationship existed long before in regard to " all things."

The meaning of Phil. ii. 3-10.

But St. Paul's views seem to centre especially round
the interpretation of Phil. ii. 3-10. Concerning this
famous passage a long and bitter controversy has raged.
Most of the combatants have, however, been silenced

1 Lightfoot, ad loc.

* Gal. iv. 4. * Rom. viii. 3. * 2 Cor. viii. 9.

^ I Cor. X. 4 (i Cor. xv. 47 probably refers to the exalted
Christ). ^ I Cor, viii. 6,

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 113

through a masterly exposition by Dr. Gifford, who seems
to leave little else to be said thereon.^ He deals, one by one,
with the points which the passage raises. A brief abstract
of his treatment will afford the best idea of the problems and
their soundest solution. From the context it is clear that
the aim of the passage is to give an example of humility
and self-sacrifice," " Have this mind in you " {rod to
(fypovelre iv v/xtv). The question at once arises and is
important for the whole interpretation of the passage, does
" Who being in the form of God " (0? eV /Jiopcfyrj Qeov
vTrdpxoiv) refer to the pre-existent, pre-human Christ alone,
or, as the Lutherans hold to-day, to Christ Incarnate
and wonder-working ? Dr. Gifford says, " neither exclu-
sively." It rather applies to both. That this can be so

1 A more recent interpretation of the passage is indicated by two
articles in the /. T. S. The first, by the Rev. J. Ross (vol. x. p. 573),
deals with dpTray^o?. He points out that it is admitted that dpTray/xos
usually means " the action of plundering " ; but sometimes is
equivalent to apivay^a, " plunder, booty." Now dp7ray/i,os is not
used elsewhere in LXXor New Testament, but ap-n-ayfia is used 17
times and always in the sense of " plunder." Probably, therefore,
St. Paul meant " the action of plundering " or he would have
used apirayjxa. It is likely that the Philippians understood it in the
active sense. They did not imagine that St. Paul spoke of robbing
God, but rather that the Messiah, Jesus Christ, did not think that
to be on an equality with God was the " plundering " or " rapacity,"
a wrong with which they were familiar through the Roman tax-
gatherers and praetors. On the contrary He gave all away. Unhke
an earthly king, He was among them as " He that serveth." So
the Philippians were to let this mind be in them. The dp7ray/xos
was just that to which He was tempted in the wilderness.

It is further pointed out that ap-n-ayixa could not equal dpTray/xos
because the former does not mean a thing to be grasped in the
future, but something grasped and carried off already. It may
have been aimed at the Judaising Church who boasted in the glory
and dominion which they would enjoy when Messiah came. How
could the Apostle help the Philippian Church ? By setting forth the
Lord as voluntarily and gladly rejecting the earthly ideal for the
spiritual, and thus winning the name above every name. (Also
see Expos. Times, vol. xix. p. 33, where Mr. F. B. Badhara connects

I

114 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

he shows by a discussion of the nature of the imperfect
tense, its use in the New Testament (as e.g. in John xi. 49
and 2 Cor. viii. 17), and its use in early Christian writers
(e.g. the letter of the Church of Lyons and Vienne to Asia).
So he concludes that Christ did not cease to be iv fiop^rj
&eov when He " emptied Himself."

The meaning of iv fiop^fi Qeov.

Next comes a discussion of the meaning of " iv p.op4>y
Qeov." Meyer, Alford, Hofmann, Bruce, Thomasius, refer
it to " the Divine appearance before Incarnation, the glory
visible at the throne of God." This rests on the assumption
that (i) the " H'Opcfi'n Qeov " is separable from the " ovaia "
or " ^ucrtf," the " essence "or " nature " of God ; or that
{ii) either (a) the " /Jiopcptj &eou " is equivalent to "to elvac
caa 06W," or {b) "/xop^ij " equals the " form of appearance,"
and " Laa@€M " the internal nature of the divine habitus.^
But he shows that these assumptions are both false.

the idea of the passage with the PauHne contrast between the First
and Second Adam and makes apivayfxov a reference to the apple.)

The second article is by the Rev. W. Warren (vol. xii. p. 461),
who asserts that the one weak spot in Dr. Gifford's study is the
assumption that dp7ray/Aos is the same as apTray/xa, contrary to St.
Paul's usual accuracy. In the words kavrov eKevoiaev there are
two ideas (i) abnegation of selfish impulses, the opposite of ambition,
(2) self-devotion and self-sacrifice, the opposite of plundering others.
It is the same thought that we find in " Who, being rich, became
poor," or in the story of the poor widow woman who withheld
nothing. Dr. Gifford assumes that lavrov iKevwcrev requires a
genitive of contents, i.e. that " Equality with God " was the only
thing of which Christ could have emptied Himself. But we may
translate " He poured out Himself, emptying His fullness into us,"
not He emptied Himself of anything. This would remove the
text from the sphere of the Kenotic Controversy, and we now inter-
pret the passage, " He considered His equality with God not as
an opportunity of self-aggrandisement, but effaced all thought of
self and poured out His fulness to enrich others."

1 So Meyer makes " habitus " equal the whole idea of divinity
though it is the Latin translation of " a-)(!]fia."

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 115

" Mop(f)y] " is properly the nature or essence, not in the ab-
stract, but as actually subsisting in the individual, and
retained as long as the individual exists. This is a sense
that would be familiar to St. Paul.^ So " /iop0?; " cannot
exist in Christ without (^yo-t? and /' ova la," nor these with-
out that, any more than abstract can exist without concrete,
universal without individual. " Mop^ij rov 0eov," then,
(i) includes the whole nature of the Deity and is inseparable
from it, {ii) is not itself inclusive of anything " accidental "
or separate, (m) could not be put off by the Son of God
at the Incarnation, without His thereby ceasing to be God.
Nor was the form of God laid aside to take the " form of s
slave."

The meaning of t6 etyat taa ©eoJ " AND " apira'yiJLOV."

The next phrase of the passage, " t6 ehai. la- a @eu>," ac-
cording to Meyer, does not mean " being equal to God," but
" the God-equal existence," that is, existence in the way of
equality with God. Dr. Gifford shows that " elvai " here
is substantive and the phrase equals " to avro<; elvai, taa
©ew." Moreover, it is grammatically wrong to place an
attributive {Jaa @ea>) after the article and substantive. Thus
it is the mode of existence that is changed, not the nature.
" He divested himself of the glories, the prerogatives, of
dignity, not of the essence." Christ, then, emptied Himself
of what He did not consider as " apira'^ixov," that is " to elvat
Xaa ©ew." De Wette and Thomasius deny that He ever
possessed this, and " dpiraypov " may certainly have either
of two meanings, the passive meaning, " Who though He
pre-existed in the form of God, yet did not regard it a thing
to be greedily clutched, but," as distinct from the active mean-
ing, " Who because he was subsisting did not regard it as an
act of plunder." Of these two meanings the context decides
us in favour of the former. The phrases " Taking the form

1 Lightfoot quotes Plutarch and Philo-Judaeus.

ii6 THE CHRISTOLOCxY OF ST. PAUL

of a servant," " being made in the likeness of men," and
" being found in fashion as a man," " He emptied Himself,"
" He humbled Himself," ^ do not necessarily either imply or
exclude the reality of the nature assumed by Christ. The
" Kenosis " and the " Humiliation " are both voluntary.
" He emptied Himself," " He humbled Himself." " The self-
consciousness of Christ voluntarily remained that of the Son
of God developing Himself humanly. As to the manner
in which these two natures are united in one person, as to
the degree in which the Deity was limited and the Humanity
exalted during His earthly life, the Apostle has said nothing
whatever."

The bearing of the Passage on Doctrine of the
Pre-existence of Christ.

This passage has always been regarded as having an inti-
mate bearing on the Pre-existence of Christ. If Dr. Gifford's
interpretation is correct, (and there is no serious refutation,)
either Christ must have been regarded by St. Paul as Eter-
nally God, or the passage must be explained away in some
such manner as Schleiermacher attempts to do, when he
says that the statements therein contained are merely
" ascetic " and " rhetorical " in character and were " not
intended to be didactically fixed." Hilgenfeld regarded
the " Pauline Christ as heavenly man but not a Divine
Being." Through His self-humiliation He attained to
equality with God. But this is manifestly not a Pauline
view. Ritschl in his opposition to metaphysics (a point
of view which Somerville to some degree shares) is obliged
to postulate an ideal pre-existence simply in the thought of
God. The term " Divinity " is nothing but the absolute
confidence of believers in the redemptive power of Jesus.

^ " fj.op(f>7]v SovXov Aa^wVj' '' £1' ojxoutifxaTL avOpwTroiV yero/^tcvo?' Kai
a^^-^/jLUTL €vpe6eL<i ws avOpmiro';" " kavTOv eKevwaev" " eraTTCivwo'ev

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 117

" We must not seek a doctrine of the Divinity of Jesus Christ
in the New Testament, but simply the expression of rehgious
behevers in contact with His Person." We may ask what
the difference is between the two ? The expression of the
conviction of rehgious behevers in contact with the Person
of Jesus is a doctrine of His Divinity. It is Christ in history
to whom St. Paul refers here. " In the letters addressed
to that Church there are not wanting indications how he
would have dealt with the subjective impressionism to
which they would reduce his historical Christology. . . .
It is not Christ's sufferings, or even His death, but His very
existence in humanity, which constitutes for Paul the final
proof of His self-renunciation." ^ Harnack states that the
doctrine of the divine Pre-existence is a mere reflection in
St. Paul's mind of the glorified Humanity in which he first
beheld Christ. The flesh was inadequate and hostile, and
therefore a humiliation. Godet is inconsistent in his trans-
lations of the passage ; Pfleiderer comes to it with a pre-
conceived idea of Christ as the Pre-existent Heavenly Man.^
" As Paul understood it, this was not an Incarnation in the
strict doctrinal sense, as the Son of God was really celestial
head of the race before. He did not need therefore to take
human nature, but simply exchanged the form of celestial
existence or godlike body of light for the body of flesh."
Dorner takes more or less the same view of Christ as "an
embodied Ideal of religious and divine humanity " as
Pfleiderer. He says that the " iyco " of our personality
is formed in the image of His. " In virtue of this abase-
ment He was able to enter into a human development com-
pletely similar to ours." Somerville holds with Hingelfeld

1 The Christ of History and of Experience, Dr. Forrest. We cannot
altogether endorse Dr. Forrest's last sentence — as we believe that
St. Paul found the " final proof " in the death of Christ rather
than in His life on earth. But both were necessary and we can-
not accurately speak of either as " final " without the other.

2 See " The Hibbert Lectures," 1885.

ii8 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

that that Lordship over all, referred to in the words " to
ehab 'laa Qew," was conferred on Christ at His Resurrection
and not possessed in a pre-incarnate state. " Christ," he
says, " was highly exalted " (uTrepvylrcoa-e). We are to picture
to ourselves a situation in which the Pre-incarnate one had
" presented to Him the career by which He was to realize
the possibilities that lay wrapt up in His being in the form
of God." The higher glory won was that of being " loved,
honoured and adored by all on the ground of service rendered
to them." We cannot, however, believe that that ground
is sufficient to constitute a new and higher nature in Jesus
Christ Himself. Would that make Him taa Qew ? Surely
it is impossible to think that any but One in essence God
could so be described. The majesty of equality in attribute
with God can never be " attained." It is no part of St.
Paul's teaching that Christ became God as a result of His
work on earth and of winning the gratitude of his fellow-
creatures.

The Axiom of Interpretation. Three Classes of
Opinion.

All these theories are but attempts to read into the plain
meaning of the text notions which are supplied by the mind
of the exegete himself. To us who desire to find out St.
Paul's own view of Christ they cannot commend themselves.
Whatever conclusion we come to, there is one axiom which
must be at its base, that is, there is one and the same Being in
every stage of the existence of Jesus Christ. " There is . . .
one Lord Jesus Christ." ^ But even if this be granted, there
is considerable variety of view as to the nature of this Being. ^
Opinions fall as a rule into one of three classes : —

{i) Christ was in His essential nature Man and no more.

1 I Cor. viii. 6.

2 Kenotic theories in general arose from a conviction that
real human experience and nature were certainly to be postulated
in any Christology.

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 119

He pre-existed as heavenly Spiritual Man, to be revealed
in due time as the Pattern Man. This view has been dealt
with under the head of the Second Adam (ii) Secondly,
there is the orthodox view of the Nature of Christ. Somer-
ville admits that it does full justice to the Divine factor in
the Person of Our Lord, and to those passages which assign
cosmological functions to the Pre-incarnate One. It also
finds a reason in the original constitution of His Person for
His present supremacy over all. He asserts that its weak-
ness consists in its sacrificing the humanity of the historic
Christ, and, with that. His moral and religious significance
for the life of men, to what is conceived to be the interest
of His essential and metaphysical Divinity. But is this
true ? Does the Catholic dogma of Perfect God and Perfect
Man " sacrifice " the humanity of the historic Christ ?
None would assert more emphatically than orthodox theo-
logians the real human nature taken by Our Lord,^ and none
see more of His moral and religious significance for the life
of man than those who regard Him as pre-existing in essence
as God, as emptying Himself, taking unto Himself the nature
of humanity, and thereby working redemption for mankind
and setting before them a life of perfect obedience to God's
will.2 So Bishop Gore says, " There is indeed no evidence
of a Divine Providence, watching over the fortunes of the
Church, more marked than that which is to be found in the
decisive and reiterated refusal to admit any opinion to be
Christian which explained away the reality or the natural
and spiritual completeness of our Lord's manhood." ^

1 " The resistance of Antioch to Alexandria saved, or went
as far as seemed possible to save, the integrity and reality of the
human nature in Christ." Dr. Sanday, Christologies Ancient and
Modern, p. 54.

2 We admit that the Greek Church after Nicaea and Chalcedon
had made Christ " a philosophical abstraction, and forgotten that
He was a living man " and thus gave rise to the Iconoclastic con-
troversy. See Gwatkin, Knowledge of God, vol. ii. p. 118.

» Dissertations, Dr. Gore, p. 138.

120 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

A difficult objection for Catholic theologians to answer
is, however, raised by Somerville. " If there is," he says,
" all the difference between what Christ in His transcendent
nature is and what we are, that there is between One who
is possessed of the Infinite attributes of Divinity and those
that are finite and exist under the limitations of creature-
hood, then it is hard to see how there can be any real union
between the Human and the Divine in His Historical Per-
sonality or how He could be in any true sense a ^ man."
And again, " The only question is whether His original God-
head is to be conceived of under those attributes of infinity
that are incommunicable to human nature, or as having
affinities with and relations to what is human that explain
the Divinity of man as " made in the image of God," Here
we are face to face with the paradox that meets us on the
threshold of any inquiry into the nature of the Person of
Christ. He is both universal and local, absolute and mani-
fested in time, omnipotent and subject to a human mother,
omniscient and growing in wisdom, omnipresent yet with
a human body. We may gain illumination with increasing
knowledge of the laws of personality which will enable uS
in some measure to understand such a union of the Human
and the Divine,^ but we may hardly hope to explain it
entirely. The orthodox theologian insists that both are
true in Christ, but the explanation still remains a deep
mystery. [Hi) Yet it is this difficulty that has led to the third
view also treated of above, i.e. that in the Pre-existent Christ
there was an essential union of both God and Man, a view of

1 Rather " Man " — not a separate Person from Christ as God.
In Him as Man the Incarnation had universal significance. He
summed up and represented liumanity before God. Christians,
as members of the human race, die with Him and rise again to
newness of Hfe.

2 So Dr. Sanday has made a bold and striking essay in his book
Christologies Ancient and Modern, offering a new line of thought
suggested by recent psychological research. See infra, p 220.

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 121

which the objections stated before seem to afford an adequate
refutation. 1

The Question of the Moral Consciousness of our
Lord in His Earthly Life.

In the meantime there rises another difficulty which we
approach humbly, realizing that we are entering again those
mysterious realms of Christian paradox, where only the
single eye of a simple faith and a pure heart can clearly see.
It is the question of the moral consciousness of Our Lord
in His human life.^ It is not a question, as Dr. Gore points
out, which ought to harass the ordinary life of faith, but
it rightly presents its problem, and demands our thought.
" We shall bow in awful reverence before the deep things
of God, but we shall, none the less, seek to go as far as we
can." ' The two Pauline passages bearing on the sub-
ject are the one we have just been considering, i.e. Phil,
ii. 5-11, the self-emptying, and 2 Cor. viii. g, the
self-beggary. These undoubtedly teach a self-limitation,
a teaching which the Gospels as unmistakably exhibit.
Christ is regarded as laying aside the " mode of divine
existence " (" to elvai taa 0ecp "). There was a " real
entrance of the Eternal Son of God into our manhood,
and into the limited conditions of consciousness necessary
to a really human state. Yet, on the other hand. He is the
Word, the Eternal Logos of God, the Creator, Sustainer, and
Goal of all things. He is the principle of cohesion in the
universe. He impresses upon creation that unity and solid-
arity which makes it a cosmos instead of a chaos." ^ Were
then these functions suspended in the Incarnation ? To

1 See Jesus Christ as the Second Adam, p. 57 ff.

2 See Dr. Weston's book The One Christ ; also for the theory
of a " double consciousness," see infra, p. 223.

^ Dissertations, Dr. Gore, p. 73.

* Philippians, Dr. Lightfoot on the passage (ii. 5-1 1).

122 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

what extent did He empty Himself ? These are the ques-
tions that confront the thinker. The answers given by
theologians may broadly be divided into four classes.^

Four Classes of Answer.
(i) The Theory of a " Dual Consciousness."

(i) First there is the theory of a " dual consciousness."
Of this view by far the most capable account we have seen
is given in Dr. Gore's dissertations.^ During Our Lord's
human life He had as it were a double life and conscious-
ness. Within His humanity He withdrew from operation
His power, His majesty and His omniscience. Yet it was
the Eternal Word Himself Who lived under human con-
ditions of limitation. " And this seems to postulate that
the personal life of the Word should have been lived, as it
were, from more than one centre, that He Who knows and
does all things in the Father and in the universe should
(reverently be it said) have begun to live from a new centre
when He assumed Manhood, and under new and restricted
conditions of power and knowledge." ^ There was no in-
terruption of His cosmic functions ; from the one centre
He lives as the Eternal Logos, from the other centre He
was the earthly Christ, the Jewish Messiah, the Christian
Redeemer.

Dr. Gore goes on to urge reasons why such a dual con-
sciousness is not inconceivable.

His considerations are helpful but not altogether convinc-
ing. Somerville objects to this view in the following words :
" I do not see, however, on this view, how we can believe
in a Divine Personality as the principle of the Personal life

1 Dr. Forrest regards the Kenotic theories as far more satisfactory
than the " too abstract " and " exaggeratedly antithetic " formula
of Chalcedon. {The Christ of History and the Christ of Experience,
p. 194)

2 This view also urged by Bishop Martensen and R. H. Hutton.

3 Dissertations, Dr. Gore, p. 215.

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 123

of Jesus Christ, since it is only outside of the latter and as
extra-mundane that this Divine Person is conceived as exist-
ing as He really is ; or that we can affirm more of Christ, if
this theory be true, than that He possessed in an extraordin-
ary measure that Spirit of God that is the principle of every
true human personality. And in that case the union of the
Divine and Human in His Person is no more than the
supreme instance of the union that is normal of every true
Christian." ^ We venture to think, however, that this
objection somewhat misses the point and is scarcely valid
against the orthodox doctrine of the Christian Church. It
is not outside the personal life of Jesus Christ or as extra-
mundane that this Divine Person is conceived of as existing
as He really is. In some way which we cannot fathom, Jesus
Christ during His life on earth was the Divine Person. It
was He Himself Who was incarnate. " It is no doubt true,' '
says Dr. Gore, " that as God He possessed potentially at
every moment the divine as well as the human conscious-
ness and nature." ^ If He was exercising the functions of
the Word in one sphere, yet it was also He, and not merely
a man animated by His Spirit, that underwent the real
" Kenosis " within the sphere of humanity. This view
comes to us with no small weight of orthodox authority, as
Dr. Gore shows, extending from Irenaeus to Dr. Westcott ;
and as such it will commend itself strongly to all Christian
thinkers.

(2) The " Absolute Kenotic " Theory.
(2) Secondly and going to the other extreme, there is the
" absolute kenotic " theory advocated by Godet, and in the
main by Gess, and the Lutheran theologians generally.
" How is such a self-deprivation on the part of a divine
Being conceivable ? " Godet asks ^ ; and answers thus : " It

1 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, pp. 207, 208.

2 Dissertations, Dr. Gore, p. 97.

3 Commentary on St. John i. 14. See p. 362 and p. 396 ££.

124 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

was necessary, first of all, that He should consent to lose
for a time His self -consciousness as a divine subject." He
ceases to live the life of the Godhead altogether. He gives
up to the Father His cosmic functions. The Logos could
only become man if He ceased to act except in the human
nature which He took upon Himself.

It is the absolute abandonment that is the difficulty of this
view to the present writer. It does not appear to be Scrip-
tural and requires assumptions " so tremendous that nothing
short of a positive apostolic statement could drive one to
contemplate it."

(3) The Union of the Natures by a Moral
Process.

(3) A third view is that advocated by Dorner.^ The
union of the natures is a moral process. The incarnation
is a gradual one. Dorner postulated at first a dual per-
sonality, a perfect, personal, humanity within the life of the
Divine personality. There was a gradual communication of
the Personal Logos to the human person until entire unity
resulted. This repeats the error attributed to Nestorius
and, as Dr. Gore shows, 2 even though later modified^ by
making the Logos a " principle " rather than a separate
personahty, it is still Nestorian at the bottom.

(4) The " Partial Kenotic Theory."

(4) Fourthly there is what Dr. Gore terms the " Partial
Kenotic " theory. It was maintained in Germany by
Thomasius and Delitzsch. Dr. Fairbairn in his book,
Christ in Modern Theology, has clearly explained it. The
one thing which is essential, that is the real continuity of a
conscious personal life is safeguarded to a far greater extent
than the theory of absolute " Kenosis " demands. " The

^ Doctrine of the Person of Christ, Div. ii. vol. iii. pp. 250-254.
Cf., too, the error of Paul of Samosata who taught that Clirist pro-
gressed towards divinity (e/< irpoKOTrrjs TedeoTroLrjcrOai).

* Dissertations.Di. Gove, p. 195. ^ As Rothe and Dorner do.

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 125

external attributes of God are omnipotence, omniscience,
omnipresence; but the internal are truth and love. . . . The
external alone might constitute a Creator, but not a Deity ;
the internal would make out of a Deity the Creator. What-
ever, then, could be surrendered, the ethical attributes and
qualities could not ; but God may only seem the more God-
like if, in obedience to the ethical. He limit or restrain or
veil the physical." ^ Thus the physical attributes were
abandoned. " So," says Dr. Gore, Dr. Fairbairn as much
as M. Godet, " postulates that Christ did absolutely abandon
His relation of equality with God and His functions in the
universe." 2 But does not Dr. Gore here confuse the
being in the form of God (" eV fiop(f)fj Oeov ") with " to ehai
la-a 06ft) " ? If he means to assert that His " relation
of equality with God " (" to ehai taa &ecp ") was not
abandoned he seems to forget Phil. ii. 7-10, or at all
events to be inconsistent with his interpretation thereof
in other places. What Christ retained was, as shown above,
the " ev fj^opcp^ Oeov " ; and what He emptied Himself of
was " TO elvai laa &€^," whatever meaning we attach to
those phrases.

Indeed, no theory of the consciousness of our Lord during
His lifetime appears to be free from objections. It seems
to the present writer that any theory ought to take account
of those points which we have raised in the present discussion.
We must make our idea of the Self-Emptying and Self-
Beggary of our Lord's human life consistent with our idea
of the pre-existent Christ. The difficulties of doing this
are great, as has been pointed out ; so great indeed that
many have given up the task as impossible for the human
mind. " The failure of all theologians to interpret intel-
lectually the Person of Christ in the light of the special
religious truth that in each case gives interest to their

1 Christ in Modern Theology, Dr. Fairbairn, pp. 354, 476.
a Dissertations, Dr. Gore, p. 192

126 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

speculations, illustrates the inability of the human mind
to deal with the metaphysics of the subject." ^ So the
whole bearing of the passage in Philippians is considered
by Somerville and Haupt to be " entirely foreign " to any
question of metaphysical theories of the " Kenosis." It
speaks not of a surrender of metaphysical attributes but
of a moral act of self-abnegation. He won the Headship
not by " grasping," but by " humble " obedience. But
of what, on this view, did the Humiliation consist ? Surely
the passage tells us that Christ came from glory to the
limitations of earthly life for us. If so, metaphysical
problems are bound to arise, and they are not answered by
denying their existence.

A TENTATIVE ViEW OF THE PrE-EXISTENT ChRIST.

However unsatisfying, then, the solution may be, it is
our task to try to form some conception of the bearing
of these questions on the Eternal Nature of Christ, It
seems to the present writer that in the Pre-incarnate Son,
and arising from the very fact that He was the Son of the
Father, there was not only His Eternal Nature as God,
but there were also potentialities which enabled Him in
course of time to take upon Himself our nature. In the
Old Testament times ^ He may have appeared as an angel
in human form. For instance. He was probably personally
present with His people in the wilderness as the " Angel of
the Covenant." If so, then these potentialities had already
become to a certain degree active. At all events, their
existence seems to be postulated by His Incarnation of the

1 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, and so in the whole chapter
on the " Eternal Nature of Christ."

2 It is held by some that the man " made " in the image of God
of Gen. i. 27 is none other than our Lord Himself.

" His Divine Person, if it is allowable so to speak, included
an essential capacity for the Incarnation " (St. John x. 36, Westcott,
a passage seen after the compilation of this essay).

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 127

Virgin Mary, and all He has afterwards become for mankind.
During His earthly life, He was God as well as Man, One
Person and the same as the Pre-existent Son. His Self-
Emptying consisted in the restrictions and limitations
without which His life as Son of Man on earth would have
been impossible. Whether this self-limitation can be
defined as Dr. Fairbairn has above defined it, as refer-
ring to His physical attributes, is a question which ought
rather to be answered in the negative than the affirmative.
In any case God in Christ shines through and permeates
every action of His on earth. This so impressed the Jews
that He was accused of " making Himself God." ^ He,
the Eternal, the Omnipotent, the Omniscient, is incarnate
with the fullness of the powers of God dwelling in and exer-
cised by Him, except in so far as the limitations of His
earthly life made that impossible. It was a voluntary
humiliation, because He came down from heaven and a
position of infinite glory to win, through humble obedience
yet voluntary emptying and beggary, the salvation of man-
kind. Yet the potentiahty for a return to Divine Majesty
was at all times present with Him. It was as if one were
to become a leper to work amongst and save lepers, yet
retained the power at any time to shake off the leprosy
and return to his fellows. Christ the sinless became sin
for us, " Him who knew no sin He made to be sin for us." *
This St. Paul saw in the self-emptying. But to the difficult
question of the cosmic relations of Christ during His earthly
life, St. Paul does not seem to supply any answer. Ulti-
mately He regards Christ as the Logos, the Word, the
Creator of the World, and its Sustainer. He is moreover
the Giver of the Holy Ghost. Can we say that God the
Father assumes these functions during the earthly life of
His Son ? We have indications from our Lord's own words

1 St. John. X. 33. See Expositor, viith ser., p. 446.

2 2 Cor. V. 21.

128 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

of the deep, personal and loving care that the Father was
exercising over all creation. It is the Father in Heaven Who
numbers the very hairs of our heads and knows when the
sparrow falls to the ground. It is the Father Who sends
rain on the just and on the unjust. It is the Father Who
knows when the " day of the Lord " shall be. There was
yet after the Incarnation unbroken communion between
the Son and the Father. " The Father was personally
present with the Son." ^ In work, in counsel, in Godhead
they were one (e^). But we can hardly go farther than to
suggest that so far as Christ by the necessities of His life
on earth was obliged to limit the exercise of His cosmical
functions, so far did God the Father directly and mediately
take them upon Himself. It would require years of study
and thought before any true estimate of this limitation
could be formed, and it may be that in our present
state of knowledge and insight it is impossible to reconcile
these truths, though the reconciliation, we believe, will
one day be found in Him " who sums up all things " in
His Person.

Summary.

Our survey of St. Paul's view of Christ as eternal has been
very limited. There are other words of his than those
dealt with in this chapter which imply His Eternal nature.
The use of the name " The Son of God " will be considered
later, and the expression " the Image of the Invisible God "
has already been commented on. We have seen Christ
as the Eternal Logos, the Word of God, without Whom
God cannot be conceived of as existing, and Who is unthink-
able without God. We have discussed the cosmical func-
tions of the Logos, his office as Creator, as the Upholder,
and Unifying Principle of the Universe. The difficulties of
the great Philippian passage have been pointed out. We
1 Cf. St. John viii. 29 and see Westcott, ad he.

CHRIST AS ETERNAL 129

have seen that He was one and the same Person in His
pre-incarnate Hfe and in His humihation. " The supposition
of an act of self-emptying on the part of the second Person
of the Trinity, that means the divesting Himself of those
qualities that constitute His divine nature, is one that just
views of God do not allow us to entertain." ^ There is a
continuity of Divine life and the Divine Person in Him
Whom we know as Jesus Christ. He it is, moreover, as
we have shown elsewhere. Who is Exalted and Glorified
and Who is even now in Heaven, till the great day of His
appearing. Then shall come the end of all things, and the
Son shall deliver up the Kingdom to the Father. But in
that consummation He will not cease to be, nor will He be
absorbed in Him who is all in all ; but He will live on as
" the first among many brethren," yet at the same time
co-equal and co-eternal with God the Father, and God the
Holy Spirit.

1 So A. B. Bruce writes in his criticism of the theory advocated
by Gess.

CHAPTER VII

Christ as Immanent

St. Paul the Mystic.

ST. JOHN has been often regarded as the most mystical
of New Testament writers, and many commentators
have seen in his Gospel and Epistles an Alexandrian type
of mystical speculation. The mystical element in his
writings and faith has, however, been unduly emphasised.
On the other hand, that of St. Paul, who is really as mystical,
to say the least, as St. John, has certainly been under-
estimated. St. Paul, with his unique experience behind
him, felt that he owed his religious life to the appearance
of the Christ, Who was revealed to him, and Who revealed
to him the knowledge required for his future work. Hence
his contempt for philosophy.^ A man's religion must be
that of the heart, revelation must be internal, it is the
spiritual mind alone that can comprehend the things of the
Spirit. The mysteries of Christianity are only for those
who are cleansed " from all defilement of flesh and spirit." ^
Then in the inner life the light begins to shine, growing
stronger and clearer and purer, bringing to the believer a
proportionate increase of knowledge, grace and love. " He
exalts the inner light into an absolute criterion of right
and wrong." ^

1 I Cor. i. and ii. ^ 2 Cor. vii. i.

3 Christian Mysticism, Dr. Inge, p. 62. Of what does religious
experience consist ? Prof. K. Lake thinks that religious contro-

130

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 131

Christology and Pneumatology.

We have already dwelt on the ever present conception
in St, Paul's writings that the individual Christian experi-
ences in his own life the redemptive process of Christ who
set forth for us in His life, death, and resurrection the law
of redemption. How does this come about ? It is by
faith {Sia TTLareo)^), as the means though not the source,^
that we are justified (Gal. ii. 16). Faith is necessary for the
entrance upon Christian life testified to in the rite of Bap-
tism, " For ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ
Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ
did put on Christ " (Gal. iii. 26, 27). It is in faith (tV Tr/o-ret)
that St. Paul lives (Gal. ii. 20), through faith in Christ {Sta
Trj<i irlareco^ avrov) we are brought near to God (Eph. iii.
12 ; Rom. v. 2). As those who eat the sacrifices offered to
idols enter into fellowship with demons, so those who partake
of the sacrifices from the altar at Jerusalem are sharers
of the life of Jehovah, and so those who partake of the
Supper of the Lord worthily, that is, without disorder and
in faith, enter into fellowship with Him (i Cor. x. 15-21).
Faith is more than conviction or orthodoxy. It is always
" living " and " saving." It is " an energy of the whole
nature, an active transference of the whole being into an-
other life " ^ (et? XpccrTOu ^Irjcrovv e-n-Larevaafxev ; Gal.
ii. 16). It is loving trust (fiducia).^ It is the means of

versy of the near future will centre round the opposing propositions
(i) That religion is the communion of man, in the sphere of
subliminal consciousness, with some other being higher than himself.
(2) That it is communion of man with his own subliminal conscious-
ness which he does not recognize as his own, but hypostatizes as
some one exterior to himself [Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, p. 252).

1 But cf. €K TTtcrrews in same passage and Lightfoot ad loc.
Our Article xi. is " per fidem " not " propter fidem."

2 Westcott, St. John, Introd. p. xxxix.

* " Faith . . . leaves us outside Christ, trusting to Him ; but
this crowning act of faith (eating the flesh of Christ and drinking

132 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

sonship (Gal. iii. 26),^ of peace with God (Rom. v. i) ; of
life (Gal. ii. 20),- of unity (Eph. iv. 5 ; iv. 13 ; 2 Cor. iv.
13), of protection (Eph. vi. 16), of power (Gal. v. 6),^ of
illumination (2 Cor. v. 7).* But it is by the Holy Spirit
that faith itself is born (Gal. v. 22). " The work of the
Spirit may not be displaced by the activity of the human
spirit," ^ and it is by His personal Agency that Christ is
formed within us. Thus it is the Holy Spirit that works
in our hearts, and makes entreaty for us with sighs " too
deep for words " [vTrepevrvyx^dvei crTevayfMot^ dXaXijroi^).^
" Where the Spirit dwells and works, God dwells and
works (i Cor. iii. 16 ; vi. 19 ; 2 Cor. iii. 17) ; it is by
the Spirit that God is immanent in men." ' We propose,
then, to consider briefly the relation between St. Paul's
doctrine of the Spirit and the Christ in Whom we live by
the Spirit ; for we shall find that, for St. Paul — as for our-
selves— Christology and Pneumatology are inseparable
both from each other and from the Christian life. So
intimate is this relationship that to attempt to set forth
the one without reference to the other would result in an
extremely inadequate and probably misleading presentation.

Aspects of St. Paul's Doctrine of the Holy Spirit.

(l) %«pt9 AND 'x^apla-fMaTu.

As we study St. Paul's views, three leading conceptions
of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit become prominent : —

(i) First St. Paul distinguishes between the miraculous
gifts {xapio-fiara) and Grace (^^api?), the normal exercise
of the Christian life in love, humility and joy. He does

His blood) incorporates us in Christ " (Westcott, Revelation of the
Father, p. 40).

1 Cf. St. John i. 12. 3 St. John xi. 25.

2 St. John xiv. 12. * Cf. St. John xii. 36, 46.
^ Kuyper, The Work of the Holy Spirit, Introd. p. xiv.
8 Rom. viii. 26, cf. viii. 16.

' Art. H.D.B., " The Holy Spirit," Prof. H. B. Swete.

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 133

not indeed neglect the former, for he lived, as Professor
Swete points out, in an age of physical manifestations. In
fact, in one place he treats of them at length (i Cor. xii.).
But he knows that in the Spirit's work there lies a deeper,
more abiding office. " The permanent results of the
Spirit's coming are faith, hope and love." He works in the
human body but still more in the human spirit ; for, by
His presence and working, a life of sonship to God is the
possession of the believer,^ a life corresponding to the Risen
life of Christ." This life the Spirit seals ,^ being moreover the
earnest [appa^odv] of a yet greater work of the Spirit in the
Resurrection of the body and the " immeasurable life of
progress " lying beyond. Such is, in brief, the work which
St. Paul in his earlier Epistles attributes to the Holy Spirit.

We are not to suppose that the Early Church in Palestine
deliberately regarded the Holy Ghost as excluded from
this sphere ; but for them the outward x^P^^f^"-'^^ were
the more remarkable, and therefore were chiefly assigned to
the Spirit as His work.

St. Paul, however, had seen men arise who could prophesy
in the name of his Master, and do many wonderful works,
yet whose lives he knew were lived in sin.^ Hence he would
be led to a deeper insight of the Spirit's function than was
prevalent among those Christians whose experience of the
Spirit's working was confined to the Charismata and out-
ward manifestations. The Holy Spirit was the Sanctifier and
builder up of the hfe in Christ. For St. Paul the " moral
miracle " ^ of a sinful man made holy came to be the greatest
miracle oj. all. The steady, not the intermittent, action of the
Spirit alone brought growth in grace. The Holy Spirit
dwelt in man as a Temple,^ which must never be allowed to

1 Rom. viii. 14, 15, 16 ; Gal. iv. 4-6.

* Rom. viii. 2. ^2 Cor. i. 22 ; v. 5. * i Cor. xiii. 2.

5 St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, Dr. A. B. Bruce, p. 249.

* I Cor. iii. 16.

134 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

become defiled by sin. He is immanent, dwelling in our
hearts. But Christ also dwells in our hearts by faith. We
cannot in our experience separate these two indwellings.
Therefore 6 8e Kvpi,o<i to Ilvevad eaTLv} " The Spirit is
the ' alter ego ' of the Lord."

(2) The Identification of the Spirit of God and the

Spirit of Christ.

Next we observe the identification of the Spirit of God
and the Spirit of Christ. He is the Spirit of Him Who raised
up Christ from the dead (Rom. viii. 11), i.e. the Father. He
is the Spirit of Christ Himself as the Anointed One and as
Son of God (Gal. iv. 6). Somerville^ sees in this fact an
advance in the primitive doctrine, for, " while it was the
original belief that the Divine Spirit is given to men through
Christ, it does not seem to have been held till Paul taught it
that this Divine Gift is itself the Spirit of Christ — the active
principle of His Personality." As the Person of Christ
became more and more associated with the work of His Spirit
in the heart, so it would be seen how those noble qualities,
which found their highest perfection in Him, were produced
and nourished by His Spirit. It would thus become in-
creasingly apparent what the higher work of the Holy Spirit
really was. Moreover we can see with Somerville how, by
drawing close the Gift and the Person and identifying the
Spirit of God with the energy of the personal life of Jesus,
Paul furnished a test for phenomena to discriminate be-
tween those proceeding from the Divine Spirit and those
proceeding from an alien source.

(3) The Identification of the Spirit of God and the

Spirit of Christ with the Person of Christ.

There seems to have been an identification of both
the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ with the Person of

1 2 Cor. iii. 17. So Dr. Plummer thereon.

2 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, p. 117.

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 135

Christ. This we find in two texts particularly ; i Corinthians
XV. 45, " The last Adam (became) a hfe-giving Spirit "
(0 ecr^aro? i4Sa/x . . . {iyeyero) et? irvevfia ^wottolovv), and
I Corinthians vi. 17, " But he that is joined unto the
Lord is one spirit " (6 Se /coXXoj/xevo? rep Kupiw ey iryev/xa).

Yet there was a True Distinction between the Lord
AND THE Holy Spirit.

These texts, however, by no means lead us to conclude
that St. Paul is here setting up any theory of the Person of
Christ. He does not set himself to construct " a philosophy
of religion in which the relation of the Holy Spirit to God,
to the Church, and to the human soul, receives scientific treat-
ment." ^ His whole conception of the Spirit arises from
his own religious experience. The Spirit had been at work
in his own inner life and he knew Christ as the source, the
only source, of the growth in holiness and grace which con-
stituted the deepest experience that life contained. So, as
we pointed out above, he could identify the Holy Spirit and
his risen Lord. But he also distinguished them very mar-
kedly, and here we must join issue withWernle, who writes
in one place, " The Spirit and Christ must be identical, as
indeed we should infer from the very expression ' Spirit of
Christ,' which connects the two conceptions." 2 Again, he
says, " It is the Christianization of the Spirit, who is thereby
transformed from an impersonal force of nature into the
historical influence of the person of Jesus." ^ A.nd
again, " Jesus made children of God of His disciples
without uttering one word about Salvation. . . . The
Spirit is nothing but the influence of the personality of Jesus
in history." * This view of St. Paul's conception of the Spirit
we hope to show to be inadequate by referring to St. Paul's
own writings. First we have the three Persons named as

1 Art. " The Holy Spirit," H. D. B., Prof. H. B. Swete.

2 Beginnings of Christianity, Wernle, vol. i. p. 265.

3 Wernle {op. cit.), vol. i. p. 265. * Wernle [op. cit.), vol. i. p. 288.

136 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

distinct hypostases ^ in " The Grace " (2 Cor. xiii. 14). Then
the whole passage, Romans viii. 12-30, especially verses 16
and 27 (" The Spirit Himself beareth witness . . . that we
are . . . joint heirs with Christ ... He that searcheth the
hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because He
maketh intercession for the saints according to (the will of)
God") points to the distinct personality of the Spirit. So
also do such passages as i Corinthians ii. 11 (" Even so the
things of God none knoweth save the Spirit of God ") ; and
I Corinthians xii. 4 (" Now there are diversities of gifts,
but the same Spirit. And there are diversities of minis-
trations, and the same Lord. And there are diversities of
workings, but the same God, who worketh all things in
all"). This language is far from being applicable to an
" impersonal force of nature or the influence of the personality
of Jesus in history." The Spirit of God is a Person Who is
from St. Paul's point of view " uncreated and divine, for It
is internal to the Essence of God." ^
The Bearing of 2 Corinthians hi. 17-18 on the Doctrine.

Two of the most difficult texts are to be found in 2
Corinthians iii. 17-18.

(i) 6 he Kvpto<; to nv6v/j,d icmv, which was translated
by Chrysostom, " The Spirit is the Lord," and was taken by
him to afford evidence of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit.
It is better to translate, " The Lord is the Spirit," and to
understand it as meaning " in effect " : "to receive Christ
is to receive His Spirit."

(2) " 01) 8e TO TTpevfia Kupiov, eXevOepia . . . Kaddrrep diro
Kvplov Uvev/jiaTo^." Dr. Hort conjectured a reading "Kvpiov"
in the first instance^ and making the word merely an adjective.

1 Using the word in the later technical sense of /xia ova-La
Tpcis {iTTocTTucrets," which, through the influence of the Cappadocian
fathers, became the universal formula for East and West.

» Art. " The Holy Spirit," H. D. B.. Prof. H. B. Swete.

3 Appendix, New Testament in Greek, Westcott and Hort, p. 119.

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 137

Dr. Plummer conjectures " KvpLo<i " and paraphrases it thus :
" The Lord Jesus is the Source of the life-giving Spirit, as op-
posed to the condemning.death-giving letter : indeed the Lord
is the hfe-giving Spirit. But such an identification reveals the
sovereign power of that Spirit, and where, as in the realm of
the Gospel, the Spirit (not the letter) is sovereign, there there
is freedom." ^

The second phrase will bear many interpretations. Some
are (i) Even as by the Spirit of the Lord, (ii) Even as by the
Lord of the Spirit, that is, Christ (Tertullian reads " irveviid-
Tcov " for he quotes as " domino spirituum "), (iii) Even as
from the Lord the Spirit, (iv) Even as from the Spirit
which is the Lord (R.V. marg.). (v) Even as from a Spirit
exercising Lordship (Hort), or a Spirit which is Lord.
This takes " Kvplov " as an adjective, and is probably
the best yet suggested.

A Consideration of some Phrases Indicating the
Mystical Union, (i) " In the Lord " and " In
Christ."

Having thus seen how St. Paul could say he was living in
the Spirit, and yet could look to Christ as the Source and
Sustainer of his spiritual life, we are better able to appre-
ciate the meaning of one or two phrases which St. Paul
used with reference to the mystical rmion with Christ.

(i) " In the Lord " and " In Christ " (" eV Kvplm" and
" iv T(Z XpiaTQi "). It is only by the identification of the
indwelling of the Spirit and of Christ that St. Paul can use
these words.2 First we notice that " eV raJ 'Iijaov " is

1 2 Corinthians, ad /oc. , Dr. A. Plummer, to whom I owe this note.

2 For a consideration of the possibility of union between person
and person see Prof. Sanday's Christologies Ancient and Modern,
p. 151 £f. ; see also Dr. Moberly, Atonement and Personality ; Dr.
Inge, Christian Mysticism and Personal Idealism and Mysticism ;
Dr. Du Bose, The Gospel in the Gospels, The Gospel according to
St. Paul, High Priesthood and Sacrifice ; Dr. R. M. Jones, Studies

138 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

never used in this connexion/ and this fact is significant.
It is Jesus as Christ, the one Anointed, and filled with the
Spirit in whom St, Paul lived. " The term Christ conjoined
with Jesus in the Epistles always points to the religious
significance Jesus has for believers." ^ Next, we see that
the exact meaning of the preposition " eV " is important for
the understanding of the phrase. Deissmann has a mono-
graph on the words " iv Xptaro) " wherein he shows how,
while " fxera " is used in the Synoptics, " eV " is used in the
Epistles. In the phrase " iv XpcaTm " the " iv " has a
local sense — the element in which the believer lives, as birds
in air. So Christians live in the pneumatic being of Christ.
This becomes in St. John an " abiding in " — " ixeivare iv
ifjboi." 3 Karl, however, in his treatment of the phrase
regards the preposition as meaning " possession by," " within
the sphere of influence of " (e.g., iv ^eeX^e/SovX). Further,
he says that " ev " conveying the idea of limitation, often
describes the sphere within which the action takes place,"
as in Romans xvi. 3, 9 ; Colossians iv. 7 ; i Thessalonians
iii. 2. We note, moreover, that in the LXX " ev " is used
of " possession by " God.

It implies " Atmosphere " and " Identity."

The interpretation of Deissmann, however, seems prefer-
able on the whole. There is the idea of " life in Christ " so
strongly brought forward — a life lived in an atmosphere
consisting of Christ, Who is the environment of our spiritual
life as the air we breathe forms that of our natural life. If
the conditions of continuous life are perfect and permanent
correspondence with environment, so is it with life " in

in Mystical Religion ; Baron von Hiigel, The Mystical Element
in Religion, all mentioned by Prof. Sanday.

1 But cf. Eph. iv. 21 " Ka6(t)s Icttlv aX-qOna iv tw ^Irjcrov," though
cf. reading aXT^^cia, W. H. margin, and Dean Robinson's note, ad /oc.

2 So Somerville, St. Paul's Conception of Christ, p. 121.
2 E.g., St. John XV. 3.

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 139

Christ." But there is more than that in these words. They
bring irresistibly to our minds the thought of unity, even of
absolute identity with Him. " I have been crucified with
Christ, yet I live; and yet no longer I, but Christ liveth in
me." ^ There was a new moral and religious consciousness.
" Christ became the self of the Apostle and what he lost in
individuality by the substitution of Christ, the living prin-
ciple of love, for the self-limited and particular, he gained in
personality ; for, passing out of his old self into Christ, he
found his real self and realized his true life in God." ^ So
he could say, " The love of Christ constraineth (avvexeo)
us " (2 Cor. V. 14), "I long after you all in the tender
mercies (eV airXdyx^vot^) of Jesus Christ " (Phil. i. 8), " As
the truth of Christ is in me " (2 Cor. xi. 10), " I can do all
things through Him that strengtheneth me " (eV r&J
ivSvvafxovvTL fie, Phil. iv. 13), " But we have the mind of
Christ" [vovv XpiaTov, I Cor. ii. 16), " Bearing about the
dying of the Lord Jesus that the life also of Jesus may be
manifested in our body " (2 Cor. iv. 10. Cf. Col. i. 24).
Christ would one day be formed in his spiritual children,
as yet feeble in the faith [reKva, Gal. iv. 19). Thus the
lives of believers are not separate. They are all breathing
the one atmosphere, living in union with one and the same
Saviour. There is one principle of life in them all. It is
in this connexion that we get a glimpse of the place which
the Sacraments ^ held in the religious life of St. Paul. The
one Baptism indicates faith in the one Lord (Eph. iv. 5).
All who are baptized * into Christ put on Christ and become
one with Him and each other (Gal. iii. 26-27). In the Lord's
Supper there is " one loaf " and " one cup " shared to indi-

1 Gal. ii. 20.

2 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, Dr. Somerville, p. 123.

3 See Prof. K. Lake, The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, p. 45. He
states that " the Sacraments became the real centre of Chris-
tianity."

* It was mostly adult Baptism in the time of St. Paul.

140 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

cate the " one body," and the fellowship therein of all who
truly partake (i Cor. x. i6, 17) ; so we dwell in Him, and He
in us.

It is the same conception but expressed in yet more tender
and striking imagery that crowns the sublimest thought of
the later " Christological Epistles," and describes under the
analogy of " the Head and the members of the one body "
the mystical relation and living union which Jesus perceived
to exist between Himself and those who trusted in Him,
a union so close that He Himself expressed it in the allegory
" I am the Vine, ye are the branches," ^

(2) " The Image of the Invisible God."

We find another mystical idea in the phrase " the
Image of the Invisible God " ("09 ia-nv eUcov rov Oeov
Tov aopdrov ") (Col. i. 15). It is in this and similar phrases ^
that St. Paul indicates the ground upon which we may firmly
hold that mystical union with Christ is both a possibility and
a reality. The verse comes in a magnificent passage des-
cribing the cosmic work of Christ and His relation to creation
and the Church. He is, as we have seen, the universal source
and centre of life. In Him were all things created, in the
heavens and upon the earth ; all things have been created
through Him {81 avrov) and unto Him (et? avrov). All
things are summed up in Him. With regard to creation
He is the firstborn [irpwToroKO'^). His relation to God the
Father is that He is " the Son of His love," and the " image of
the Invisible God." His relation to His Church is the
mystical relationship of union of the Head and the Body,
He is the firstborn from the dead. It is precisely because
all men are images of God (Gen. i. 27 ; i Cor. xi. 7), and He
is the image of God, because all men are the " glory " of
God (i Cor, xi. 7), and He too is the " Lord of glory " (i

1 St. John XV. 5.

2 E.g., " Son of God " and sons of God,

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 141

Cor. ii. 8), and the hope of glory (Col. i. 27) ; and, finally,
because we are sons (Gal. iv. 6) and God sent forth His Son,
that mystic union with Him is possible, and we are able to
accept His assurance that, in union with Him, we may attain
to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ. Such
is the meaning with which these phrases were filled by the
Apostle. The Logos had indeed been called by Philo " the
image of the invisible God " as the principle of self-mani-
festation and self-communication in the Godhead. But it
was just one of those philosophical terms used by the Apostle
to teach a religious truth. It does not represent the " ad-
vance " and the " new terminology " which Somerville sees
in the conceptions of the " Christologic al Epistles." ^ The
same phrase had been used in 2 Corinthians iv. 4, and the
conception must soon have been prominent in St. Paul's
thought about Christ. It may indeed be an equivalent
phrase to " the Son of God " of the earlier Epistles, and if
so, it implies not only Pre-existence but Divinity. Its
bearing on the subject before us is at all events seen in the
fact that, though we are all "sons," "images of God,"
" imitators of God," the " fullness of God," " fellow workers
with Him," it is alwaysihroughChristandin organic connexion
with Him that these privileges are ours.^ Further, it is as a
body we are thus termed. Of no one individual man could it
be, nor was it, said by St. Paul that he is, or was, the Image, or
the Fullness, or the Glory, or the Son of God in the sense in
which these may be ascribed to Christ .^ Each of the three

1 Si. Paul's Conception of Christ, Dr. Somerville, p. 155.

2 We are transformed into the (Ikuiv tot) vlov tov Oiov. " The
holy and blessed state of mind which Christ possesses " (Grimm-
Thayer on dKwv).

We notice how St. Paul's thought completes that of St. John.
Christ is the light of the world (St. John viii. 12), God is light (i
John i. 5), Christians shine as luminaries (ws (fnoa-TTJpe^) in the world
(Phil. ii. 15).

3 In I Cor. xi. 7, man is called " cikwi' Oeov " because the thought
is of his God-like power of command. So in the same passage B6$a

142 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

ideas latent in the word " Image," that is, likeness, representa-
tion, and manifestation were transcendently present in
Christ. " He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father," ^ and
life in Him enables us in a lesser and imperfect degree to
reflect that Image. " It is," as Somerville grandly says,
" as successive generations of men are simply the unfolding
of the natural life contained in the First Man, so that not
until the race is exhausted can we form any proper concep-
tion of the power and faculty that lay in him at the first in
germ, so of Christ, the Second Adam, no adequate repre-
sentation can be furnished of the possibilities of spiritual
manhood and likeness to God . . . till Humanity [may we
not say the Universe ?] as a whole has been brought into
living union with Him."

(3) Christ as Head {a) of Man, (/3) of the Church and
Redeemed Humanity, (7) of all Principalities
AND Powers.

Christ as Head is regarded by St. Paul from three
different points of view : {a) as Head in relation to Man.
" The head of every man is Christ " (i Cor. xi. 3). Christ is
the Saviour of the race, its Head, its Guide, its Representa-
tive. He is all that He meant when He spoke of Himself
as the " Son of Man." {/3) As Head in relation to the Church
and redeemed humanity. It is especially this idea which
is brought before us in the " Christological Epistles."
" And He is the Head of the body, the Church " (Col. i. 18) ;
" But speaking the truth in love may grow up unto Him in
all things, who is the Head even Christ " (Eph. iv. 15, and
Eph. V. 23) . St. Paul refers to Christ as Head of His Church,
and of a New Humanity, in two different ways, (i) As

is used of man because his " function of government reflects the
majesty of the divine ruler " (Grimm-Thayer). In reference to
Christ these phrases refer to His unique pre-eminence and relation
to God.

1 St, John xiv. 9,

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 143

Head, He is immanent in the Church. The idea of imma-
nence, though not dominant, is certainly there. The idea
of the IndwelHng Spirit seems to have been replaced to some
extent by the conception of Christ as Head in the later
Epistles. We find it, however, side by side with the former
in the earlier Epistles (though Somerville does not appear
to think so), cf. i Corinthians xii. 12, " As the body is one
and hath many members. . . ." " Your bodies are members
of Christ " (i Cor. vi. 15). " Ye are the body of Christ " (i
Cor. xii. 27). It is scarcely a step in advance of this to set
forth Christ as the Head of that body whereof we are mem-
bers. As belonging to one body, the same life flows through
all. As Head, He dwells inseparably in His members as
His members live in Him.

(ii) As Head, moreover, He is transcendent. This is per-
haps the dominating idea of the expression, and will be dealt
with in the next chapter, p. 151.

(7) Christ is Head in relation to all principalities and
powers. Here again the idea is rather one of transcend-
ence, and will be considered below, p. 167 ff.

The Source of St. Paul's Doctrine of the Indwelling
Christ, (i) Is it Jewish ?

Meanwhile we have still to answer the question, What
was the source of St. Paul's doctrine of the Indwelling Christ?
Is it to be traced to Jewish conceptions of the time, or to the
Greek mysteries, or was it a conviction borne in upon him
by his own vital experiences ? These points we shall now
take in order.

(i) In the Jewish books Baruch, Sirach and Wisdom,
Wisdom is conceived of as personal and with a distinct
hypostasis (Prov. viii. 22 ff.). As a Pre-existent spirit,
Wisdom is the means of creation in the past and of redemp-
tion in the future, whilst a new spiritual and eternal state
of things is established. In these books, especially in the

144 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Wisdom of Solomon, we get " a presentation of Stoic ideas
in Pharisaic dress." St. Paul, it is said, therefore conceives
of Christ as the " Soul " animating the universe, who has
implanted that divine spark of life in our breasts which
makes us part of and sharers in His life.

If he has taken this speculation, he has spiritualized and
transformed it beyond recognition. The Power of God, the
Wisdom of God, the Spirit of God all work within. No
subtle philosophy produces that experience. It was the
foolish things of the world that shamed the wise, and
the weak things that brought to nought the mighty.

(ii) Or does it come from Current Mystical Ideas in
Greece, Egypt and India ?

(ii) Or did St. Paul obtain his doctrine by adopting the
mystical ideas current at the time ? The Eleusinian, Orphic,
Bacchic, Greek and Oriental mysteries, with their extra-
ordinary parallels to the Story of Christ and the religious
lives of the redeemed, offered union, mystical and real, with
the " 0€6<i ao)T7]p." 1 Indeed, Professor Bacon asserts that
all the mysteries, both Greek and Oriental, have as their
common theme the Indian doctrine of Avatar. He quotes
the following passage from Barth, Religions of India.^ The

1 Prof. Gardner {op cit. p. 72) mentions three words used by St.
Paul which have a special technical sense in the language of the
mysteries, (i) reXetos meant " one fully initiated." We must,
however, remember that in some cases (as, e.g., i Cor. ii. 6) it is
contrasted with vrjirioL? {" babes " i Cor. iii. i) and so has rather
the sense of " full-grown " (Matt. v. 48). Also, in an absolute
sense, God is reXcios- (2) jxvfLaOai, means in classical Greek
" to be initiated into the mysteries." In Phil. iv. 12, however,
it has a wider application, " to every condition and environment
I have become accustomed," or "in everything and all things
I have learnt the secret " (Grimm and Thayer). (3) <I>ajTt^civ may
be used in quite a general sense. Prof. Gardner also suggests that
the " app-qra prjp.ara " mean " words which it was not lawful for
him to repeat " (2 Cor. xii. 4) and take us " into the atmosphere
of the mysteries." ' p. 170.

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 145

Avatar doctrine is " the presence, at once mystical and real,
of the Supreme Being in the human individual, Who is at
one and the same time true God and true man ; and this
intimate union of the two natures is represented as continu-
ing after the death of the individual in whom it took place." ^
Among the ceremonies which introduced the worshipper into
mystical union with the 0eo? crwr?//? were such as the cover-
ing of himself with a mask representing the divinity, or with
blood representing the life, of the god. He ate and drank
that which represented the god's flesh and blood, if by any
means he might thereby live in his god and so attain to
immortality.2 Certainly these ideas were very prevalent
and the ritual was widely spread when St. Paul preached
the Gospel of the Redeemer, and they represented real
religious experience.

Their Influence was felt in the Terminology
WHICH St. Paul Adopted.

It is probable that at the least they had no small
influence on the terminology he used, and the forms
under which he presented this doctrine. There is nothing
inherently improbable or repugnant in such a view. There
is the " mj^stery of Christ," God as the " ©eo? a-wrrip," Christ
as the " New Man." With Christ we are united through
baptism in His death, putting off the old man, as we are
united with Him in His resurrection, in putting on the
" new man." As Bacon says, " It was not possible to preach
the Gospel on such soil and not employ this phraseology and
these ideas. If it had been possible, it would have been a
foolish neglect of germs of truth which God had in His own

1 Story of St. Paxil, Dr. Bacon, p. 307. See also Expos, viith
Ser. No. 7, The Dependence of Early Christianity upon Non-
Jewish Religions, Prof. Carl Clemen ; and Prof. K. Lake, Earlier
Epistles of St. Paul.

2 Cf. Gwatkin, Knowledge of God, vol. ii. pp. 146, 147 ; Bigg,
The Church's Task under the Empire.

146 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

way sown in millions of hearts that were groping after Him
in heathen darkness, longing for a deliverance from the
dominion of sin and death." But the mysteries did not
influence the doctrine of St. Paul.

(iii) The Real Source was his Personal Experience.
There is a vast difference between the teaching of the
mysteries and the doctrines of the Christian Faith.^ The
latter resulted from personal experience under revelation
from Christ. But, when he came to preach and teach and
formulate his religious experiences, St. Paul would naturally
adopt current modes of expression, he would dress them in
such guise as his hearers and readers could recognize, he
would show how the world's preparation for the Gospel had
not been lost, and how every ancient working of the Logos
in mankind was but making ready the soul for the Gospel-
sowing. As he adopted Rabbinical language and mode of
argument in preaching to the Jews, so we may well believe
he took Gentile phraseology to express his meaning to the
Gentiles. We are, as Professor Stewart says, waiting for
more material from inscriptions. " In the meantime it
cannot be called illegitimate, as it certainly is an enrichment
of New Testament language, to surround such words as
fivari]pt,ov, re\€Lo<;, eTroTrrrjii, with associations derived
from so important an element of contemporary Greek life
as the mysteries." ^

He was a " Practical " and so a True Mystic.
So the true Christian mystic will find in St. Paul one who
experienced in his own religious life the marvellous joy that

1 Gwatkin, Knowledge of God, vol. ii. p. 149.

2 Cf. Art. " Mysteries," H.D.B., Prof. H. Stewart. See also The
Religious Experience of St. Paul, by Prof. Gardner, chapter iv.
especially. He lays great stress on the parallelism, but not so great
as formerly. He hesitates to assert that St. Paul plagiarized from
the mysteries and he admits that he spoke of them " in terms of
the greatest dislike and contempt " (p. 80).

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 147

a life hidden in Christ, and a soul illuminated by the shining
light of His Presence, alone can know. As our own lives
are drawn more closely to His, as we learn more and more
deeply of the unsearchable riches of His love we shall more
and more appreciate the wonderful combination of active
devotion, deep meditation and undimmed happiness through-
out his life of toil and suffering which is set forth in every
writing of the Apostle to the Gentiles. In him we shall find an
example of what a true mystic ought to be. He was no " un-
practical dreamer," so engrossed with flights into the worlds
beyond that he took no interest in the affairs of this.i Full of
energy and missionary zeal, his advice and exhortation were
always practical and to the point. It was indeed his spiritual
insight, and experience, that enabled him to reach so deeply
down under the superficiahties of life, and to disclose the
realities which alone can afford us sure guidance and certain
foothold. To his mysticism he owed in no small degree
his power as a missionary, and as a mystic he speaks to
Christians of every century and race through his writings,
ever holding forth the lamp of Life to give light and leading
to those souls which are advancing from glory to glory, as
the Spirit, which is Sovereign, transforms them into the
image of the glory of the Lord.

1 " As a matter of fact," says Dr. Inge, " all the great mystics
have been energetic and influential and their business capacity
is specially noted in a curiously large number of cases. For instance,
Plotinus was often in request as a guardian and trustee ; St. Bernard
showed great gifts as an organizer ; St. Terese, as a founder of
convents and administrator, gave evidence of extraordinary practical
ability ; even St. Juan of the Cross displayed the same qualities ;
John Smith was an excellent bursar of his college ; Fenelon ruled
his diocese extremely well and Madame Guyon surprised those who
had dealings with her by her aptitude for affairs. Henry More
was offered posts of high responsibility but declined them. The
mystic is not as a rule ambitious, but I do not think he often shows
incapacity for practical life if he consents to mingle in it " {Christian
Mysticism, p. xi. Preface).

148 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

The Necessity of a Check in the Mystical Life met

BY realizing (i) THE TRANSCENDENCE OF ChRIST,

(2) BY A True Appreciation of His Earthly Life.

St. Paul's experience of the Indwelling Christ was not by
any means exhaustive of his relationship to Christ. How-
ever vivid that experience, Christ was also the pattern of
manhood, an external type to be imitated, " an objective and
historical model whom every believer keeps before his eyes,
I Cor. xi. I, Phil. ii. 5." ^ But there was another aspect on
which he lays the greatest stress. Christ was not only Imman-
ent, He was Transcendent. While we hope to deal in more
detail with this latter aspect in the next chapter, it seems well
to point out here how great a safeguard his conviction of the
transcendence of Christ must have been against those many
dangers that beset the mystic in his advance in the Christian
life. It has indeed been true of many mystics that they
have been led astray, not by centring all their religious life
in the Indwelling Christ, but by excluding every other
aspect of Him, as insignificant and uninteresting. We are
reminded in this connexion of the late Dr. Dale, and the
doctrine of the " Living Christ " associated with his name
and received by many eminent English theologians. This
view is typical of the modern sacrifice of the " Christ of
History" to the "Christ of Experience." 2 it makes Him,
as Somerville points out, " little more than an intellectual
conception or a theological fact — a category of thought
without power to touch the heart ; or, if conceived by us
as a Person, He would be to our souls what the spiritual
Christ is to a certain class of mystics — the object of an
intercourse in which impressions are referred to Him that
really come from their own hearts, and that have no con-
nexion with the historical manifestation of the Son of

1 Sabatier, The Apostle Paul, Eng. trans., p. 84.

2 See infra, ch. x.

CHRIST AS IMMANENT 14^

Man," or, we may add, with the exalted and transcendent
Lord. St. Paul's Christ was a " blending of history and
faith." Indeed in the words of Gloag,^ " Paul is far removed
from an enthusiastic subjectionism which consoles itself
with personal experience, but loses out of sight the historical
foundations of the faith."

It was in communion with the Spiritual Christ, the source
of Life, Risen and Exalted, that St. Paul found his Christian
life possible. It was not merely a fellowship with the Jesus
of History Whose sayings and example exercised an illumin-
ating influence over his mind. " A school might have been
formed, a hero worship might have been instituted had
that been all, but a Religion could only arise, because the
Ancient Church was conscious that God had revealed Him-
self in the Resurrection and Exaltation of Jesus," 2 It is
true that St. Paul valued the earthly life of Christ and
worshipped the Christ of History. It is also true that he
did not undervalue organization and a life of regular devo-
tional worship and constant discipline of body and soul.
It is further true that St. Paul was a mystic.^ But all these
facts are parallel, and not contradictory. Indeed no Church
or individual can ever long remain either purely mystical
or entirely disciplinarian, " for even Rome has never ven-
tured to stamp out entirely the mystic element ; and not
even a sect is purely mystic, for the Quakers themselves
were not long in discovering that scandals and disorders
might come from an unregulated following of the inner
light." «

1 Transl. Bruce, St. Paul's Conception of Christianity, p. 258.

2 Die Nachfolge Christi, J. Weiss, p. 83, transl. Somerville, St.
Paul's Conception of Christ, p. 251.

* " There can be no personal religion in any age without a touch
of mysticism " (Gwatkin, Knowledge of God, vol. ii. p. 200 n. and

P- 327)-

« The Knowledge of God, vol. ii.. Prof. Gwatkin, p. 58.

150 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

The Historical Manifestation of Jesus Christ and the
Christ of Mysticism.

So for St. Paul there was no antagonism, nor had Jesus
of Nazareth sunk out of sight. It is the same Lord Whose
patient feet trod this earth, Who Hves exalted and glori-
fied. It is the same Lord Who has taken real human flesh
and blood upon Him, and Who lives by His Holy Spirit
enshrined in the hearts of believers.

So Jesus the Divine calls out the Divine in us. In the
innermost depths of our personality dwells a spark of the
divine light. Only when that shines, and lights our whole
being, is knowledge of God possible. " What we are, that
we behold ; what we behold, that we are." ^ How near
to God must be One Who can kindle this faint flame of God's
light till its beams become the sunshine of our lives. How
near to us must be One with Whom it is possible to enter
into so close a mystical union that we dwell in Him and
He dwells in us. By the working of His Holy Spirit Christ
is formed in our hearts. For every faithful soul the means
of grace bring strength and refreshment by communion with
the Divine, Thus for the individual as for the race the
Person of Christ has a saving significance. This must
imply the intimacy of His relation with God as well as His
Personal pre-eminence over mankind. " If you have found
in Christ the supreme and ultimate authority over your
m oral and spiritual life, you have found God in Him." ^

^ Ruysbroek, quoted by Dr. Inge, Christian Mysticism, p. 7.
2 Christian Doctrine, Dr. Dale, pp. 120, 121.

CHAPTER VIII

Christ as Transcendent

The Idea of Transcendence in Oriental Philosophy
AND IN Jewish Theology.

WE have seen in the last chapter the absolute posses-
sion which Jesus Christ takes of the soul of the
believer. It is proposed herein to point out one or two
lines of thought whereby we may gather something of the
transcendence which St. Paul assigned to Christ both in
the spiritual and physical worlds. The complementary
ideas of the Immanence and Transcendence of Christ are
beautifully and tersely expressed in the Pauline phrases
" in Christ " and its converse " Christ in me." ^

As the relationship between Christianity and its rival
religions becomes clearer, we can see how the former has
taken into itself every element of truth in the latter, purify-
ing it of all unworthy accretions. It was so in the case of
the doctrine of Divine Immanence considered in the last
chapter. A favourite idea in Greek Philosophy, and the
basis of all the Stoic doctrines (themselves an attempt to
combine Hellenic and Oriental thought), was the unity of
the world as Nature or God. There is one Divine Being,
ruling and sustaining all, the All-Father, everywhere present.
It was grasped in crude and imperfect form in the popular
religion of the mysteries, and St. Paul, as we have seen,
recognized to the full the truth the Stoics taught. So whilst

1 Cf. " Manemus in illo cum sumus membra ejus ; manet autem
ipse in nobis cum sumus templum ejus " (Aug. in Joh., xxvii. 6).

151

152 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

it is not specifically Christian in the narrower sense of
that word, for it depends upon the Light that lighteth
every man that cometh into the world, yet the true com-
munion of man with God is a great and precious truth of
which the deepest meaning is found only in the Indwelling
Christ.

In Oriental Philosophy, however, the dominant idea was
rather the transcendence of the Deity. Matter was inher-
ently evil, or, at least, passive to good. Consequently, God
dwells far above all His creatures on earth, and could only
come into contact with them by acting through a series of
emanations. Herein again is concealed a truth which the
revelation of Christ placed in its true position. It is,
however, in the writings of the Hebrew prophets that this
doctrine is most definitely and accurately foreshadowed.
In the dawn of history, God had drawn very near to man,
and man to God. He walked with man in the Garden ; He
entered into covenant relation as man with man. " He
spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his
friend." ^ But as time drew on, the directness of communi-
cation seemed to pass away. There was no frequent vision. 2
The idea of God gradually lost any anthropomorphic associa-
tions. Whether or not, in its simplest form and most
primitive stage, the popular view of Him was that as kith
and kin, as one of the tribe, and God was only its champion
against foes, and participator in its meals,^ the gulf between
the worshipper and the Deity was now immeasurably
widened. His attributes acquired a moral meaning. The
power of sin was deeply felt and sin-offering came to be made.
So the development proceeded to the sublime conceptions
of Isaiah. " The Holy One of Israel," ^ far removed in His
sanctity and hohness from sinful humanity, in Whose pure

1 Exod. xxxiii. 11. ^ i Sam. iii. i.

2 See Whit worth, Hulsean Lectures, 1903, p. 5.

4 ^Nnb'i tJ'np.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 153

presence the lips of even the good man must be cleansed
with refining fire, enters the Heaven of Heavens in awful
majesty. His voice is the thunder, and His glance the
lightning flash. He is the Lord of Hosts,^ the Lord of the
armies of men and angels, the Lord of the sun, moon and
stars. Though side by side with this development was
brought back, too, spiritualized and deepened, the truth of
God's nearness to His people, for He may be personally
known to them ; and in the coming days the New Covenant
should be established when the Lord Himself should person-
ally teach His people and inscribe the knowledge of Him-
self on every heart, ^ yet the awful Holiness of Jehovah, His
universal Rule, His omnipotence and omniscience were
truths even more strongly emphasised by the keenest-
sighted, and most spiritually minded, of the Old Testament
prophets as they were more deeply impressed on his soul.
There is no better introduction to the understanding of St.
Paul's conception of Jesus as transcendent than the study
of the development of these Jewish conceptions, undoubtedly
familiar to him, concerning the sovereignty and transcen-
dence of Jehovah. That St. Paul had felt the majesty and
beauty of the Old Testament revelation is beyond doubt.
That he was acquainted with the popularizations of Oriental
philosophy we do not hesitate to admit. But it was no
mere " amalgamation " of the two, no mere eclectic synthesis
of Hellenism and Judaism which he effected. It was rather
" the conquest of both for Jesus " that makes his doctrine
a spiritual power, and that " assigns Paul his high place in
the world's history."

St. Paul's View of the Transcendence of Christ

INCLUDED IN HIS CONCEPTIONS OF ChRIST (a) AS LORD,

AND (13) AS Head.
In dealing with what he teaches it is proposed to treat of

1 niK3V ~'jn^.. » Jer. xxxi. ^i, 34, etc.

154 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

it mainly in two sections : a. Jesus as Lord ; j3. Jesus as
Head.

a. Jesus as Lord. The title Kvpto<; in the Epistles usually
refers to Christ. ^ In the Old Testament there are three
classes of words which our English version translates by
" Lord " : (i) There is the Tetragrammaton mn'', Lord,
the sacred Proper Name of the God of the Jews. When
St. Paul quotes Old Testament passages where the Lord
is speaking, he writes Kvpio^. To Jews, Kvpio^ must
have represented all those pecuhar and sacred relation-
ships which they concealed behind the letters mn\ So
sacred was mn'' that (by the " hedge to the Law " of Lev.
xxiv. 1 6) the penalty for using it was made death ; and so
'Ji^^^ (and in the case of ^}T\^ r\\p\ ,'crrib^) supplied the
vowel points for mrf after the vowel points were invented.
It was thus pronounced ""^nK, or DTI 7Nt as the case might be.
(ii) There is the word ''^^^^ Lord, when used as a name for
the Divine Being. ''J^TNt is probably either a plural " of
majesty " or the " intensive " plural, and not a relic of poly-
theism. Thus it may express the idea of greatness of person
or of "indefinite expansion " of time or space (as in D'P^).
Kvpto<i may, however, be used for ]ilh^ in the singular
if referring to the Divine Person, or for 'ik'\:2 in the same
instance,^ (iii) There was a class of words meaning " mas-
ter " some ten in number, translated " lord " in the Old
Testament. Of these the chief is IHij^. In the New Testa,
ment whenever KvpLoq refers to God or Christ it is translated
"Lord." The Old Testament lettering "Lord" for a
reference to Jehovah is dropped, and thus the Old Testa-
ment distinction between the proper and the ordinary
Name for God is taken away. This distinction is also

1 There are exceptions, of course, in such passages as Eph. vi.
5, 9 (once) ; Col. iv. i. In such cases as i Cor. vii. 25 ; 2 Cor. viii. 21 ;
I Thess. iv. 6 ; 2 Thess. iii. 1-5, 16 ; i Cor. iii. 20, the interpretation
is doubtful. 2 Only Dan. ii. 47 ; v. 23.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 155

lost in the LXX where Kvpto^ is used for the Divine
Being whether 'JnNi or nin\

St. Matthew xxii. 44 and Psalm ex. i.
St. Paul's Use of the Title.

The result is seen in the confusion that results from the
exegesis of such a text as " The Lord (Jehovah) said to
my Lord (Messiah) " (EtTrec Kvpto^ rw Kvpicp fiov «.t.X,.),^
in the original ''^n>^^ r^y^"] D^^P, where a correct under-
standing of the relationship between the LXX and Hebrew
is necessary. Amongst the Jews at the time of Our Lord
Kvpio<; was applied to the Messiah (Mark xii. 35, 36, 37 ;
and xi. 3 ; Psalms of Solomon xvii. 36 {l3a<Ti\ev<i avrwv
Xpt(TTo<; Kvpio<;). This did not, however, necessarily
imply that Messiah was God, for " they expressly distin-
guished between the Messiah and the Memra or ' Word ' of
Jehovah." ^ As a title it was applied by the disciples to
Jesus. " Ye call me Master (6 AiSdaKoXo';) and Lord (6
Kvpco^)."^ After His death and resurrection the Apostles
made it the expression of their central belief. " The word
* Lord,' " writes Wernle, " is introduced as the equivalent for
Messiah into the official formula used at Baptism : Jesus
the Lord, no longer Jesus the Christ." * The confession
" Jesus is the Lord," was probably the germ from which the
later Baptismal Creeds developed. It certainly appears in
St. Paul's Epistles as a confession which Christians were
bound to make. " No man speaking by the spirit of God
saith 'Avadefxa 'Ii]<Tov<i, and no man can say Kvpioq
'lT]crov<; but by the Holy Spirit." ^ " Wherefore God also
hath highly exalted Him — that every tongue should confess

1 St. Matt. xxii. 44, quoting Ps, ex. i.

2 Sanday and Headlam on Rom. i. 4, referring to Weber, Altsyn.
Theol., p. 341.

3 St. John xiii. 13.

* Beginnings of Christianity, P. Wernle, vol. i. p. 247.
5 I Cor. xii. 3.

156 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

that Jesus Christ is Lord {6rt Kvpco<i 'hiaov^ Xpi(no<i)
to the glory of God the Father." ^ If thou shalt confess
with thy mouth otl Kvpto<i 'Irja-ov';, thou shalt be saved (Rom .
X. 9). In this confession is included those developments to
which the exigencies of later times gave rise. At the very
least the word Kvpio<; for St. Paul must have meant the
Messiah. It really meant very much more. As we trace
his use of the word as applied to Jesus Christ certain rela-
tionships which it expresses become more and more pro-
minent.^

I. Christ as Exalted.
(i) It is the title given to Christ as Exalted. It is indeed
a Divine acknowledgment of the value of His earthly life,
" For to this end Christ both died and lived (again) that
He might be Lord of both the dead and the living." ^
Christ Jesus " took upon Him the ixop<^i)v hovXov . . .
and became obedient unto death, even the death of the
Cross ; wherefore also God highly exalted Him and gave
unto Him the Name which is above every name . . . that
every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord." *
So the Lordship of Christ as exalted is intimately connected
with the Redemption He wrought upon earth. It is note-
worthy that the title " the Lord Jesus " occurs so fre-
quently. The Name which belonged to Him in its fullest
sense after His self-emptying and perfect obedience on the

1 Phil. ii. II.

2 von Adolf Deissmann {Light from the Ancient East, p. 353-
364 ff.) has suggested the emphasis laid by St. Paul on 6 Kiynos
is a tacit protest against the common application of the term to
the Caesars of this time. Resch has traced the development of
meaning from " master " or " rabbi " to that of the Pauline epistles
which he regards as influenced by the use of the word for Roman
Emperors, and the divine honours paid to them {Did. of C. and G.,
Art. " Divinity of Christ," Rev. A. S. Martin).

3 Rom. xiv. 9.

^ Phil. ii. 7-1 1. See also Messianic Interpretation, Prof. Know-
liiig. PP- 5. 93-

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 157

Cross was transcendent compared with every other name,
and was united with that name which especially referred to
the earthly life of Christ. In this name, " Jesus " confessed
as " Lord " (ev t&J ovo/xan) every knee should bow of things in
heaven and things on earth and things under the earth. ^
Universal reverence and prayer, the worship of all nations,
are ascribed to Him, Who is Lord. It is " the name of
Jesus " 2 that forms the ground in which (eV) prayer
grows and bears its precious fruit, acceptable to God, and
which (to extend the metaphor) forms the atmosphere in
which (eV) prayer lives.

St. Paul's Eschatology. i Cor. xv. 24-28.
It is in this connexion that we are brought to consider
St. Paul's eschatology. Christ now sits as Exalted Lord
at the right hand of His Father, accomplishing a work for
Him. But the end will come " when He shall deliver up
the Kingdom to God, even the Father ; when He shall have
abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He
must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet."
After the destruction of the last enemy, i.e. death, there
will come the subjection of the Son also " to Him that did
subject all things unto Him, that God may be all in all." 3

1 Cf. Dr. Plummer's notes on the occurrence of the phrase in
St. Matthew. See Commentary, pp. 325, 330, 434. Referring to
Baptism in the last passage Dr. Plummer writes : " Whereas in
Acts we have ' baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus ' or ' bap-
tized in the Name of Jesus Christ,' St. Paul says simply ' baptized
into Christ,' omitting all mention of the Name." But yet as the
passages quoted show, the Name was nevertheless indicative of
character and representation, it was " a synonym for the Divine
Nature, for God Himself." We venture to hold that St. Paul
taught and practised prayer to Christ despite Prof. Gardner's
assertion that " he regards worship and prayer as due to God alone.
Prayer to Clxrist is nowhere advocated by St. Paul " {Rel. Exp.
of St. Paul, p. 204.

2 Phil. ii. 9 (eV Tw ovo'/xart 'irjorov). Quite possibly "the Name "
is Kwpto9. In any case it refers to His dignity and nature as KvpLr><;.
Cf. Rom. xiv. II. 3 J Cor xv. 24-28.

158 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

A twofold question is then presented to us. Is the Lord-
ship of Christ Eternal ? and how can such eschatology be
reconciled with the doctrine of the Trinity ? Many explana-
tions have been given ; St. Chrysostom regards the passage
as merely referring to the " full agreement with the Father/ '
St. Augustine as " the Son guiding the elect to the contem-
plation of the Father," Beza as " the presentation of the
elect to the Father," Theodoret as " the full manifestation
of the Father to the World," St. Ambrose holds that the
Son here is the same as the Church— the body of Christ ;
many early commentators apply it to the Human nature
of Our Lord only. The Son, " o vi6<;," must, however,
include the whole of His Being. It is used absolutely.
Luther, Melanchthon, Bengel, Olshausen and others apply
it to the cessation of the mediatorial ofhce between God
and man — the reign of Grace administered now by the Son
will be succeeded by a state of glory. Against this view
Godet urges the objection that a Kingdom is to be delivered
up, not a mediatorial office. Meyer, Hoffmann, Heinrici, and
others apply the term to the sovereignty exercised by Christ
over the hostile powers. " He ceases to have in the view of
the world that mediate position between the world and God,
in consequence of which the world saw in Him a ruler dif-
ferent from God, possessing a sovereignty belonging to Him
as His own. This rule within the world ceases because it
has reached its end." Against this view it is urged that the
submission is voluntary. Once more, there is the view of
Schmidt, who held that " Either the characteristic of abso-
lute existence is not essential to the notion of God, which
no one will allow, or it must be confessed that the Apostolic
conception here stated is incompatible with the Divine
Nature of Christ."^ Consequently he concludes that the
idea of the subjection of the Son here taught is contradictory
not only to the dogma of the Trinity, but also to the expres-

1 Die Paulinische Christologie, quoted by Godet on i Cor. ad loc.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 159

sions of St. Paul which imply Christ's divinity and pre-
existence. But this is attributing to St. Paul a contradiction
which it seems impossible to attribute to his logical mind.
Godet points out that the idea of subordination as well as of
His Divine Pre-existence forms part of St. Paul's Christo-
logical conceptions.

The True Interpretation of the Passage.
The view we are led to adopt here is the following : —
The word " Son " implies (i) possibility of subjection
and (ii) equality of nature. After the voluntary submission
then, Christ is an elder brother with brethren. We are
joint heirs with Him. He still of course remains " What
we can never be — 6fioova-i,o<; t&J Trarpi." He is not ab-
sorbed in the Deity, nor does He lose His personality —
that is still distinct. Neither does He descend ; but we.
His subjects and followers, rise to Him in the fullness of
time, when the Messianic sovereignty shall be yielded up,
when, that is, we shall have reached the perfect stature of
Christ. It is only to perfect humanity that God can directly
reveal Himself, that He can be " irdvra iv Traaiv," when
human wills of His creation fully and freely yield to Him.^
Thus too the Salvation shall be universal, of the universe as
well as humanity, of devils as well as angels. For St. Paul
possibly regarded the universe as governed by semi-personal,
" actually existent and intelligent forces," 2 — " Elemental
Beings" {ra arotx^la tov k6<tijlov"). There are, he says,
half scornfully using terms familiar to Jewish speculation,
" thrones and dominions and principalities and authorities "
(Col. i. 16). But in comparison with Christ they are " no

1 So Lotze writes, " The goal of history is the formation of a
society of inteUigent and free beings, brought by Christ into perfect
communion with God."

2 Gal. iv. 3 ; Eph, i. 21. Dr. A. Robinson ad loc. ; also Earlier
Epistles of St. Paul, Dr. K. Lake. The latter deals with the parallel
between the angels of Jewish theology and the beneficent daemons
of the mysteries, see pp. 192 ff., 213.

i6o THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

gods," for over all conceivable rivals, real or imaginary,
good or evil, in this world or the next, Christ is made supreme,
the Absolute Lord. All things are " unto Him " — the Head
of redeemed humanity, the firstborn of all Creation. Such
is the Lordship of Christ, It implicitly condemns Panthe-
ism, for Pantheism requires the annihilation of the individual
existence. It moreover excludes the Deistic view that
man is good without God. It assures us that one day the
relationships of " Kupto? " and " 8ov\o<; " will have passed
away, and we shall live at last the perfect life.

Christ will still be its source and pledge. He will no longer
rule, for the Kingdom will have been presented to the Father,
and we shall see God as He is. As our Elder Brother, perfect
in His humanity too, He will be subordinate to the Father.
The relationships of time will fade from the timeless realms of
immortality ; though, whilst memory still brings back the
past and grateful love fills the soul,^ the songs of praise to
the Redeemer cannot cease. The old relationship will be
restored. Man will walk with God in His Paradise, he
will not need to hide in the cleft of the Rock when the Glory
passes by. But God will be more fully known through
humanity's experiences of sin and suffering and struggle,
and through the earnest expectation of the creature being
met by a deeper Revelation of Himself. He will be a God
Whose deathless love has been revealed in the Trinity, three
Persons yet one God, co-equal and co-eternal ; ^ Whose

1 Love abides (i Cor. xiii. 13).

2 Cf. Lux Mundi, p. 72. " So far from the doctrine of the Trinity-
being, in Mr. Gladstone's unfortunate phrase, ' the scaffolding of a
purer theism,' non-Christian monotheism was the ' scaffolding '
through which already the outlines of the future building might
be seen. For the modern world, the Christian doctrine of God
remains as the only safeguard in reason for a permanent' theistic
belief." The phrase referred to occurs in Mr. Gladstone's Pyoem
to Genesis. " It may be that we shall find Christianity a sort
of scaffolding and that the final building is pure theism, when . . .
God shall be all in all."

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT i6i

unfathomable love has brought a universe back to Himself.
This God shall be all in all.

Of that perfect life we can speak but hesitatingly, for so
deep a mystery belongs to a region which we can yet see
through a glass but very darkly. Yet the dim, uncertain
outlines, as they shape themselves through the gloom, assure
us of the realities that shall one day be revealed.

Other Functions of the Lordship of Christ.

(2) The Lordship of Christ secures for His people pro-
tection from evil. His is the victory over sin and death, and
in the strength of His invisible might we are more than
conquerors, " For I am persuaded that neither death, nor
life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor
things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any
other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love
of God, which is in Christ Jesus Our Lord." ^

(3) As He is Our Lord, we are His " SovXoi," " bond-
servants," subject to the law of Christ, yet free with the
liberty wherewith He has made us free. He has redeemed
us and henceforth He is our new Master.^

(4) As Lord, He sanctifies and strengthens His servants.
" And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love
one toward another." "But the Lord is faithful, who
shall stablish you and guard you from the evil one." ^

(5) With " The Lord " St. Paul enters into mystic union.
He is " ev Kvploi," " Whether we live, we live unto the
Lord " (" Toj Kvplw ").* We please the Lord by walking
worthily of Him.^ " Let Him that glorieth glory in the
Lord ' eV Kvplw.' " ^ " Are ye not my work in the Lord ? "
(ev Kvpiw).'^ It is the " glory " of the Lord we reflect.^

(6) As Lord, He is Judge. The day of the Lord is at hand

1 Rom. viii. 38. 2 Rom. i. i ; Col. iv. 12, etc.

2 I Thess. iii. 12 ; 2 Thess. iii. 3. Cf. the work of the Holy-
Spirit. * Rom. xiv. 8. 5 Col. i. 10.

6 I Cor, i. 31. ' iCor. ix. I. ^ 2Cor. iii. 18.

M

i62 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

" when He shall come to be glorified in His saints " ^ and
we shall be for ever with the Lord.- Here we are in close
touch again with current Jewish conceptions. We have
already dwelt, in the chapter on " Christ as Messiah," on the
points of contact between Jewish eschatology and the
Pauline conception of the last day. The subject of the
speedy return of the Christ is brought forward especially in
the first and second Epistles to the Thessalonians. As we
have pointed out above, the day of the Lord conceived of
by the prophets was a descent of God in battle to destroy
the enemies of His people. Gradually there grew up the idea
of a judgment by which the oppressors should be punished,
and with it developed the idea of a resurrection for the saints
who died in times of distress. For Nature too there should
be " a new heaven and a new earth." With the growth
of the idea of a personal Messiah, moreover, as in the
Psalms of Solomon, the Sibylline oracles, Enoch and the
Apocalypse of Baruch, the Messiah is conceived of as
King after the judgment, an office handed to Him by
God. In St. Paul's writings, the Parousia is the day of
the Lord, the day of Christ. On that day, living and
dead shall assemble before Him for judgment " each
shall receive the things done in the body, whether good or
bad." ^ Christ awards life eternal to those who have sown
unto the Spirit, corruption to those who have sown to the
flesh.* There is thus a difference in the two concep-
tions. The Jewish idea of Messiah in Heaven does not
include the belief that whilst He is in Heaven, before He
appears, there is any vital relationship with His people,
"nor does He exercise any of those offices towards and on
behalf of them the thought of which is so prominent in the
Christian faith." ^ In fact Professor Stanton, in his dis-

1 I Thess. i. lo ; 2 Thess. i. 10. ^ j Thess. iv. 17.

3 2 Cor. V. 10. * Gal. vi. 7-10.

5 The Jewish and Christian Messiah, by Prof. V. H. Stanton, p. 153.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 163

cussion of the Enochic book of the Three Parables, says
that if he is right as to the traces of Christian influences
therein, " the Christ is nowhere on Jewish ground regarded
as the future judge of quick and dead." Harnack, more-
over, regards the hope of Christ's speedy coming as " the
most important Article in the Christology." ^ The belief
in the Second Advent became, he says, " the specific Chris-
tian belief." The truth would appear to be that there was
no idea that Messiah would come twice. It was his Second
Advent that was peculiar to Christianity, though even that
idea was in a very faint way present in the conception of
One of the seed of David snatched up to the clouds and kept
there waiting till his manifestation in glory. ^ .Be that as
it may, it is an undoubted function of the Risen and Exalted
Lord to judge the world.

The Earlier and Later Epistles hereon.

It would be interesting to turn aside to inquire w^hether
the conception expressed in i and 2 Thess. developed
in the later Epistles or disappeared from them. It must
suffice to say here what becomes evident in a study of them
all, that the same essential characteristics of the doctrine
appear in every group of the Epistles ; and that, however
modified the view might have been, the variation nowhere
amounts to inconsistency.^ It would be further interesting
in this connexion to inquire whether St. Paul believed in a
doctrine of universal restoration. Was the redeeming effect
of Christ's life and death to result in the bringing of all the
sinful to a state of blessedness ? Though a detailed discus-
sion would be irrelevant in this essay, we are led, by a study
of the material, to conclude that this is not so. But in any

1 History of Dogma, Dr. A. Harnack, voL i. p. 82. See infra,
p. 212, for recent emphasis on the eschatological side of Christian
doctrine.

2 Art. " Messiah," H. D. B., Prof. H. V. Stanton.

3 So Dr. Salmond.

i64 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

case the work of Christ was of cosmic significance. It does
not end with man. It includes all created things. It was
His intention and accomplishment " to bring all things back
to their pristine condition of harmony, through Christ as the
centre of unity and bond of reconciliation." ^

Three prominent Features of the Judgeship of
Christ.

So in this conception of Christ as Judge it is sufficient for
our purpose to note three things : (i) The day of the Lord
Jehovah becomes the day of the Lord Jesus. The function
of judging in the Old Testament attributed to the Lord
becomes, in the New, the office of the Redeemer, (ii) The
Divine attributes of omniscience and omnipotence are im-
plied for the Judge. The rewards and punishments, which
He distributes, evidence His infinite power. His searching
the innermost and deepest secrets of the heart of every man
implies a knowledge which could only belong to God Him-
self, (iii) There is postulated the absolute transcendence
of One who could so judge Humanity, One so far above men
that, though their Head, He was capable of pronouncing
sentences of eternal import on those whose nature He had
taken into His own.

The Lordship of Christ and God the Father.

(7) We note the relation which Jesus as Lord has to-
wards God the Father. We have dwelt on one aspect of
this above, namely, the subjection of the Son to the Father.
There is another, however, quite as prominent. It is the
equality, the oneness in heart and mind and will of Jesus
Christ and the Father. It is shown by considering the
Epistles in the light of two facts: —

(i) What the Father does the Son does also. There is in
St. Paul's writings a kind of " communicatio idiomatum "
between the Persons of the Godhead. It is the " judgment of

1 Art. " Eschatology," H. D. B., Prof, G. G. Findlay.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 165

God " that we know is true against evil doers/ is inevitable, ^
and righteous and kindly .2 Before the judgment seat of God
all must stand.^ Yet it is before the judgment seat of Christ
that we must all be made manifest.^ The true key to the
apparent inconsistency is possibly to be found in Rom. ii.
16. " In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men,
according to My gospel, by Jesus Christ " (8ta 'Irja-ov
Xpiarod). Again God is the distributor of blessing, and it
is He Who hath called us into the fellowship of His Son Jesus
Christ Our Lord.® Yet it is Christ the Lord Who strengthens
and stablishes our hearts unblamable in hohness.' Grace
comes from God through Jesus Christ.^ Moreover, the death
of Christ is the working of God's purpose and the manifes-
tation of His love as well as of that of the Saviour. " But
God commendeth His own love towards us in that, whilst
we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." ^ Christ is also our
peace, " Who made both one . . . that He might reconcile
them both in one body unto God." ^° Yet it is God Who
reconciles. " But all things are of God Who reconciled us
to Himself through Christ." ^^ Yet more noticeable than
all is the identification of Jesus with the Lord of the Old
Testament in the many passages where " the Lord " speaks
and acts. All these instances lead us to conclude that St.
Paul's use of the word Kvpio<i for the Saviour implied
far more than that He was the Jewish Messiah. He saw in
Him One Whose work and essence could be identified with
the work and essence of God Himself. Could such a One have
been less than Divine ? And, if Divine, was there any escape
for a Jewish monotheist from the conviction that He was
God, co-equal with, and of the same essence as, the Father ?
Wernle, indeed, says, " As both ' Lord ' and ' Saviour '

1 Rom.ii. 2. 2 Rom. ii.3. ^ Rom. ii. 5. * Rom. xiv. 10.

5 2 Cor. V. 10. ^ I Cor. i. g ; vii. 17 ; i Thess. ii. 12.

' I Thess. iii. 13. ^ Rom. xvi. 20. Cf. i Cor. i. 4.

9 Rom. V. 8, 10 Eph. ii. 16, 17. "2 Cor. v. 18.

'i66 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

were attributes universally applied to gods and kings, both
these titles came to be means, contrary to his (St. Paul's)
intention, of separating Jesus altogether from the Messianic
picture, and bringing Him nearer to the dignity of the God-
head " ; but is it not rather true to say, as we have shown,
that the many lines of that portrait of the Messiah drawn by
divers portions, and in divers manners by the prophets upon
the canvas of the shifting future, had at last met, not to be
destroyed, but to be harmonized and blended in that single
figure whom St. Paul preached to the world as his Lord ?

The title " Lord " certainly implied for the Apostle a nearer
relationship to God the Father than would be gathered from
the " Messianic Picture " ; but it was not because " gods
and kings " were universally so called that he came to this
faith.i It was the living experience of his hfe that lifted
him high above the national narrowness of his countrymen.
He stood upon heights which made the transcendence of
Jesus only more manifest and awful, and yet which filled
him with our common hope and yearning that, some day, as
we rise from one stage of glory >to another ,2 we shall attain
to the fullness of the stature of the Perfect man ; of Him,
Whose dwelling in our hearts is the seal of our attainment
to the Heaven of Heavens, to the glories behind the veil,
where Christ exalted sitteth on the right hand of God.

(ii) To us, moreover. He is God's vicegerent. As such we
may address our petitions to Him.^ " The authority of God
is indistinguishable from that of Christ, for it is an authority
of righteousness and love," It is the Father Who is the

1 See " The Trial of our Faith " (Chvistianity and Paganism),
Dr. Hodgkin.

2 2 Cor. iii. 18. Cf. Bengel who comments thus : " a gloria Domini
ad gloriam in nobis."

3 Cf. The hymns, petitions, and prayers offered to the Son by
the Christian Church of all time, e.g., Collect for 3rd Sunday in
Advent, 4th S. in Advent (in Sacramentary of Gregory), ist Sunday
in Lent, St. Stephen's Day in Church of England Prayer Book.
Cf. Eph. i. 21 ; Phil. ii. 10.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 167

source, through the Son Who is the instrument, " In turn-
ing in faith and prayer to Christ, he (St. Paul) was conscious
he was drawing near to God in the surest way, and that in
caUing on God he was calhng on Christ in Whom alone God
is accessible to men." ^ Only as God manifested in human
form, could He have inspired the highest religious worship,
and only by being Divine could He have been a worthy
object of it.

(/3) Jesus Christ as Head.
/3. Jesus Christ as Head. We considered in the last chapter
the conception of Christ as Head, and therefore Immanent,
and mentioned there that the predominant idea in Headship
was transcendence. It is a term of wider application than
" Lord." It contains the ideas of authority and union com-
bined. First, then, Christ is not only the life of believers, He
is their Controller collectively, and, as such, as the Head, the
" Firstborn from the dead." ^ The Church is the Body of
which He is the Head, that among all (or, in all things, eV Truer iv)
He might have the pre-eminence. " For the husband is the
head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the Church." ^
So the Church is conceived of as the Body saved by the deep
counsels and unsparing devotion of the Head, who requires
absolute obedience. He it is Who provides for the safety
of the members of the Body. That is the function of Christ
as Head of the Body. Further, He is the Head of indi-
vidual members of the Body. " The head of every man is
Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head
of Christ is God." * " There exist," says Godet, referring
to this passage, and especially to /ce^aX?) Se XpccrTov 6
0609, " three relations which together form a kind of
hierarchy." Lowest in the scale comes the purely human
relation between man and woman, higher is the Divine-

1 So Somcrville, to whom I am indebted for many of the previous
remarks, St. Paul's Conception of Christ, pp. 134-147.

2 Col. i. 18. 3 Epii. V. 23. ^ I Cor. xi. 3.

i68 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

human relation between Christ and man, and highest is the
purely Divine relation between God and Christ. He sees
in the conception two ideas : —

(a) Community of life.

(/5) Inequality within this communion — one being active
and directing, the other receptive and directed.

Many ^ think that the words apply only to Christ incar-
nate. But there could be no idea of community of life
present in that case. The same division exists with regard
to the interpretation of another passage, " All are yours ;
and ye are Christ's ; and Christ is God's." ^ Some ^ maintain
that the words, " and Christ is God's " refer to Christ as
man only. It is better, however, to refer them (with most
of the Fathers, and with Meyer, Klung and Godet) to
Christ as a Divine Being. The words refer to Christ Glorified
and Head of the Church. So that even within the Trinity
would follow the subordination of the Son to the Father — a
subordination to some extent implied in the words " Son,"
" Logos." " As to His one and invisible Person as Son of
God and Son of Man, Jesus receives all from the Father and
is consequently His." So in the text especially, for the
moment, before us (i Cor. xi. 3), the reference is probably
to the Divine Person of Christ, and we must not shrink too
much from the difficult idea of the subordination of the Son
within a co-equal Trinity.

Lastly, Christ is Head in relation to " all principalities
and powers," " And gave Him to be Head over all things
to the Church, which is His body," * " And in Him ye are
made full, Who is the Head of all principality and power." ^
" And not holding fast the Head from Whom all the body,
being supplied and knit together through the joints and
bands, increaseth with the increase of God." ^ These texts

1 E.g. Edwards, Heinrici. 2 j Qq^ [{{ 23.

* E.g. Augustine, Calvin, Olshausen, de Wette.
^ Eph. i. 22. ^ Col. ii. 10. ^ Col. ii. 19.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT i6g

bring out clearly the transcendence of Christ as Head, the
idea of authority over all things. The same principalities
and powers which God, having put off from Himself, made
a show of openly, and triumphed over, were subject to Christ
as their Head. The idea is not purely speculative. Christ
is the Supreme Universal Ruler. We may compare with this
the sublimest conceptions which the Old Testament produces
of the universality of Jehovah's rule. None are more sub-
lime or far-reaching than this. To Christ is attributed, not
only as the Second Adam the government of man, not only
as Head of the Church authority over the Redeemed Human-
ity, but the Headship over all things, including the angels.
However St. Paul regarded the angels (and they were un-
doubtedly held to have great religious influence and autho-
rity^), not even they could separate him from the love of
Christ. He, the Head, transcends them all. We may well
ask, how, then, could St. Paul have conceived of Christ living
in His Exalted State, but as a Person in the Godhead Itself.

The Meaning of Col. ii. 15-18. Ruler over Angels.
Another passage (Col. ii. 15-18) remains for consideration,
" ttTre/cSuo-ayLtevo 9 Ta<; ap')(a^ koi Ta<i i^ovcriwi, eSeiyf^aTicrev
ev irapprjcria, OpLa/n^evaa'i avTOv^ kv avrw. " Putting off
from Himself principalities and powers. He made a show of
them openly, triumphing over them in it " (the Cross).
St. Paul regarded the law as ordained through angels,
8iaTayel<; Bi ayyiXcov.^ This would appear to have been
a common belief of the Jews.^ He might consequently
have meant by these words, that promulgation of theirs,

1 The angels of Jewish theology almost exactly corresponded to
the Spirits or daemons {-rrvev/xaTa or Sat/xoves) of Gentile religion.
{Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, Prof. K. Lake, p. 192 ff.)

2 Gal. iii. 19.

3 Cf. also Heb. ii. 2; Acts vii. 53; Jos. Antiq. xv. 5, 3:
" And as for ourselves, we have learned from God the most excellent
of our doctrines, and the most holy part of our law by angels, or
ambassadors" (Wliiston's trans.).

I70 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

" that writing, that investiture,"^ so to speak, of God was
first wiped out, soiled and rendered worthless and then
nailed to the cross, abrogated, and cancelled there. There
is no doubt that the errors of false teachers at Colosse had
associated the worship of angels with Jewish observances,
and there is no doubt that St. Paul had this in mind as he
wrote. But may not his words have had a far wider appli-
cation ? Formerly, God had appeared to men under the
vesture of created intelligences. They saw in the workings
of God in nature and the world the interposition of angelic
beings. On the Cross, God stripped Himself of that vesture
in the death of Him Who was the Head of all principalities
and powers. Now the revelation of Him Who was supreme
in the angelic realms was complete, God was reconciling
the world in Him, and both victory over sin and death and
the fulfilment of Man's destiny to be sovereign over all
things become at last a possible consummation. All powers,
evil and good, were in subjection to Him.

And over Nature.

St. Paul's teaching hereon was teaching for his own time,
but it has its importance to-day. For us indeed the problem
has shifted further back, but it is not changed. The question,
" Does Christ rule over nature ? " finds here a clear answer.
Where the ancients saw angels, we see law. There seems
to be a great gulf fixed still between God and His world.
There is the cruel struggle for existence, the survival only
of the fittest, the tooth of nature red with her children's
blood. How many has this state of paradox and contra-
diction, of saddening difficulty and perplexity, led into the
dualistic way of thinking, which either works out an ascetic
Ideal or results in the licence of the libertine ! How many,
again, have fallen into the danger of becoming slaves to an
ideal of conduct, shutting out of thought and life all but

1 So Dean Alford, ad loc.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 171

natural law where nothing is moral, and all is merely strength
and selfishness ? The answer to these problems is found,
to-day as then, in Christ, With Him as our Head, we are
victorious in the battle of life. His rule is co-extensive with
the universe as with humanity. For Him we must claim
the world and all its interests. In Him alone we may hope
to reach, slowly and painfully, it may be, a real under-
standing of the underlying unity despite the superficial
contradictions of the workings of God in the world. Only
by holding up and preaching this Christ to men can we hope
to bring our many brethren who feel keenly the buffetings
of the restless sea of doubt to the haven of the peace that
passeth all miderstanding. In Him we see that love is not
merely good nature, but the perfect revelation and fulfilment
of the highest law — that love is sacrifice to the uttermost.^

The Ideas of Immanence and Transcendence combined.

But the consideration of Christ as Head leads us on to
another, and still wider, conception in St. Paul's writings.
To a certain extent the ideas of immanence and transcend-
ence are both present in the word " Lord " as well as in the
word " Head," though in each the dominant idea is that of
" transcendence," St, Paul passes very readily from the
conception of Christ as Head to the loftiest conception of
all, a conception which contains in the highest development
both these truths. In three passages particularly is this
combination shown : —

(i) In the passage already mentioned above (Eph. v, 23-
33), after speaking of " the husband as the head of the wife,
as Christ also is of the Church," ^ St, Paul passes from the
metaphor of headship to that of identity. As the husband
and wife become " one flesh," the ideal marriage state from
the beginning, so also is Christ and the Church, " This
mystery is a mighty one ; but I speak (it) with reference to

* Prof. Gwa.tkin, Knowledge of Go(Z, vol. i.p. 85, - Eph. v, 23.

172 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Christ and the Church." ^ Here there is absolute unity
between the Head and the Body. Indwelhng and trans-
cendence are combined in that sacred identity which is the
fruit of holy Love.^

(ii) Long before St. Paul wrote to the Ephesians he had
already assigned to Christ a position of the highest dignity
and closest relationship with believers. A remarkable pas-
sage in I Cor. reads, " For as the body is one, and hath
many members, and all the members of the body, being
many, are one body; so also is Christ." ^ Of this passage
there have been nearly as man}^ interpretations as interpre-
ters. Grotius, de Wette, Heinrici, regard " Christ " as mean-
ing " the Church itself." Reichbert thinks that it refers to
" the ideal Christ." Others regard it as referring to the
Glorified Christ, including His Church. So Chrysostom
and Meyer refer it to Christ as the Head filling His Church.
Hofmann and Edwards regard it as teaching that Christ is
the " personal ego " of the organism. Holsten, as he often
does, regards Christ here as the same as the Spirit. Godet
explains it as " the whole spiritual economy of which He is
the principle." This last is nearer the most satisfactory
interpretation which is given by Dr. J. A. Robinson.*
" He is no part, but rather the whole, of which the various
members are parts." He was not thinking so much there of
Christ as the Head, as of Christ including the Head, and
all the members. It is exactly parallel to the Johannine
passage, " I am the Vine, ye are the branches." ^

(iii) So we are brought into a position to understand the
difficult phrase which crowns St. Paul's thought on the sub-

^ This idea clearly springs not from heathen rites, but from the
beautiful and touching imagery of the Old Testament especially
adopted in the story of Amos and Gomer,

2 Eph. V. 32. Cf. Gen. ii. 24 ; St. Matt. xix. 5 ; also see Dr.
J. Armitage Robinson hereon, Ephesians, p. 42.

" I Cor. xii. 12. * Ephesians, ad loc. ^ St. John xv. 5.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 173

ject, " And Him hath He given to be Head over all things
to the Church, which is His body, the fullness of Him Who
all in all is being fulfilled " (to "TrKrjpoifia tov to, iravra iv iraaiv
irXTjpovjMevov)} Dr. J. A. Robinson has dealt so clearly and
admirably with the meaning of this last phrase, that we
cannot do better than follow his guidance.^

'First, then, it seems clear that in the sense in which the
body is the fullness (to irXt^paifia), or completion, of the Head,
in the sense in which the Head is incomplete without the
body, Christ needs the Church for His fullness, and without
It He is, in that sense, incomplete. " Through the Church,
which St. Paul refuses to think of as something separate
from Him, He still lives and moves among men." The
whole Head and Body is thus Christ. As the Church grows
more complete so does Christ. He is " the Christ that is
to be." So that in one sense Christ is not all that He shall
be. " He is being fulfilled." He hath put all things under
His feet and He hath given Him to be head over all things
to the Church, which is His body, the fullness of Him Who
all in all is being fulfilled. " All conceivable fullness, a
completeness which sums up the Universe, is predicated of
Christ, as the issue of the Divine purpose." So St. Paul
can say elsewhere, " In Him were created all things, in the
heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things in-
visible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or
powers, all things have been created through Him, and
unto Him ; and He is before all things, and in Him all
things consist." ^

Summary of the Present Chapter and its relation

TO St. Paul's Christology.

What do these conceptions of St. Paul concerning Christ

teach us as to His Person ? We have seen that the term

" Kvpio<i " was applied by him to Our Lord. The sense in

1 Eph. i. 23. Dr. Robinson hereon.

2 Ephesians, p. 42 ff. ^ Col. i. 16.

174 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

which the disciples in the early days of their discipleship
addressed Him as " Kvpto<; " (i.e. as a Jewish Rabbi) is
inadequate. The word became filled with the deepest
meaning. " Jesus is the Lord " was a confession implying
belief in a Lord Risen and Exalted. For St. Paul, familiar
with the LXX and the Old Testament in Hebrew, and
most careful in his uses of current expressions in a Christian
sense, the word " Lord " conveyed the idea of Godheads
Quotations relating to nin'' or ''^il^^ are applied to
Christ. As Lord He is Sovereign over the Church, and over
the Universe. " This Lordship is so wide and lofty as
to be inconceivable in one less than God," He is moreover
the Head, the controlling, saving Ruler of the body, the
Church. He is the Head of all creation. All things move
to their goal in Him. " To believe in Him, to accept Him as
our Ideal, and find our life's end in doing His will is to be true
to a relation that lies in Creation i tself , and that expresses
the eternal law of our being." ^ We have dwelt briefly,
too, on the fact that Christ is addressed in prayer, and is the
object of worship, a thing impossible for St. Paul with his
abhorrence of creature worship, if Jesus Christ were not God
Himself. Yet, in a sense, there is a " Christ that is to be,"
still incomplete, imperfect, a Christ consisting of the Head
as well as the Body, " which is the TrXi'ipwfxa of Him who all
in all is being fulfilled." Christ in the end performs the
ofiiceof Judge at the Parousia, an office which demands for
its fulfilment attributes belonging only to God Himself.^
Then at the end " the Kingdom is delivered up to the Father,
in obedience to Him, when the work of the redemption of
the Universe is perfected, a surrender which does not imply
inequality of nature, but " is essential to the Divine Unity." ^

1 St. Paul's Conception of Christ, Dr. Somerville, pp. 192, 193.

2 It is true that in some final sense, God the Father is Judge
and the Son intercedes before Him. Cf. St. Matt. x. 32.

3 Art, " Paul the Apostle," H. D. B., Prof. G. G. Findlay.

CHRIST AS TRANSCENDENT 175

" There is nothing really surprising," concludes Prof. Find-
lay, " if, as seems most probable in both instances, Paul
has actually in Rom. ix. 5^ and Tit. ii. 13 given to
Christ the predicate ' God.' "

1 See infya, p. 180.

CHAPTER IX

Christ as Perfect God and Perfect Man

Was Christ, for St. Paul, Perfect God ?

WE have seen in the foregoing pages that the external
attributes (e.g. omniscience, omnipresence, omni-
potence) and the internal attributes (e.g. truth and love) ^
essential to the Deity are predicated by St. Paul of Jesus
Christ. No one can really grasp the view of Christ which
St. Paul's convictions concerning Christ as Immanent, as
Transcendent and as Eternal, postulate, without perceiving
that, for him, Christ was indeed God. We are aware that
this conclusion is by no means always attained. Sabatier
writes, " St. Paul's Christology, on the contrary, was framed
from a human standpoint. It has an anthropological origin,
and retains something of this essentially human character
even in its metaphysical form. This is doubtless the reason
why the Christ of Paul never comes to be simply and abso-
lutely God." 2

Baur thought St. Paul's view of Christ's Person was much
lower. He holds that " It cannot possibly be allowed that
he regarded Him as God. He calls Him a man." ^ " So
Dean Everett in " The Gospel of Paul " writes, " Christ was
indeed to him never God. The Church in the deification
of Christ has followed the momentum derived from St. Paul ;

* To adopt Dr. Fairbairn's division, see p. 125 supra. Cf. ttuv tu
■n-Xypoiixa, " All the Divine powers and attibutes^,'' Col. i. 19.
2 The Apostle Paul, Sabatier, p. 262. ^ PaiiHnsm, vol. ii. p. 239 ff.

176

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 177

but has been carried by it far beyond the point which he
himself reached. Still Paul invested Him with superhuman
and pre-existent glory by which He stood under God alone."

Three Questions suggest themselves for Answer.

It would seem that three points especially ought to be
dealt with, if we would arrive at a satisfactory answer to the
question, " Was Christ, for St. Paul, perfect God ? " These
are (i) What view of the Person of Christ is implied by the
place He occupied in St. Paul's religious life, and by the
Apostle's conception of the work Christ came to do for the
world ? (2) Does St. Paul in his writings ever call Christ
God ? (3) What evidence is there that the " momentum
derived from St. Paul " was carried by the Church in its
deification of Christ far beyond the point which he himself
reached ? In other words, " What is the relation between
the Christ of St. Paul and the Christ of dogma ? " The first
of these has already been dealt with at sufficient length, and
we now propose to discuss the question, " Did St. Paul
actually call Christ God ? "

Evidence of St. Paul's Sermons and Writings.
(a) The Title " Son of God."

The answer depends on our examination of St. Paul's
writings,^ a process to which we now again proceed with
this question in view. Here we find certain phrases, which
to the mind of the present writer clearly indicate that for
St. Paul Christ was God ; (i) There is his use of the title

1 The texts in the New Testament suggested in this connexion
by the Rev. A. S. Martin {Diet, of C. and G., Art. '■' Divinity of
Christ ") are John i. i, xx. 28, i John v. 20, Heb. i. 8 £f., Rom. ix. 5,
Titus ii. 13, Acts xx. 28, i Tim. iii. 16, Phil. ii. 6, 2 Pet. i. i, Col.
ii. 9, The strongest in St. Paul's writings are regarded as Phil. ii.
6-8 and Col. ii. 9. Other texts not regarded by that writer as
important, but sometimes quoted, are Col. ii. 2, Eph. v. 5, 2 Thess.
i. 12.

N

178 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

" Son of God." We have already dealt with the use of this
phrase from a Messianic point of view. We have seen that
it meant at least that Jesus was the Messiah. But to the
Apostle it meant much more. In Rom. i. 1-14 it stands
in juxtaposition with, and contrast to, the fact that Christ
satisfied all the conditions of Messiahship in His descent
from David as a description of what He is in His higher
nature, and as proved by the Resurrection according to the
Spirit of Holiness {Kara trvev/xa dyi(oavvrj(;). If Dr. Sanday
is right, though in the Old Testament the term " Son of God "
did not imply Divinity, yet by this time it was established as
" the standing formula to express what we mean by the
Divinity of Christ." ^

Dr. Sanday thus defines the term : "It is the picture of
a mind lying open without flaw or impediment to the stream
of Divine love pouring in upon it, and responding to that
love at once with exquisite sensitiveness and with entire
completeness. It is indeed the very perfection of what we
mean by religion and the religious attitude of the soul to
God." 2 It is an expression freely used by the apostles
to " bring out their belief in the Divine side of the nature
of Christ." 3

For St. Paul, then, to use this phrase is to confess his
belief in the divinity of Christ, and to identify the Son of
God with the Eternal Word, the Transcendent and Exalted
Christ, and the Indwelling Saviour, is in every respect to
regard Him as God. But did the term imply for St. Paul
all that the Fathers of the fourth century saw in it ? Was
the Son of God necessarily identical in essence with God,
and therefore actually God ?

There is no doubt that in the Gospels the title is used in

1 Art. " Son of God," H. D. B., p. 573, Prof. W. Sanday.

2 H. D. B., p. 576.

3 H. D. B., p. 577. See note on the origin of the Christian use
of the title " Son of God."

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 179

the main of the Incarnate, and not of the Pre-existent, Christ.
But in the Epistles there is more ambiguity. In two pas-
sages especially, as Dr. Sanday points out, Christ as pre-
existent is called " Son," i.e. in the opening passage of the
Epistle to the Hebrews, where it is as " Son " He made the
worlds ; and in Col. i. 13-15 " The Son of His love
. . . Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn
of all creation." Moreover, Rom. viii. 32, " God spared
not His own Son," and Rom. viii. 3, "God, sending His
own Son " certainly imply that Christ was the Son of God
before His Incarnation. Nor can we refrain from concluding
that one, who, like St. Paul, saw so great a transcendence
in the Sonship of Jesus over the sonship of His followers,
and identified in his thought this same Son of God with the
Person Who stood in the closest possible relationship to
God as the Son of His love and to man as Universal Ruler
and Saviour, would probably have seen in the words an abso-
lute identity of essence and an essential equality with the
Father.*

{/3) COLOSSIANS I. 19, COLOSSIANS II. 9, AND

Philippians II. 7-11.

(/3) The passages Col. i. 19 and ii. 9 strengthen the
conclusion that for St. Paul Christ was actually God. In
the former passage he says, " It was (God's) good pleasure
that in Him all the plenitude should have its permanent
abode " [irdpTo TrXrjpayfia KaTOLKrjcrai "), i.e. in Christ there
was no mere temporary indwelling of a portion of " the
Divine powers and attributes," 2 but their totality resided
permanently in Him. This statement seems to the present

1 The only contemporary attempt known to Dr. Sanday to dis-
tinguish radically between utos ©eoC and ©eos is in Clem. Horn,
xvi. 15, 16 (cf. X. 10). " It is," he says, " characteristic of the
teaching of that curiously isolated production."

2 Colossians, Dr. Lightfoot, p. 157.

i8o THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

writer a declaration as strong, in all but name, as if its author
had said " 0eo9 rjp 6 ;>^pi(rTO(?." Is it conceivable that One
Who was not ofioova-LO'; Tu> irarpi should be capable of exer-
cising to the fullest degree all the totality of the attributes
of the Divine nature ? " All that is His own right," more-
over, " is His Father's pleasure, and is ever referred to that
pleasure by Himself." ^ So that the objection of Meyer
and Eadie that the Divine essence dwelt in Christ necessarily,
and not of the Father's good pleasure, falls to the ground.

The second passage runs thus. " In Christ all the pleni-
tude of the Godhead has its permanent fixed abode bodily."
( * ori, ev avTQ) KarocKei irav to irXtjpcofjLa t^9 ©60x77x09
acofjLaTiKQ)<i "). Of the word " aQ)/ubaTLKa)<i " many inter-
pretations have been given. Inter alia it is understood as
meaning " really," or " wholly," or (understanding " ttXtj-
pfofjia " as used of the Church) " as this body." The best and
most appropriate meaning is " bodily wise, corporeally, "^ and
thus the whole phrase refers to the Incarnate Christ. " The
indwelling of the Pleroma refers to the Eternal Word and not
to the Incarnate Christ, but ' o-G)/iaxt«ft)9 ' is added to show
that the Word, in whom the Pleroma thus had its abode
from all eternity, crowned His work by the Incarnation."

We have already dwelt at length on the meaning of the
words in Phil. ii. 7-1 1, " Who being in the form of
God " (" 09 iv P'Opcf)^ ©eov virdp-x^wv "), and we have seen
that, almost beyond doubt, St. Paul there views Christ as
being in essence God, not merely as pre-existent with regard
to His self-emptying, but eternally ; and we should be quite
ready to find that he really does in unmistakable terms call
Christ God.

(7) Romans ix. 5.

{7) It is possible that he has done so in a fourth passage

^ New Testament in Greek, Dean Alford, ad loc.
^ So Dr. Lightfoot (p. 180) and Dr. Abbott (pp. 154, 253) on
" Colossians."

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN i8i

which we will now proceed to consider, i.e. Rom. ix. 5. The
verse reads thus in the R.V., " Whose are the Fathers, and
of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh. Who is over all,
God blessed for ever " (mv ol 7rarepe<i koI i^ ojv 6 XpLaTb<; to
Kara crdpKa' 6 mv iirl TrdvTcov ©609 6^X0777x09 et9 TOU9 aieova?).^
This text wa3 the subject of an interesting controversy-
some years ago between Dr. Kennedy and Dr. Gifford,
two theologians whose scholarship and ability made the
incident doubly interesting. Dr. Kennedy preached a
sermon in 1883,2 and, when it was published, discussed the
text thoroughly in the appendix. After a statement of pre-
liminary facts he goes on to consider first the context of the
words. St. Paul's object, he says, was to win the ear of the
Jews. He sums up their most glorious privileges, " Whose
is the adoption ..." Is it likely he would say, " Of whom
as concerning the flesh Christ came, Who is over all, God
blessed for ever ? " * That would imply that Messiah was

1 Professor Gardner {op. cil. p. 202) is quite ready to admit that
©eds does apply to the Exalted Christ. He asserts that this word
was much more loosely used in the time of Paul. Paul himself
seems not to be very strict in 2 Cor. iv. 4, where the " god (o Of.6<i)
of this age" (not world) is mentioned. In the latter passage indeed
some have taken 6 ©cos as referring to God and not to Satan (so
Irenaeus, and, taking tujv d-Trt'o-Taij/ before rov aiwvos tovtov, Origen
and many early writers). This is an improbable interpretation.
But we may easily see how ^eds in this connexion was used as
equivalent to Sip)(wv. Its use may be quite general. " He whom
this ag8 has elevated to the position of their God." In any case
©eds is in each case qualified by the words which accompany it.
" Who is overall, God blessed for ever," if we allow that it refers
to Christ, can only mean that Christ is the Supreme and Eternal
God. Principal Carpenter (Jesus or Christ? p. 241 n.) gives a
summary of recent critical opinion on the text. He agrees with
Lietzmann that its interpretation is a " matter of feeling." For
an interesting and widely accepted suggested emendation (reading
(Lv b instead of 6 wv) see J.T.S. vol. xi., 1909-1910, Art. Philo
(p. 36) (Mr. J. H. A. Hart).

2 A sermon before the University of Cambridge on Christmas Day.

3 So A.V.

i82 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

come, to which the Jews would not listen. Nor is the
translation, " of whom as concerning the flesh is Christ
Which is over all, God blessed for ever " happier, for, he
says, it is the Father Who is " eVt Travrcov." ^ It was
really the ascription of a final doxology of confidence in the
great monotheistic doctrine of the Jews. The Jews did not
expect the coming Messiah to be the Lord Jehovah incarnate.
Moreover, doxologies are elsewhere addressed to the Father,
except one in 2 Tim. iv. 18 which is addressed to " 6
Kvpco<i," and 2 Pet. iii. 18, where the glory both now and
unto the day of eternity is ascribed to Our Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ. The former, however, seemed to Dr. Kennedy
to be ambiguous, though he admitted that the latter refers
to Christ. So the words of Rom. ix. 5 should, in his
opinion, be punctuated with a colon after " to Kara adpKa,"
and the next words should he translated as a doxology to
the Father.

Dr. Gifford in his reply dealt with these points fully and
adequately. First, then, did St. Paul refrain from pre-
dicating " 0609 " of Jesus Christ ? Dr. Kennedy admitted
that he predicated its equivalents. In i Cor. viii. 6 he recites
a kind of creed "... and in One Lord Jesus Christ ..."
which for St. Paul must have meant that Jesus Christ was
in some way the Lord Jehovah. Meyer, Abbott, and others
have not established their contention that " 0e6? " is far
higher than " Kvpio^." Moreover, if we consider the con-
text, we find that the words are not addressed so much to
Jewish unbelievers as to all the believers at Rome. He is
detailing the privileges of the Jewish nation ; there is no
word of sudden change or revulsion of feeling from anguish
to exultation, nor any reason why there should be a digres-
sion. From a grammatical point of view it should be noted
(i) that " o 'Xpio'TO'i " is " the Messiah " rather than a proper

1 Ought it not, however, to be remembered that there is an
interchange of ofl&ce and title between Father and Son ?

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 183

name, (ii) That there ought to be an antithesis to "to
Kara adpica." (iii) " 6 wv " is not used in its " sacred "
sense of " absolute being " (" I am "). So " iov " is either
(a) the copula, i.e. "6 wv e-n-l irdvTtov &eb<;" is subject, and
" €v\oyr)T6<i " predicate. In this case Dr. Kennedy's con-
struction is possible — or {b) " 6 eVt iravrcov " may be subject
and " 0609 " predicate. It is not probable, though possible,
that there is an ellipse of " eVxi." (iv) " €v\o'yr]T6<i " in
a doxology always precedes its subject. Dr. Gifford con-
cisely states the matter thus : — •

"The Apostle applies in all other passages ' evXoyrjTof:'
to God. Granted. Therefore in Rom. ix. 5 also to God,
Granted also. Therefore he does not apply it here to Christ.
Non sequitur — unless, of course, we start with the pre-
supposition that he does not intend to call Christ God here
as (so it is said) he does not elsewhere. But surely this a
priori consideration falls before the weight of internal
evidence of the passage itself."

So Dr. Gifford concludes that here, at all events, St. Paul
does actually call Christ " God."

After a careful consideration of all the evidence. Doctors
Sanday and^Headlam come to the conclusion that there is
no argument which they have felt to be quite conclusive.
The grammar and argument of the passage, however, lead
them to say, " In these circumstances, with some slight,
but only slight, hesitation we adopt the first alternative
and translate ' Of whom is the Christ as concerning the
flesh. Who is over all, God blessed for ever, Amen.' " ^ There
has, however, since appeared an ingenious theory advanced
by Prof. Burkitt.* He points out that the question still
remains whether any doxology at all occurs in the context.
The " Amen " points to the words being not a description
but an ascription. " The obvious difficulty in referring the

^ Commentary on Romans, p. 238.
2 y. X. S., vol. V. p. 451.

i84 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

words to our Lord is not that the Christology ... is too
' high ' for St. Paul, but that the words are used in a par-
enthetical way." After a discussion of the use of evXoyijToi;
by St. Paul, Professor Burkitt concludes that, as in Rom.
i. 25 and 2 Cor. xi. 31, he adds here at the end of the
enumeration of Israel's privileges, his solenm invocation
of the God of Israel. He accordingly translates it " I lie
not, . . . the Eternal (Blessed is His Name !) / call Him
to witness." The occurrence of the word " evXoyrjTO'i " is
enough to show that the Holy Name has been explicitly or
implicitly pronounced. "It is the mention of the Tetra-
grammaton that calls forth the benediction expressed in
' €v\oy7]T6<; ,' for the Name of the Holy One (Blessed is
He !) should not be uttered without a benediction."^ This
is exceedingly ingenious ; but, until further proof is forth-
coming that it rests on less tentative grounds, the conclusion
reached by Dr. Gifford, or, at all events, the more cautious
one of Drs. Sanday and Headlam, commends itself to the
present writer.

(S) Acts xx. 28.

(S) There are other texts where the ascription of ©eo? to our
Lord is, to say the least, doubtful ; e.g. St. Paul's speech to
the Elders at Miletus contains the much-discussed passage,
" Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in the
which the H0I3/ Ghost hath made you Bishops, to feed the
Church of God, which He purchased with His own blood "
(Acts XX. 28) {irpoaixeTe eavroU koI iravrl tm Troifivoo), ev
cS u/xa? TO Tlvevfia to "Ayiov eOero iirtcTKOTrov^, Troiixaivetv ttjv
eKKKrjaiav rod &€ov, rjv irepLeTroii^aaro hia tov aifiarc^ rov iSiou).
On this verse the MSS. are divided between " Qeov" and
" Kvpiov," hut " Kvptov"haiS, on the whole, the greatest

1 So Professor Burkitt suggests that in St. Mark xiv. 61 ff.
" Yios TOV ^vXoyrjTov " indicates the use of the Tetragrammaton
itself or of one of its recognized substitutes.

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 185

weight of MSS. authority.^ On the other hand, transcrip-
tional evidence would incline us to read " &eov." We are
aware that even if we read " &eov," there are alternative
interpretations, as e.g. " the Church of the Father (Oeov)
which He purchased through the blood that was His own "
(i.e. of Jesus). 2 But we must not exclude the possibility,
at least, that St. Paul, if correctly reported, has here
actually called Christ " God."

(e) Romans xvi. 27, Romans xi. 34-36.

(e) Again in Rom. xvi. 27, " To the only wise God [to
whom] be the glory through Jesus Christ for ever . . .
Amen." (fiovo) aocfxp OeS, Sict 'Irjaov XpLcrrov [m] rj 86^a et9
Tov'i al(opa<i. a/j,7)v) Dr. Liddon believed that the doxology
refers to Christ, but it may be that it is better to omit " u> "
and take it as referring to God the Father. In Rom. xi.
34-36, " For who hath known the mind of the Lord . . .
for of Him, and through Him and unto Him are all things.
To Him be the glory for ever. Amen " " rt? yap eyvco vovv

Kvptov ; . . . 8tc €^ avTOV KOi ht avTov Ka\ elq avrov rh iraVTa.
avT(p rj 86^a et? tov<; aia)va<;. dfiyjv ") the ascription is
to " the Lord." Does St. Paul mean Christ ? In the Old
Testament question " Who hath known the mind of the
Lord ? ", the " Lord " is Jehovah, but it would be quite in
keeping with St. Paul's use of " Kvpio^ " if in this quotation
the Lord were Christ. Some regard the passage, on the
other hand, as an ascription to the Trinity, " e'^ avrov, Kal
Bi' avTov Kal el<; avrov." At least an ascription to Christ
is possible.

1 For 0£ov KB Vulg. Syr. For Kvpiov ACDE Copt. Arm. For
Kvpiov Koi &iOV H.L.P.

* So Mr. T. E. Page on the passage, Ads of the Apostles, p. 217.
Westcott and Hort suggest a primitive error — " YIOY " may have
dropped out after " TOYIDIOY."

i86 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

(^) COLOSSIANS II. 2.1

Col. ii. 2 affords us further evidence of a cumulative
character, especially the phrase " that they may know the
mystery of God, even Christ " (et? erri'^vwa-Lv rov fMva-Trjpiov
Tov @eov, XptcTTov). We fully admit the weight of various
readings, but yet there is the possibility, however the readings
for " Xpi(7Tov " (B. Hil.) vary (" KainaTpb<i koI tov Xpiarov,
oeoTTLv Xpiaro<; "),^ and however ambiguous the meaning,
that Christ is here called God.

Summary of the Position thus Reached.

We hold, therefore, that it is impossible to assert unre-
servedly that St. Paul has not called Christ God, and on
the other hand, we conclude that though we cannot abso-
lutely affirm that St. Paul has called Christ God, our hesi-
tation in doing so is of the slightest. He has attributed
to Him such functions and station as carry with them of
necessity that belief, he has applied to Him such terms as
could only be given to One Who was identical in essence
with the Father. If he does not in his epistles lay great
stress upon the miraculous in the life of Christ, such as the
Virgin Birth and His mighty works, yet he portrays Him
as One perfectly obedient to the Will of God, and for St,
Paul that was Divinity. Such an accumulation of evidence
must bring with it the expectation of, or at all events the pre-
paration for, finding " ©eo? " used of Christ in his writings.

St. John clearly believing and teaching the Deity of
Christ, as is so widely admitted, only predicates ©to? of
Christ once (John i. i), though the reference and reading
there is undoubted. Even if St. Paul did not give to Jesus
Christ the predicate " God " in his epistles, in the same
unmistakable way, there remains no other conclusion to
adopt as regards St. Paul's belief of the Person of Christ
than that he saw in Him Perfect God.

^ But see supra, p. 177 w. * Cf. Col. i. 27.

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 187

Christ the Perfect Man.

So far we have dealt entirely with the Deity of Christ.
But as we have shown above, no one who was not really
man could have played the part in St. Paul's religious life
that Christ did. It was the reality of Christ's earthly life,
the reality of His sufferings,^ the reality of His victory over
sin, and of His saving power for the human race that trans-
formed the Apostle's zeal, kindled his love and inspired
such amazing power and patience in the winning and shep-
herding of souls. Always before St. Paul's eyes was this life
to be seen, wherein was set forth in the flesh the perfect
ideal relationship of man to man, of man to God. This
was no shadowy phantasm, passing through the ranks of
men, unreal amongst the terribly real things of life. It
was no apparition fleeting like a shadow on the screen from
one side of the picture of His generation to the other. In
Him St. Paul saw God become Man for our redemption, the
Eternal Word Incarnate, the sublimest example of self-
sacrifice and humiliation. His Lord had left the state and
majesty of His throne on high, He had beggared Himself
and by His lowly, patient, stainless life, given up in death on
the Cross and consummated by the Resurrection from the
grave, there had been brought to mankind, nay, even to the
universe, a hope new born, a freedom new granted, a joy
and a peace which the world could neither give nor take
away. That His life was really lived, we believe, is an
implication underlying all St. Paul's convictions. We have
tried to show that the earthly life of Jesus had some value
for St. Paul. That he believed in the Virgin Birth we may
not be able to affirm positively, though we remember how
weak and dangerous is the argument from silence as a rule.

1 That the rcahty of His temptations was also emphasized strongly
in St. Paul's teaching is made very probable by the stress laid upon
it in word and argument by the Pauline School, e.g., the author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistles and Gospel of St. John.

i88 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

We have, moreover, indications that he might have taught
it, e.g. " Born of a woman," ^ " Born of the seed of David
according to the flesh," ^ whilst Bishop Gore thinks that the
conception of the Second Adam postulates it.^ However
that may be, docetic theories can find no place in St. Paul.
A wilful delusion on the part of his sinless Lord was impos-
sible. Nor was Christ merely a man endued with the Divine
Spirit, at birth, or, perhaps, at baptism. The Spirit was His
Spirit, and wrought in the believer the image of His Lord.
Nor did He progress (" e/c irpoKoirri^") towards Divinity. The
sinlessness and spotlessness of His life from birth to death
forbid the idea. His being One Person (always ev (Jbop^fi 0eov
virdpxov," though not always " laa&ew") throughout, both
in Pre-existence and during His Incarnation, make it im-
possible. His Person was Divine. In it were united the
Divine nature, which was His from eternity, and the human
nature, which was only potential before His Incarnation, but
realized and perfect after it. Nor was his Christ the Christ of
Apollinaris, as Harnack seems to assert. " In ApolHnaris,
speculation has returned to its first beginning, for this
Christ is really the Christ of Paul, the heavenly Spirit-
being Who assumed the flesh." Apollinaris taught that
in the God-man, Jesus Christ, the Logos took the place of
the Human Soul {'^vxv)' He had a "a-co/xa," and an irrational
soul, and instead of the human " Trvevixa" there was the
Logos.* The conception was certainly a loftier one than that
of Arius who substituted a half divine (though personal)

1 Gal. iv. 4. 3 Rom. i. 3.

^ He was the head of a new race, a new starting point for humanity.
" Now considering how strongly St. Paul expresses the idea of the
solidarity of man by natural descent and the consequent implica-
tion of the whole human race in Adam's fall, his belief in the sinless
Second Adam seems to me to postulate the fact of His Virgin Birth,
the fact, that is, that He was born in such a way that His birth
was a new creative act of God." Dissertations, Dr. Gore, p. 10.

* Cf. The Platonic threefold division of man.

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 189

Word for the human soul ; but it labours under difficulties
as grave. Christ, so it was said, could not even feel in-
firmity or temptation.^ " We confess that there is one
nature of God the Word Which was incarnate " summed
up his teaching. His Christ was thus not really man at
all. Such a Christ, it is clear, could not have been a real
Redeemer. " That which was not taken was not healed." *
If we have estimated rightly, on the one hand, St. Paul's
power of formulating theological thought and his wealth of
religious experience ; and, on the other, his conception
of redemption in Christ Jesus, we cannot for a moment
attribute to him a Christology so inconsistent. Christ
must have had a perfectly human soul as well as a real
human body.^

We have seen how the really human nature of Christ is
demanded by the conception which St. Paul formed of Him
as Messiah, as Second Adam, and as Redeemer. As the
Saviour of the House of David, He was born of a human
mother. As the Head of a New Humanity, of a Redeemed
Race, He was the Perfect Man, the Second Adam, in Whom,
as the Author of their salvation and the Strength and Stay
of their lives, the new creation lived. He was the explana-
tion of the past, the solution of the mysteries of life, the
reconciliation of the apparent paradoxes of experience.
Could the figure of the Man of Sorrows, crowned in His life
by the Cross, in His death by the Resurrection, have been
blotted out from the world-worn Apostle's vision as he
filled up that which was lacking of the sufferings of Christ ?
" Ecce Homo ! " we cry, as we see the veil lifting, and Christ,

1 Cf. against this idea St. John xii. 27 ; St. Matt. xxvi. 38.

* " TO yAp a.irp6(TXr}TTTov &6ip6.TT(VTov ," Gregory of Nazianzus. Ep.
chap. i.

3 We must not forget that St. Paul and St. John were very con-
siderably superior to their immediate successors in spiritual insight
and attainment. Cf. St. Paul's epistles and the Epistle of Clement,
pr the Epistle to the Hebrews with that of Barnabas.

igo THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

as St. Paul knew Him, outlined, though yet but faintly, to
our view. " Ecce Deus " are the words that rise to our lips
as we kneel in lowly worship before the transcendent Lord
of Glory, exalted, seated on the right hand of the Father.
Yet He is no " tertium quid " ^ with the human and divine
commingled. He is One Lord Jesus Christ. That is why
in Him we find the pledge of our hope, the earnest of what
we shall be. As Christ is formed in us so more and more
we shall become that for which we exist, until we attain
to the stature of the fullness of Christ, and perfectly fulfil
our destiny. In His divine essence, Christ remains still im-
measurably above us. By His assumption of human nature
we obtain the inspiration, the hope of an eternal progress,
we find the ground of the optimism of the Christian faith.^

1 TertuUian, Adv. Prax. 27.

2 We should remember that, as the Editor of the Interpreter {vol.
vi. p. 225) has pointed out, the word " Person " is differently used
in Theology and in ordinary language. " One personality of Christ "
does not mean a mixture of human and divine in a tliird hybrid
nature wliich blends both. In the ordinary sense " person " means
"a separate spiritual individual, a separate mind, will, and energy."
In Christ one Personality, One Person, has two minds, two wills,
two energies, human and divine. This " duality " has been the
subject of much recent criticism. It had been emphasized by the
Reformed theology which insisted upon the reality of both natures
in Christ. So Prof. Kilpatrick {Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels,
Art. " Incarnation"), writes that questions such as the relation of
His divinity to His humanity " evidently proceed from the point
of view of dualism, according to which one nature is contrasted
with another ; whereas St. Paul's views of God and of man, and
of the God-man are all synthetic. Personal unity, not logical
dualism, is the key to the thought of St. Paul. Between God and
man, there is the unity of moral likeness ; between the Father
and the Son, the unity of being and fellowsliip, . . . between
the pre-incarnate and the incarnate periods of Christ's experience
and action, the unity of one continuous life . . ." He asserts that
before reconstruction of theological definition is possible, this
" dualism " must be abandoned. Principal Garvie, however, is
with us when he states {Encycl. of Rel. and Eth., Art. " Christian-
ity ") that " it cannot be claimed that a satisfactory re-statement
which is likely to win general acceptance has been reached."

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 191

The Christ of St. Paul and the Christ of Dogma.

So, as both Dr. Lightfoot and Dr. Gifford assert, St.
Paul's doctrine of the Person of Christ is not adequately
represented by any conception short of the perfect deity
and perfect humanity of Christ.^ Had he lived through
the times of controversy, when the doubts and speculation
of the fourth century forced the Church to define her
faith, St. Paul would indubitably have been among the
staunchest supporters of those dogmas, which are now some-
times supposed to be in opposition to his teaching. Is
there that opposition between the Christ of St. Paul and the
Christ of dogma which some theologians perceive ? Christ
for St. Paul was indeed the Christ of experience, but is not
the Christ of dogma also the Christ of experience ? It is
surely experience which makes the soul cling immovably to
the conviction that Christ was both Perfect God and Perfect
Man. To have a religion without dogma of some kind is
impossible.^ But we must be careful to take the right

1 We do not admit that, as a recent writer has attempted to
show {Jestis or Christ ? p. 255, by Rev. James ColHer), it is in conse-
quence of the " genesis and development, the ascendancy and pre-
ponderance " of the Holy Communion (becoming later the Mass)
that Christ has Himself " become God, and the Supreme God."
Nor do we admit, though this is the order of treatment in this essay,
that, as Dr. Martineau has advocated {Seat of Authority in Religion,
p. 361), Jesus was construed successively by the personal attendants
of Jesus as Messiah, by St. Paul as the Second Adam or the Ideal of
Humanity, and by the school from which the Fourth Gospel came
as a Divine Incarnation. In the first place this theory of develop-
ment does violence to the facts, and in the second place the Synop-
tists know Jesus as the Ideal Man and the Son of God, and St.
Paul and St. John know a Jesus Who is also Messiah (see Diet, of
C. and G., Art. " Divinity of Christ," Rev. A. S. Martin). Their
emphasis is different, but not exclusive. The Person is the same.
2 I would borrow Dr. Sanday's definition of the much misused
word " orthodoxy." It ought to be used to express " a deep cen-
trality and balance of thought, undisturbed by extraneous influences
of any kind, and resting on a basis of genuine religion " [Christologies ,
Anciefjt and Modern, p. 22).

192 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

view of the dogmas of the Christian Church. Why were the
definitions of the fourth and fifth centuries drawn up, and
what office did they serve ? When the Church began to
embrace within its fold those who brought with them
inheritances of Greek philosophy and Oriental training, it
soon commenced to feel the effect in its spiritual life.
Speculation became rife, the doctrine of the Person of Christ
became emptied of its essential value, and, had the Church
not made a bold stand at Nicaea, it must " either have sunk
back into an effete paganism, or shaped itself on despotic
ideals of the Muslim sort." ^ All that the Christian wished
to preserve was the innermost, deepest-rooted, conviction
of his soul that Christ was " as divine as the Father, and as
human as ourselves." There was no idea of being logically
consistent. There was no attempt to explicate the method
of the Incarnation, but its reality was clearly asserted.^
Moreover in the decision at Nicaea, all future orthodox
decisions were involved. The same speculative interests
which forced the Church to that decision compelled her to
put forth definition after definition until she crowned all
with that of Chalcedon, wherein the two truths are em-
phatically stated. There is no attempt to explain how
Christ became incarnate or what the self-limitation therein
impHed involved. To do that the kenotic theories of to-day
have sprung into existence. Whatever view therefore we
take of the " Kenosis," we can at least join with those who
formulated the Creeds of the General Councils of the fourth
and fifth centuries, and give our unhesitating adherence to
the unchangeable doctrines of the Perfect Godhead and
Perfect Manhood of Jesus Christ which they set forth.
That they advance beyond St. Paul in the expression and
formulation of belief is evident. That St. Paul taught as

^ Th$ Knowledge of God, Prof. Gwatkin, vol. ii. p. 112.
2 See The Christ of History and the Christ of Experience, Dr.
Forrest, p. 193.

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 193

truly as they do the real, perfect, sinless, Manhood of his
Lord, and, at the same time, His absolute equality and
essential identity of essence with the Father is the firm
conviction of the present writer.

Experience and Dogma.

The Church's interests have never been merely speculative
or metaphysical. They were not so then.^ She has always
in the main stream of her thought held that experience is
the basis and the test of the Christian life. The person of
Christ is " a mystery that may be practically known by
any one, theoretically comprehended by none." ^ " The
Church's formulae," says Dr. Forrest, " were negative
rather than positive." No one, we are convinced, can study
the history of those times, and read the works of the Fathers,
without becoming convinced of the justice of Prof. Sanday's
remark about the definitions of our faith that " Every word
in them represents a battle, or succession of battles, in which
the combatants were, many of them, giants." * To these
positions, hard won by our spiritual ancestors in Christ,
we firmly hold. In our faith in God's leading, we dare not
disparage their witness.* But it does not therefore follow
that we cannot have passionate convictions, whole-hearted
zeal, intense experiences. It does not shut us out from the

1 The Trinitarian formula was drawn up by the Church " non
ut illud diceretur, sed ne taceretur " (Tert., De Trin., v. 9, 10). Prof.
Sanday writes : " There may well have been a self-determination of
the Godhead, such as issued in the Incarnation, as far back as
thought can go. I add that as perhaps a tenable modern para-
phrase of the primary element in the doctrine of the Trinity. This
doctrine, in its essence as in its origin, turns upon the recognition
of the Incarnation of the Son " {Christologies, Ancient and Modern,
p. 168).

2 The Knowledge of God, Prof. Gwatkin, vol. ii. p 76.

3 Art. " Jesus Christ," H. D. B., Prof. W. Sanday, p. 650.

* Cf. the recent Ritschhan School in its disparagement of the
metaphysical,

O

194 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

wonderful working of the Holy Spirit as He fashions us
into the likeness of Christ. It rather means that we sup-
plement these by quiet hours of patient thought about the
Redeemer, by welcoming all evidence, of whatever kind, that
our faith may be strengthened and its contents become
clearer to our minds, by recognizing the guiding hand of
God as we see Him leading His people through storms of
controversies, speculations and doubts, and by bringing
vividly home to ourselves the glorious heritage of the Church
of to-day from the Church of all time. It seems to be
unworthy of the Christian conception of the working of
God in the world to reject all or any of this, and only by
making it our own, as well as by a resolute determination
to leave that heritage not only untarnished but enriched
by saintly life, will our religious experience have true balance.
There have indeed been accumulated in the past needless
accretions to, and harmful perversions of, the doctrines of
primitive times, but we venture to think, that to any candid
student of history, certain fundamental doctrines stand
out, clear and unmistakable, as the continuous Faith of
the Church. These fundamentals we believe to be contained
in her Creeds.

Conclusion.

We conclude that St. Paul's faith was as true, if not
quite as rigidly defined, as that of the great army of Christian
saints who have placed unshaken trust in the Perfection of
the Deity and the Manhood of our Lord united in One
Person. His experiences were deeper, his powers of insight
keener, than those of any of his contemporaries except
perhaps St. John, and certainly than those of any of the
leaders of Christian thought since. Even to-day, despite
the accumulated wealth of Christian tradition and centuries
of patient seeking after light, we still turn to him with the
cry, " Master, show us the Christ," and for answer he has

CHRIST AS PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN 195

placarded before us the Messiah as the Man of Sorrows,
bearing on the Cross the sins of the world. He has pointed
us to a Christ whose cosmic and soteriological functions
concern the universe. He has proclaimed the gospel of
the solution of the ultimate problems of life. He has made
known to us the heavenly vision which he obeyed, a vision
which, he has affirmed, must dawn on every Christian soul,
and shine more and more unto the perfect day. As that
vision becomes clearer to us, we shall find its light illuminat-
ing many of the darker places of our lives , we shall realize
the truth of Browning's words :

" The acknowledgment of God in Christ,
Accepted by the reason, solves for thee
All questions on the earth, and out of it.
And has so far advanced thee to be wise."

CHAPTER X

Recent Christological Thought

WE live in an age of specialization. In no department
of the world's activities is this more manifest than
in the sphere of theological thought. Dr. Schweitzer has
indicated the type of progress of which he himself is a con-
spicuous example. " Progress always consists in taking one
or other of two alternatives, in abandoning the attempt
to combine them." ^ This is the progress of the specialist,
and it is apt to be very one-sided. The truer progress is
by the Hegelian method of thesis, antithesis and synthesis ;
and, though in this way advance is not so great along any
one particular line of specialization, it is so much the more
truly balanced and therefore sounder in the main.

Behind much of ^this activity lies a great revolt from
the Pharisaic attitude of the man who, having a formula,
imagines that he has the right thing and is safe. It carries
with it, for the moment, a discrediting of Pauline theology.
" For eighteen centuries," writes Dr. Bacon, " Christianity
has been interpreted by its theologians from the Pauline
view ' sub specie seternitatis.' But the Matthseo-Petrine
basis has never been eliminated. . . . The dominance of
the Pauline-Greek interpretation is coming to an end." ^
A twofold task has been before theologians ; first, to find
the " Historic Jesus " from the Gospel records ; secondly,

1 Quest of the Historical Jesus, p. 237.

2 Jesus or Christ ? p. 219.

196

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 197

to set forth the true relationship between this Jesus and the
Christ of the Creeds. ^ With each ebb and flow of opinion,
the same questions are asked again : " How shall we speak
of Him ? What is Christianity ? "

An idea of the varied movements at work in thought and
life may be gained from a consideration of some of their
recent developments, all of them bearing on the elucida-
tion or influencing the estimation of Pauline theology.

(i) The application of scientific methods of historical
criticism and investigation into the literature of the New
Testament and its background, has continued with unabated
vigour.' It is with the latter especially that recent works
on St. Paul have dealt. Professor Knowling, in his book.
Messianic Interpretation,^ has brought out very clearly the
most recent information concerning the Jewish background
to the Christian conception of the Messiah. He deals there ^
with the view of the most recent Jewish commentator that
the usual Christian idea of Jewish conceptions is in reality the
creation of the Christian theologians, " half caricature, half
truth," and concludes that, in this case, it is not the Christian
but the Jew who has falsified the picture of his own Messiah.^
Among the most interesting of recent discoveries in this
respect is that of the Odes of Solomon. Harnack regards
them as being Jewish in origin with Christian interpolations.
They bear witness, as Professor Knowling points out, to a
universalism as wide as St. Paul's and a mysticism not unlike
that of St. John's. For them the Messiah has come.

The Gentile background to the Epistles has been treated
of in two recent and important books, The Religious Experi-
ence of St. Paul, by Professor Gardner,^ and The Earlier

1 Jesus or Christ ? p. g.

2 Sea above, p. i f[.

3 See also The Background of the Gospels, Dr. W. Fairweather.
* p. 19 ff.

6 See also Mr. J. H. A. Hart's book, Th» Hope of Catholic Judaism.
^ Crown Theol. Series.

igS THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Epistles of St. Paul, by Professor Kirsopp Lake.* Both
emphasize strongly, and perhaps unduly, the effect of the
language and ideas of the mysteries upon the Pauline pre-
sentment of the Gospel. Professor Gardner, after dealing
with the origin and essential features and development of
the Greek mysteries proceeds to point out the parallelism
with Pauline doctrine in detail (chap. iv.). The use of the
word " mystery," the contrast between flesh and spirit, the
idea of salvation, the universalism of the Gospel,^ the
Christian Sacraments, all find close parallels in the mysteries.
It is not quite clear how far Professor Gardner would have
us regard St. Paul as dependent upon the latter for his theo-
logy. St. Paul began " the mysticizing of Christian enthu-
siasm." It was the next age that carried it much further,
and introduced " new elements " not " so valuable or so
innocent " as those introduced by him. He would not
" consciously copy the pagan ritual " or ideas, yet he
" fused together " by the fire of his enthusiasm the doctrine
of the Exalted Christ (regarded by the Professor as of Jewish
origin, and closely connected with apocalyptic belief) and
the doctrine of the Mystic Christ (which is " derived from,
or at all events, parallel to, the beliefs of the Hellenistic
mysteries ").^

Professor K. Lake's most valuable book deals with the
Epistles to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians and
Romans. He sets out the Gentile hope of a coming De-
liverer,* the idea of a Redeemer-God and its connexion
with the growing importance of the Sacraments. ^ He dwells
on the eschatological interest of the Thessalonian belief
and the relation of the mysteries' view of life after death
to the Jewish doctrine of a Resurrection which was adopted
by St. Paul.^ The last two chapters are particularly im-
portant. There Professor Lake regards the Jewish Christian

1 Pub. Rivington, 191 1. 2 cf_ the Odes of Solomon above, p. 197.

3 P. 200. 4 p. ^3 g. 6 p. 43, 6 p. g2.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 199

generally as seeing in the Crucifixion of Jesus not an atoning
death, imique in the history of the world, but " merely one
of a long list of crimes against the messengers of God."
The unique significance of the death of Jesus was assigned
to it by St. Paul in Gentile circles, not necessarily " bor-
rowed " from the mysteries, but, as such conceptions were
in the air, Jews and Greeks each construed the same spiritual
experience in the language familiar to themselves. The last
chapter touches upon eschatology, and is referred to below.

Both of these lines of inquiry are valuable. If it were
possible to discover exactly what were the Messianic hopes,
and the ideas of Gentile religion current in the time of St.
Paul, and if we could further find out accurately where St.
Paul stood both before and after his conversion with regard
to them, the meaning of his message, his doctrine, and his
experience would be so much more clear. We welcome the
light thrown upon both these necessary preliminary studies
to an adequate conception of his Christology. The study
of Christian origins is yet in its cradle ; but as it grows we
believe that the synthesis of its different lines of inquiry will
confirm the conclusions reached above.

(ii) In Liberal thought there has been a very considerable
departure from the traditional statements of Christianity.
It represents a breaking free from convention in religion,
a shrinking from the repetition of shibboleths, and a dis-
crediting of orthodox dogmatic statement. For instance,
the Rev. W. Morgan, in his able article " Back to
Christ," 1 asserts that the " Absolute Substance " of the
Councils (a term and an idea borrowed from Hellenistic
Philosophy), " has nothing in common with the holy personal
Will of the Prophets, or with the gracious Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ," In their definitions, if the ethical was
recognized, it occupied only a subordinate place in com-
parison with the metaphysical. The " vital religious

1 Diet, of C. and G.

200 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

interests " which the Church imagined she was preserving *
were really only " a metaphysical, or more strictly a
physical, conception of God."

(iii) The influence of personality in history is recognized
as it never has been before. This has been attributed by
the writer just mentioned to the influence of such teachers
as Goethe, Emerson and Carlyle. We may add also such
names as Moberly, Illingworth, and James.^ The rise of
new speculative philosophies has greatly aided the move-
ment to make personality the central and dominant
principle in history. In the study of the psychology of
Christian experience seems to lie one of the most fruitful
fields of research. It is a return to St. Paul, or rather a
further unfolding of the Pauline Gospel " Christ in me."

(iv) Side by side with these movements has been the

growth of popular socialistic ideas, a new and powerful

realization of what we call (for want of a better word)

" Solidarity." ^ No principle has been more potent in the

vast labour disputes of the day. It is essentially a social

doctrine, but in so far as it has a religious basis, it finds its

parallel, if not its inspiration, in St. Paul. It throws a

growing light on the influence of action upon others, and so

helps us to understand " As in Adam all die, so also in Christ

shall all be made alive." Yet only half the truth is grasped,

and that not wholly — " No man liveth unto himself." So

there is poured out a wealth of devotion, of sacrifice, of zeal,

of labour, all traits of the Pauline type of character. But

the other half is not yet apparent — ■" No true man liveth

1 See p. I go ff. above.
^ 2 Bishop Westcott distrusted and " was dissatisfied with per-
sonal influence, he was inclined to overlook it, and to expect from
organization on true principles that effectiveness wliich mainly
depends on the man behind it." He gave a higher place to the
power of ideas. See Life, vol. ii. pp. 362, 363.

3 Prof. Gardner suggests " incorporation." See Rel. Exp. of
St. Paul, p. 197.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 201

for himself," and " though I give my body to be burned,
and have not love, it profiteth nothing."

(v) Most encouraging of all has been the wonderful out-
pouring of missionary enthusiasm, resulting in the drawing
together of different schools of thought for the common
aim under the one Lord. It is a return to St. Paul in the
best sense. Here are lives of single purpose, of unsparing
devotion and unrelaxing zeal, fired by the noblest ideals
and the grandest aims. Their message is the same as that
of the first preachers of the Gospel. It is proof that the
inspiration of St. Paul is a force to be reckoned with in the
religious world to-day.^

It is always most difficult to review the trend of move-
ments of the day. The horizon is so vast, and we overlook
so much or falsely estimate the importance of what we see.
But yet we believe, with the optimism of the Christian faith,
that these seemingly parallel or divergent lines of advance
will, one day, be seen to converge in a more wondrous
portrait of the Christ ; and that, to vary the metaphor, the
seemingly discordant notes that sound so inharmonious to

our ears now —

" May make one music as before
But vaster."

We may, however, for this purpose, take these different
movements as centring round two subjects : (i) The recovery
and estimation of the Christ of History ; (ii) the explanation
of the personality of the Christ of History.

I. The Recovery of the Christ of History.

(i) The strong movement to recover the Christ of history
may be seen on every hand. It emanates from a belief that
the Christ of theological speculation has replaced the Christ
of History, that it is " increasingly difficult to find the Nicene
Christology in the New Testament and the ante-Nicene
Church," ^ that popular language is exceedingly inaccurate,

^ See Allen's Missionary Methods ; St. Paul or Ours ? in the Library
of Historic Theology. * Father Tyrrell, Jesus or Christ P p. 8.

202 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

the orthodox theological Christianity tending towards Nes-
torianism, and the popular non-theological Christology being
monophysite.^ So Pfleiderer writes in the beginning of his
book, The Early Christian Conception^ of St. Paul : " It is
to the great and abiding credit of the scientific theology of
the nineteenth century that it has learned to distinguish be-
tween the Christ of faith and the Man Jesus of history."
Theology is seen no longer as a result but as a process, its
terms modified or even transformed by outside influences.^
It has a growth, and its expression varies with, or even more
than. Christian experience. So it is held that the figure of
the historic Jesus is merged into, and swallowed up by, that
of the pre-existent Logos as a drop of vinegar in the ocean
(to use the famous Eutychian phrase) . We have been too
much concerned with operations within the Trinity.'
Many have taken up the old attitude that all healthy pro-
gress means the transition from Trinitarian Christianity to
Unitarianism.* We have regarded Christ as the trans-
cendent Lord, the Saviour of the world, the Creator and
Support of life, and have not found the historic Person,
Whose moral personality and the acts of Whose historic life
form the true basis of real religious faith to-day.

In thus going back to the historic Christ, one of the most
considerable barriers seems to many scholars to be St. Paul.^
The teaching of the Apostles, the position of the Early
Church, the experience and belief of the Church of Christ
throughout the centuries are discredited and must be swept
aside. The contrast must be drawn between the Adam-

1 Father Tyrrell, Jesus or Christ? p. lo.

2 It is interesting to compare Newman's position with Harnack's.
See Diet, of C. and G., Art. " Divinity of Christ," Rev. A. S. Martin.

3 Dr. Schweitzer attributes the bringing together of tlie " supra-
mundane Christ " and the historical Jesus to Gnosticism and the
Logos Christology (see Quest of the Historical Jesus, p. 3).

* Cf . Delitzsch, referred to by Prof. Knowling, Messianic Inter-
pretation.

5 See Diet, of C. and G., Art, " Paul," Prof. Sanday.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 203

Christ section of Romans and the Gospel of Jesus of Gahlee.*
Some even go behind the " pillar " passages of Schmiedel,
and the question can be seriously asked, " Did Jesus really
live ? " 2 Some find in the Jesus discovered by this process
a Jesus Who is their ultimate authority in religion. Others
find in Him not a message about Himself, but a message
about God the Father. Fatherhood and Brotherhood are
His Gospel, not salvation from sin through a dying Saviour ;
others see in the acts and moral personality of the historic
Jesus the Gospel of the Redeemer. Others find in Him a
mistaken eschatological dreamer Whose School was very
much more powerful than Himself, Whose Church was built
upon a falsehood and Whose followers found their spiritual
life in believing a delusion or fabricating a myth. To others
it has seemed that, after all, the historical Jesus, the details
of His life on earth, the facts of His ministry, the searchings
of textual scholars, the tomes of apologists, the rejecters or
supporters of the miracles are all vanity. Jesus came to
bring an Idea and an Ideal whereby we reach " the native
land of the Spirit " and know Christ no longer after the
flesh. Others influenced only by the great democratic
movements of the day find in Him (when He is properly
" reduced ") only a humanitarian Jesus whose ethic
contained the principles of social reform.^

Principal Garvie, in his article " The Living Christ," *
has given a clear account of the way in which the Jesus of
History has been sought. First, He has been stripped of all
miracles, then the metaphysical has been excluded, then
Jesus has been " reduced " to an Apocalyptic dreamer.
Some of these aspects were brought into prominence in
popular English thought through the medium of an article

1 See Loisy, "The Christian Mystery," H. J., Oct. igii.

2 Prof. Clemen.

' See Jesus Christ and the Social Question, Prof. Peabody.
* Expos. Times, vol. xxii.

204 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

in the Hibbert Journal entitled, " Jesus or Christ ? " ^ A
number of writers not very representative ^ were invited to
write their views on the alternative. " Jesus " was taken
to mean the historical Jesus of the Gospels ; " Christ " the
second person of the Trinity, Who became man. We are
bidden by some writers to choose between the two. Whilst
it is admitted that as far as the Christian Church is con-
cerned the paradox is true that it is " built upon a hyphen," ^
and even Professor Schmiedel is constrained to admit that
" it is a very serious question whether we to-day should
possess Christianity at all if Jesus had not been interpreted
as a divine being," ^ the general result of the volume is
that though most writers accept both the titles, they do not
admit that the same person is truly both. Jesus is his-
torical, Christ is the Ideal, Who was never on the earth ;
and it is necessary to recover the Former from the dualism
of the Christ of dogma, and the transcendence of the Christ
of St. Paul and Experience.

(i) The Rationalist School ranges from those who deny
that Jesus ever lived, to those who, in varying degree, merely
object to the traditional presentation of the Person of
Christ. Some resolve it into a myth and others attack
the portrait as we have it, and deny its perfection.
Of the forerunners of the extreme Rationahst School,
Strauss (1808-1874) ^ is one of the most prominent. His
method of dealing with fact and narrative has been compared
to " a ploughshare passing through a field of daisies." ^
He reduced the Christian story to myth, which is the creation
of fact out of an idea. Another writer (Drews) has since

1 By the Rev. R. Roberts.

* It was pointed out by the editor of the Inierprefev that the
Unitarian writers were twice as many as the rest.

3 Prof. Gardner, Jesus or Christ P p. 50.

* Jesus or Christ ? p. 65.

' For Paulus see The Quest of the Historical Jesus, Dr. Schweitzer,
p. 48 S.

^ Diet. of. C. and G., vol. ii.. Art. " Christ in Modern Thought."

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 205

explained the Gospel story entirely from the " Christ- myth
of \\'est Africa," asserting that we know nothing of the
historical personality we call Jesus. Kalthoff certainly
allowed that " among the thousands of the crucified in the
time of the Gospel, there must have been some Jesus who
in the spirit of prophetic piety closed his poor martyr-life."
" But," he added, ." this cross had no meaning." Accord-
ing to him, Christianity was in its essence a widespread
social movement, which was begun by a class of oppressed
men struggling into power. This was later combined with
the philosophical and mystical views current at the time
into a religion. Jensen's view was that Christianity arose
from Babylonian legend. Pfleiderer finds the beginning of
Christianity in myth, not in history, and even likens the con*
ception of Christ to those c onceptions found in legends of
other faiths.^

If these writers are correct, St. Paul was either the victim
of a great delusion, or he was responsible for the propagation
of a gigantic fraud. We believe these theories will not bear
examination. The only sources of information that we have
give no support to the theory that Christianity rose from a
social movement, and the plausibility of that theory depends
upon the " transferring to a distant age of economic views and
social hopes " of to-day.^ That Christianity presents paral-
lels with early myths is undoubtedly true. But it does not
follow therefrom that it is itself a myth. "If the Christian
God really made the human race, would not the human
race tend to rumours and perversions of the Christian
God ? " ^ The study of anthropology and of comparative
religion is illuminating whilst it is humbling, but it only sets
in greater relief the firm historic basis of our faith, as well

* Early Christian Conceptions of Christ, p. 9.

2 Encyc. of Rel. and Eth., Art. " Christianity," Princ. Garvie.

3 Mr. G. K. Chesterton, Religious Doubts of Democracy, p. 18 ;
see also Diet, of C. and G., Art. " Divinity of Christ."

2o6 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

as its purity and loftiness amid so much that was crudely
primitive and degrading. " If the doctrine of the Person
of Christ," wrote Dr. Fairbairn, " were explicable on the
mere mythical apotheosis of Jesus of Nazareth, it would
become the most insolent and fateful anomaly in history."
St. Paul's cry for a real Christ is our own —

" my flesh, that I seek
In the Godhead I I seek and I find it . . .
... a Man Hke to me.
Thou shalt love and be loved by, for ever !
.... a Hand like this hand

Shall throw open the gates of new life to thee ! See
the Christ Stand ! " i

Another class of writers, however, accept the fact of the
earthly life of Jesus, but either reduce our knowledge of
Him to the narrowest limits or deny that the portrait pre-
sented is great enough to justify the claim that Jesus is
perfect Man, perfect God. In a recent article ^ some of the
charges of defects in the life and character of Jesus have
been enumerated. Professor Schmiedel, accepting the
position that Jesus was man, asks : " Can a man be sinless ? "
To pin our faith to an affirmative answer is " hazardous in
the extreme." ^ The Rev. R. Roberts has attacked the
apparent " limits " of the historical Jesus as portrayed in
the Gospels. Professor Gardner writes, " Any community,
save one purely parasitic, which acted upon (the precepts of
the Sermon on the Mount) would starve." ^ Many are asking
whether the whole of Christian morality is not out of date.
The " sinlessness " of Jesus is denied. The Rev. R. J.
Campbell writes : "To speak of Him as morally perfect is
absurd, to call Him sinless worse, for it introduces an entirely
false emphasis into the relation of God and man." ^ So the

* R. Browning, " Saul."

2 Rev. A. S. Martin, Art. " Christianity," Diet, of C. and G.,
see pp. 472, 473 ff. 3 Jesus or Christ P p. 68 ff.

* Rel. Exp. of St. Paul, pp. 242, 243.
^ Jesus or Christ ? p. 191.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 207

first rationalists have been content to allow that Jesus was
a man not only tempted like as we are, but also found with
sin. For Kenan, Jesus during His last days on earth fell
from His ideal of the " sweet theology of love," adopted
Jewish eschatology, became a wonder-worker who stooped
even to " arranging " miracles, and at last, outwardly brave,
inwardly in despair, died upon the Cross, the conqueror of
Death. The eschatologists and even the modernists,^
have followed in the same groove of thought.

It is needless to insist upon the difference between this
position and that of St. Paul. For him, redemption could
only be through a perfect, sinless life offered up once for all.
Mr. Roberts was effectively answered, in the " Jesus or
Christ ? " controversy, by at least three writers, Mr. G. K.
Chesterton and Professors Hope Moulton and Weinel.
Professor Schmiedel's canon of criticism, by which we are
to accept only such parts of the Gospel story as are beyond
possibility of invention, because they contradict the char-
acteristic view of Him which believers held, ultimately
simply begs the question.^ He seems to hold what is a
contradiction in terms. "It is impossible to hold com-
munion with Jesus as a man in the past," yet " no one
feels reluctance in addressing prayers to Jesus."

It is possible to answer objections to the character of Jesus
in detail, and one by one, but we must be content here to
bring them into relation to the Pauline Christology, and to
observe that it is remarkable how eagerly St. Paul is claimed
as a witness that the birth-stories of our Lord belong to the
realm of myth because he does not appear to have referred
to them, and " therefore did not know them," yet his view of
the Person of Christ, and his witness to the early Christology
of the Church is rejected as unhistorical and speculative.
Christ is perfect, or He could not be our Ideal, for, in so far
as He is imperfect. He would fall short of being our moral

1 See infra, p. 215. 2 See Jesus or Christ? p. 177.

208 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

example.^ He is the Perfect Man to whom we shall one day
come. That is the aim of the Gospel message (Col. i. 28).
But it is not as an Example that He is His Gospel. It
is in the giving of power to reach that goal that Christ is
the Saviour (Rom. i. 16).

(ii) More important, however, than the rationalizing critics
are the views of what has been called the " Christocentric "
School," of whom a typical English representative is Dr.
Fairbairn.3 Their aim is to get behind the scholastic, the
speculative, the Pauline Christ, to the historic Jesus, and
having discovered Him to make His self-consciousness, not
the Church, or the Bible, or St. Paul, the absolute guide
and authority. This school knows a Christ Who is trans-
cendent and superhuman, a Risen Lord declared by the
Resurrection to be the Son of God with power, but they will
not use of Him the terms that describe Him as the Second
Person of the Trinity. The Gospel is the interpretation of
fact ; not the Person and Work of Jesus, but a doctrine about
them.* St. Paul translated " the religion of Jesus," which
was personal, into the religion of Christ, which was universal.^

Concerning this position it may be observed that all our
knowledge of the historic Christ comes to us from and
through the Apostles. Historically the Epistles have as

* Prof. Hy. Jones (Jesua or Christ ? The Idealism of Jesus) en-
deavours to preserve the real humanity of Jesus by diminishing the
distance between Him and ourselves. Yet Bishop Lightfoot has
rather expressed the heart of the Gospel. " It is the infinity of the
price paid for our redemption, which is its essential characteristic.
It is the fact that God gave not a life like our lives . . . but His
Eternal Word to become flesh ... for our sakes " {University
Sermons, p. 290).

» Did. of C. and G., Art. " Back to Christ," Rev. W. Morgan.
» See The Place of Christ in Modern Theology and Stxidies in
Religion and Theology.

* " Christianity is given only when speculatively construed."
Dr. Fairbairn, Philosophy of the Christian Religion, p. 306. (Quoted
in above article.)

5 Studies in Re^- »wd Theol, p. 475.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 209

much weight as the Synoptists, and their portrait of the

Christ is earher. In the deepest sense, St, Paul's thought

is " Christocentric." The " Christocentric " thinker is right

when he wishes to see the Jesus also of the Synoptists,

and to make that one Christ the supreme authority of his

life. That was the way of St. Paul. But he is wrong if he

shuts out from his interpretation of that self-consciousness

of Jesus the experience of Christians of the past. God

speaks of and guides us to the Christ through the Bible, as

well as through the Church. The lives of His saints also

daily interpret the living Christ. It is the truth Browning

has expressed —

" Oh, I must feel your brain prompt mine,
Your heart anticipate my heart.
You must be just before, in fine.

See and make me see, for your part.
New depths of the divine ! "

[By the Fireside.)

They seem to be also wrong in so far as they allow any
doctrine of Christ to take the central place of His Person.
But if that danger be guarded against, and the true
synthesis be made of their own spiritual experience of
the personal presence of Christ with the experience of the
Body of the Redeemed, this school of thinkers will find
itself very near the heart of Pauline theology.

(iii) The Liberal Protestant School of Theology is widely
supported, especially by German thinkers. They are filled
with the Reformation spirit of liberty of thought, and find
themselves carried by it behind the Reformation standpoint,
which they regard as a return to St. Paul rather than to
the historical Jesus.^ In the words of Lessing, " The
Christian religion has been tried for eighteen centuries, the
religion of Christ remains yet to be tried." The " religion
of Christ " is not, in their view, the religion of miracle and
dogma which treats of Jesus Christ as God [deoXoyel rov
1 See Art, " Back to Christ " above referred to.

210 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Xpio-Tov). It is a religion with no Christology, with no
developed doctrine of Redemption. It was held and
taught by Jesus yet it concerned not Himself but the Father.
His central doctrines were the Fatherhood of God, and the
Brotherhood of Men. Not the Son, but the Father only,
belongs to the Gospel, as Jesus declares it.^ So the doc-
trine of the Trinity was called forth by liturgical necessities
and customs (the number " three " being widely regarded
as sacred). 2 All metaphysical theology is rejected, and
the miraculous in the Gospel story is denied. Jesus is
unique indeed, but He is no longer an object of faith.
His office is described in the words of Bousset : " Thou
art our leader, to Whom there is none like, the leader in
the highest things, the leader of our souls to God, the
Way, the Truth, the Life." ^ To Harnack, Jesus is the
coming Judge.* So Professor Weinel finds the heart of
Christianity to be not in the Person of Jesus, but in
what He taught. Professor Henry Jones wishes to keep
the position of " son of God " for all, in the same sense
that Jesus was " Son of God." ''

It is impossible to bring such teaching into line with the
Christology of St. Paul, for it is reached only by ignoring
the latter. The heart of the Pauline theology is not the
Revelation of the Fatherhood of God.^ When once the

1 What is Christianity ? A. Harnack, p. 144 ff.

" See Drs. Kruger and Harnack. The latter in his boolc Ver-
fassung und Recht der Alien Kirche finds that the expression ** Son
of God " took by degrees the place of the usual expression " The
Messiah," and the formula " Father, Son, and Holy Ghost " replaced
" God, Christ, and Holy Spirit " as a result of Judaistic controversy
(see Messianic Interpretation, pp. 81-84).

» Das Wesen der Religion, p. 267 (also quoted in Art. " Back to
Christ ").

* Das Wesen der Christentums, p. 91.

' Art. in Jesus or Christ ? " The Idealism of Jesus."

8 As the writers of the Pauline section of Art. on " Communion
with God " {Encyc. of Rel, and Eth.) seernto think, see vol. iii. p. 754.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 211

uniqueness of Jesus is admitted, it is difficult to stop there.
Harnack is constrained to admit that in some sense He is
the centre of His Gospel, " He was its personal realiza-
tion and strength," ^ and even Professor Henry Jones
allows that " revelation had come to Him with a fullness
and power with which it came to no other." But the main
criticism of the position from the point of view of St. Paul
lies in the fact that Jesus is not made His own Gospel. He
is for St. Paul, Himself Christianity .^ Nor did St. Paul
regard Christ only as a God-like man. As Father Tyrrell
has reminded us again.' " God-like " is still removed
by an infinite distance from God. A God-like man may
command our admiration, our love ; but " man owes
no adoration, no unqualified self-surrender even to the
most God-like of men — only to the absolutely Divine."
In their denial of the miraculous, and their opposition to
the metaphysical * these thinkers find themselves differing
from the Pauline view of Christ and of nature ; of Christ,
because, though we can never fathom the mystery of His
Incarnation, or fully understand the psychology of His
soul,^ yet we must try to reach an adequate conception of
His relationship to God and man ; and of nature, because to
St. Paul God was greater than nature, and the Christ
who shone upon him on the Damascus road also gave to
some power to work miracles and gifts of healings. It is

1 What is Christianity ? p. 145 ff.

2 Harnack and many others have declared that this is not so.
"It is a perverse proceeding to make Christology the fundamental
substance of the Gospel, (as) is shown by Christ's teaching which is
everywhere directed to the all- important point, and summarily
confronts every man with his God " {What is Christianity P p. 184).

3 Jesus or Christ ? p. 15.

* See Encyc. of Rel. and Eth., Art. " Christianity," Princ. Garvie.

5 " No one could fathom this mystery who had not had a parallel
experience " {What is Christianity ? p. 129). Yet a man's philosophy
and thought have a vital bearing on his conduct, " What a ma,n
thinks that he is,"

212 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

true that Christ revealed the Fatherhood of God and the
Brotherhood of men, but He revealed the Fatherhood be-
cause He revealed Himself, and Brotherhood because He
showed that the whole race of the Redeemed were one in
Him.

(iv) The Ritschlian School which was mentioned above
represents a return from the Christ of the Epistles to the
historic Jesus of the Gospel records. This Christ is the
sum of Christianity. Doctrine is not the Revelation, for
that is but the formulation of the faith of another. " It is
not by appropriating St. Paul's thoughts about Christ . . .
that we become Christians, but only by trusting Christ as
St. Paul trusted Him." Only then have his thoughts
meaning to us.^ The great thing is to live the life, and
know the experience, not to assent to a formula, or to
learn a creed.^ If, then, we ask " what is the worth of
Christ ? " we find by experience that He has the worth
of God. That experience comes alone through faith.
There is, however, no value in the miraculous, or in tradi-
tional theology, in themselves.

On the question as to belief in the Virgin Birth, the mighty
works, the bodily Resurrection, the Ritschlians are divided.
Some accept them as historical, but most believe that the
living Christ is not declared to be the Son of God with
power by the bodily Resurrection, but by the impression
His Person makes upon us. In that sense it is true that
He could not be holden of death.

In many ways this is, perhaps, the most powerful of
modern schools, and is a return not only to Christ but to
the standpoint of St. Paul. It makes the Person of Christ
the centre of its faith. It saves the Exalted Christ of ex-
perience from the charge of being merely visionary by filling
up its conception of Him from the details of Christ's historic

1 See Diet, of C. and G., Art. " Back to Christ,"
8 Thus following Schleiermacher a,nd Rothe,

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 213

life on earth ; finding in the activities of that earthly life
that Redemption was won and God was revealed.^

In this scheme of thought the idea of the Kingdom of
God assumed considerable importance, and rightly so. The
supremacy of experience is also truly insisted upon, and
the centrality of Christology for the faith. But it has
what seem to be weaknesses, with all its truth and strength,
and the criticism ventured above ^ still seems to be just and
needed in an estimation of it.

(v) The Eschatological School has of late been revived
mainly through the issue of Professor Schweitzer's book.
The Quest of the Historical Jesus. This work most ably
traces the course of German thought about the life of
Christ and endorses with considerable emphasis and argu-
ment the purely eschatological view of the teaching of
Jesus. " The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward publicly
as the Messiah, who preached the ethic of the Kingdom
of God, who founded the Kingdom of Heaven upon earth,
and died to give His work its final consecration, never had
any existence. He is a figure designed by rationalism,
endowed with life by liberalism, and clothed by modern
theology in an historical garb." ^

Dr. Schweitzer considers that the attitude of thinkers to
the eschatological position is the great dividing line between
them. He would force upon us the choice between the
eschatological and the rationalist position, between " thor-
ough-going scepticism and thorough-going eschatology." *
Reimarus, Renan, Weiss (J.), Ritschl had all more or less
insisted on the importance of the eschatological interpreta-
tion of Jesus.' Its importance, as Professor Sanday has

1 See Diet, of C. and G., vol. ii., Art. " Christ in Modern Thought."

2 See supra, p. 6 ft.

3 See p. 396. For the eschatological teaching of J. Weiss, see
pp. 237-240. * Chap. xix.

5 So the Rev. J. M. Thompson in a recent book, Jesus according

214 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

pointed out/ is that it is a check upon the extreme rational-
izing School, it postulates a real manifestation of God on the
earth, not merely of an eminent teacher, and it refers to an
element really in the Gospels and certainly true. It is a
protest against an entirely ethical presentation of the teach-
ing of Jesus. Yet eschatological teaching is not necessarily
unethical. If half the first message was eschatological,
" The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand," the other half is
ethical, " Repent ye." ^ The ethical side of the Gospel is
so prominent that it has been most evident to those who
have tried to estimate Christianity from the outside,^ for
the Apocalyptic hope was clearly unrealized and as yet
in the future. Even the charge of Nietzsche and his school
that Christianity in its tenderness towards the weak and
sinful, its introspection, its view of sorrow and sin, as
" a worship of failure and decay " is unexpected testimony
to the prominence of the ethical in the Christian Gospel.
The rise of ethical societie s in Christian countries is another
witness to the same fact. It is clear that no satisfactory
position can be arrived at without a due balancing of both
ethical and eschatological. The New Testament view of
the Kingdom is that of a Kingdom both present and
future, both ethical and eschatological, both visible and
invisible. Dr. Schweitzer following Weiss sees only the
future and the eschatological, and of this Jesus is only
the forerunner. He does not establish it.

Many scholars * will not allow the primary importance of
the eschatological element. Though such prominence is
given in the early epistles of St. Paul to the speedy Second

to St. Mark, writes : " He thought the present world was coming
to an end in a few years."

1 H. J., Oct., 1911.

=• Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, Prof. K. Lake, p. 443.

^ E.g. Lecky, Hist. Eur. Mor. ii. 8 f.

* Such as Wellhausen, Wrede, Kolbing, Peabody, von Dobschiit J.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 215

Coming, it nowhere forms the pith of the Christian message,
nor is it regarded as indispensable for the effectiveness of
that message. The dominating influence in Jewish theology
was Pharisaic, though, as Dr. Sanday shows, ^ that did not
exclude the Apocalyptic. But the Gospel of Paul was
neither. It was a definite experience of salvation from sin, a
growth in holiness, a firm conviction of the presence of the
Indwelling Saviour, and a strong hope in His Return.
Eschatology is a part and an important part of his preach-
ing,' but it is not all. For St. Paul the Kingdom of Heaven
is certainly present as well as future, " The Kingdom of
Heaven is . . . righteousness and peace and joy . . ." '
Nothing is further from St. Paul than to make his Lord a mere
visionary, an Apocalyptic dreamer, either consciously wrong,
or with only a message from God about the future, a hope the
conditions of whose realization were faith in God the Father,
and the forgiveness of sins.* There are many indications in
the Gospels that the eschatological is secondary.^ In St. Paul
it is subordinate to the main Gospel of pardon for sin and
peace through the blood of Christ, though we recognize his
insistence on the paradox that the present Christ is yet an
absent Christ Who is to come. Professor Sanday has
recently shown how the ethical and apocalyptic movements
in Judaism were parallel and separate. He points out that

1 H. J., Oct., 1911.

3 Probably, as Princ. Garvie points out [Encyc. of Rel. and Eth.,
Art. " Christianity "), we have not sufficiently realized that
Jesus stood in the prophetic succession and used prophetic speech,

* Rom. xiv. 17. See also i Cor. vi. 20; Col. i. 13, 14. For the
kingdom as future see Gal. v. 21 ; 2 Cor. iv. gff. ; Eph. v. 5 ; i Thess.
ii. 12.

* So Loisy in his book Jesus.

^ Cf. The Parables of the growth of the Kingdom ; the emphasis
laid on our duty towards our neighbour ; Matt. xxiv. 36 ; Mark
xiii. 32 ("Of that hour no man knoweth"). The coming of
the Son of Man may be " at even, or at midnight, or at cock-crowing,
or in the morning" (St. Mark xiii. 35). "The Kingdom of God is
within you " (cvtos vfxwv. St. Luke xvii. 21).

2i6 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Dr. Schweitzer has made the mistake of ignoring St. Paul, i
who is an excellent example of the refutation of the accusa-
tion that the Lord's teaching is an " Interimethik," The
theory would make the disciples greater than their Lord,
for it assumes that the opinions of Jesus must not be allowed
to be in advance of his age, though those of the disciples must
have transcended them. St. Paul, at least, had no suspicion
that he was doing so. For him in Christ were all the trea-
sures of wisdom and knowledge hidden (Col. ii. 3). The
" reduced " historical Jesus of Schweitzer would make the
impression produced by Him an incredible miracle. ^

(vi) The Roman Catholic modernist eschatologists represent
an attempt to make Roman Catholicism agree with the
results of modern thought. Their position is a protest
against the Rationalist School, and denies that the essence
of the Gospel is to be found in the Revelation of the Father-
hood of God.^ So Father Tyrrell writes : " He seemed to
call men less to His teaching than to Himself." The
original message of Jesus was contained in the announcement
of the Coming Kingdom of God. The sonship of Jesus was
only in regard to that Kingdom about to be established.
" The Gospel of Jesus is not a religion . . . yet a religion
had issued from the Gospel." It was " not due to the will
or direct action of Christ." * We cannot expect in Christ
" truth in its strict sense," but only value for the spiritual
life. Jesus cherished a hope which was doomed to dis-
appointment, yet He planted the seed which afterwards
grew, and still grows, as the Roman Catholic Church. It
is in the Church that this fallible Jesus, possessed by the
Apocalyptic ideas of the time, still lives on. There was no

1 For his account of Pauline Eschatology see Quest of Historical
Jesus, p. 364 ff,

2 For an able and minute criticism of the eschatological position,
see The Eschatological Question in the Gospels, by the Rev. C. W.
Emmet. ^ gee Loisy, L'J^vangile et I'liglise, p. 86 ff.

* Loisy, H. J., Oct., igii.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 217

Revelation once for all given to mankind, but the Church
finds gradually, and with continually deeper meaning,
through the impulse from the Apocalyptic message of Christ ,
the ever-growing content of the Christian Gospel. ^ This
" new apologetic " for the Roman Catholic Church, an
appeal to the future, not to the past, is open to the twofold
criticism of, first of all, placing the Church before Christ, and
making that the real source of Christianity ; and secondly,
of making the Christ a mistaken visionary who announced
only a hope for the future, and the coming end of this age.
It is " only by a ' tour de force ' intellectual and moral that
the creed, code, and worship of the Church can be represented
as no more than the Evolution under God's providence of the
religious impulse given by Jesus in proclaiming the Coming
Kingdom." 2 For St. Paul, Christology, not Eschatology,
gives the central impulse to his Christianity. " Christ-
ianity," as de Pressense wrote, " is Christ." For St. Paul,
too, the Kingdom has come — the Christian has eternal
life. He knows the power of the Resurrection, and he
already has the peace that passeth all understanding.

(vii) The speculative school of philosophy which has fol-
lowed in the steps of Hegel has exercised, and still continues to
exercise, considerable influence. Hegel (1770-1831) held that
the way of all progress lay through three distinct stages ;
thesis, antithesis and synthesis. We recognize a truth, and
we state it as though it were a whole truth. As experience
grows, we discover it is only a half-truth and that the appar-
ent opposite is equally true. Later comes the higher syn-
thesis in which the two are united. So in religion, by
means of the historical facts we attain the realm of the
spiritual, and then the facts matter no more. It is the

* So the reply of Italian modernists to the Papal Encyclical
of Condemnation. See Father Tyrrell's Christianity at the Cross
Roads, and Mediaevalism ; also see L' ^vangile et I'^glise. Also, Art.
" Christianity " {Encyc. of Rel. and Eth.).

- Expository Times, Art. " The Living Christ," Princ. Garvie.

2i8 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

process of which St. Paul writes, " Wherefore we henceforth
know no man after the flesh : even though we have known
Christ after the jQesh, yet now we know Him so no more." ^
So Bishop PhiUips Brooks writes : " It is the Idea of Jesus
which is the illumination and inspiration of existence." *
So Edward Caird beautifully translates Hegel : " And, as
on the summit of a mountain, removed from all hard dis-
tinctions of detail, we calmly overlook the limitations of
the landscape and the world, so by religion we are lifted
above all the obstructions of finitude. In religion, there-
fore, man beholds his own existence in a transfigured re-
flection, in which all the divisions, all the crude lights and
shadows of the world are softened into eternal peace under
the beams of a spiritual sun. It is in this native land of the
spirit that the waters of oblivion flow, from which it is given
to Psyche to drink and forget all her sorrows ; for here the
darkness of life becomes a transparent dream-image, through
which the light of eternity shines in upon us." ^

We have been recently reminded what an influence the
Hegelian type of thought still has. The Rev. R. J. Camp-
bell writes : " So far as we can judge from Gospel evidence
the Christ of the Apostle Paul bore little or no relation to
the Jesus of Galilee." * Professor Gardner asserts that
St. Paul " scarcely thought of the death of Christ as a fact
in history," and " to make much of the outward sur-
roundings of the suffering would be to dwell on Christ
after the flesh " ; and again, History is " a mere reflection
on earth of a heavenly drama." " The phases of his
Master's existence . . . are in his mind rather connected
in essence than in time." " Dr. Anderson writes : " As
religion has its being in eternal idea or ideals, it may

1 2 Cor. V. 1 6. ^ Bohlen Lectures, 1879.

3 Evolution of Religion, vol. i. p. 82 f.

* Jesus or Christ? p. 189.

^ Rel. Exp. of Si. Paul, pp. 32, 189, 190.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 219

be entirely indifferent to historical facts. The Hving Christ
remains only the symbol of the Divine life in man, but has
no connexion with the historical Jesus, whose existence
is to be regarded as of no significance or value for religion." ^
So not only the Jesus of history but all historical Chris-
tianity must sink into unimportance.

For this position the support of St. Paul is claimed.
When he reached " the native land of the Spirit " the hard
distinctions of events in time and space were obliterated by
the dream light of eternity. But the meaning of 2 Cor.
V. 16 ' is not that here assigned to it. St. Paul is really
the great opponent of such evaporation of fact. For him,
above all, the facts of sin and death were real ; for the Hegelian
School they are unfelt. Redemption also must be reaP;
" myths and legends " cannot really save from real evil.
St. Paul's writings bear witness of an entire spiritual and
moral change. Only if Christ was an historical reality is there
a sufficient cause for this change. For us, as for St. Paul, the
temporal reveals the eternal ; we know that the way of Divine
and human progress lies through the facts of history, that
we cannot detach the Ideal from the Historic,* and that,
like all the Apostles, we look for a God and a Saviour Who
acts. It is, as Professor Scott Holland has said, " His
reality as Jesus in the flesh, which is the measure of His
capacity to be the Christ." * We would seek a Christ supreme
in the spiritual realm, but a purely ideal Christ is impossible.
•' Against the empty abstractions of the Divine Spirit " which
mark this School, "and its anaemic conception of Christ's

^ Cf. The Larger Faith," p. 229 ff. 2 gee above, p. 40 ff.

^ See Encyc. of Rel. and Eth., Art. " Christianity," Princ. Garvie ;
see also Art. in Jesus or Christ ? by same writer. See also Hermann,
Why does our faith need historical facts ? (there mentioned).

* So Prof. Weinel in Jesiis or Christ ? Mr. G. K. Chesterton
cleverly says that if we so separate Jesus from Christ we make
the one an obscure Rabbi, and the other a myth.

5 Jgsus or Christ ? p. 135.

220 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

Person, the experience-theology is a passionate protest." ^.

Christianity has what Professor Sanday has called " truth
to type," 2 and its type is that of a religion which finds its
basis in faith in an historic Person. It is not the con-
templation or the appropriation either of an ideal or an
idea. It must consist, as Coleridge has reminded us, of
both fact and idea.

(viii) The great social movements of the day are not without
their view of Christianity and of Christ. It is the Humani-
tarian Christ who mainly appeals to them. They hold that
all theology must be given up. The practical duties of
brotherhood and philanthropy constitute the Gospel. The
rise of ethical schools and societies ^ indicates the number
of those who place the full emphasis upon the attenuated
gospel of the moral precepts and what the Unitarian terms
the " pure humanity of Jesus." The Socialist leaders,
while appealing to Jesus, are frankly puzzled by much that
they find in the Gospels.* Both Socialist and Ethical
Societies move apart from St. Paul. Their religion con-
tains nothing of the supernatural in their faith. The Risen
and Exalted Christ is unknown to them. The Christ of St.
Paul has not shone upon their path or into their hearts.

11. The Explanation of the Person of the Christ
OF History.
One development of Christological thought, mainly
amongst the orthodox supporters of the perfect Manhood
and perfect Godhead of Christ, has taken place recently in
the realm of psychology. Two questions have been re-
peatedly asked ^ : (i) What is the relationship of the Divine

1 Diet, of C.and G., vol. ii., " Christ in Modern Thought," Rev.
A. S. Martin.

2 Christologies, Ancient and Modern, ChSL-ptevix. on " Symbolism,"
Prof. Sanday.

3 Due to Matthew Arnold amongst others.

* See Prof. Peabody, Jesits Christ and the Social Question.
^ As e.g. by Dr. Inge, /. T. S., vol. xi. p. 584.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 221

and the Human in the Person of our Lord ? (ii) How
can a Christ who is more than the " reduced " Christ of
the Ritschhans be brought into our own hves ? Professor
Sanday in his book, Christologies Ancient and Modern,
propounded a fresh and interesting theory, which we may
give in his own words : " The first proposition is, that the
proper seat or ' locus ' of all divine indwelling or divine
action upon the human soul, is the subliminal conscious-
ness. And the other proposition ... is, that the same,
or the corresponding subliminal consciousness is the
proper seat or ' locus ' of the Deity of the incarnate
Christ." 1

That psychology has a most important part to play in the
interpretation of religious experience is becoming increasingly
certain. Professor Sanday's position has, however, been
somewhat severely criticized. It remains for us here to
point out how far his theory will harmonize with the Pauline
Christology.

In the first place it is quite possible ^ that St. Paul had
no thought of the Kenosis at all. It is further certain that,
if he had, he was only concerned with the fact, and not the
method of it. But he has very clear and definite indications
in his epistles as to how he would test for acceptance or
rejection any theory of the relationship between the Divine
and the Human in our Lord's Person. Most prominently
we note that his religious life was entirely in the conscious
sphere. His conscious life was the dial of the pressure of
not only a hidden hfe, but also of a life which he knew,
which was reached by conscious self-surrender of will to his
Lord. In that inner sphere of union with Christ, nothing
was so essential as " the conscious and active faith " ^ that
unites the soul to Him. Professor Sanday suggests that
that union takes place in the subconscious sphere. The

1 P. 159. 2 See above, pp. 113, 114.

3 See Expos. Times, Art. " Christologir-s Ancient and Modern,';
Sept. 191 o. Prof. Mackintosh.

222 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

subconscious, as has been frequently pointed out,^ has no
moral character of itself. From it come the diabolical and
frivolous, as well as the noble and the good. It is true that
realm is mysterious, but we ought not therefore to assume
that it comes from some higher spiritual source.' We ought
not to trust its promptings simply because they are out of
the reach of reason. " That way madness lies." It is true
that many of our noblest ideas come unexpectedly and
unbidden, 2 and rise from that subliminal realm where our
powers have no conscious play. Yet we cannot identify
that sphere with the Divine.* But the value of such " up-
rushes " from the subliminal self is determined not by what
they are in themselves, but by the conscious use we make
of them. It is in the sphere of knowledge and reason and
will, and through these, that they assume their importance.
Nor is the subliminal the only channel through which the
Divine speaks to us. Sometimes God speaks directly, and
most clearly so. Dr. Inge thinks that the unconscious part
of man preserves " stores of racial rather than individual
experience, world-old instincts ^ and mechanical habits,
indispensable for the existence and perpetuation of the
race." « But the supraliminal thoughts are just as inspired
and important.

So, for St. Paul, his religious experiences were, above all,
conscious. God spoke to him directly. It is true he saw
visions, but the vision was to the whole man's personality,
and he was conscious of them. So on the Damascus road
he saw and heard. When he was lifted up to the third
heaven and saw visions and revelations of the Lord,'

1 Ibid. ; also see H. J., Oct., igio. Rev. J. M. Thompson.

2 Dr. Inge, /. T. S., vol. xi. p. 584.

3 So H. J., Oct., 1 9 10, Rev. J. M, Thompson (above).

* Dr. Sanday does not do so. He regards the subliminal as the
sphere for the operation of the Divine.

5 So Prof. Mackintosh, Art. " Christologies Ancient and
Modern," Expository Times, Sept. 1910.

« /. r. S. (above). ' 2 Cor. xii. 1-4.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 223

though the consciousness of the body faded away, yet
he knew, he heard, he remembered. His hfe " in
Christ " was a conscious growth unto the perfect man.
The inspiration of the Holy Spirit was a very Hving and
constant experience. Faith was the active going forth
and resting on and in Christ. So of love. Love must be
conscious. It cannot be transferred to the realm of
the unconscious, and love is for St. Paul " the greatest
thing in the world." ^ Hope must be conscious, though it
rises often unbidden and unexplained, yet it is the fruit of
the Spirit's working, and has its anchor far within the veil
— not that which separates the conscious from the uncon-
scious self, but which lies between this conscious state and
the next. That veil is pierced by a new and living way,
and, though we know now only in part, and see that future
as through a glass darkly, then we shall know as we are
known. Dr. Sanday's theory seems to force us back
towards an agnostic conception of God."

So for St. Paul the conscious, not the unconscious, is the
essential in religion. Love, holiness, wisdom are all con-
scious states. The intellect plays an important part in the
religious life. The will and heart are summoned to yield
their acceptable service. He spoke, it is true, not in words
of man's wisdom, but only because every thought was
brought into captivity to Christ. Religion was not out
of his control. " We are fellow-labourers with God." The
Holy Spirit does not think for us, does not will for us, does
not love for us, does not work for us. But He works with
us, and in that conscious co-partnership we learn to find our
true selves because we find ourselves in Him.

How, then, would this theory concern St. Paul's Chris-
tology ? His psychology is not ours, but nevertheless

1 See Prof. Drummond's beautiful booklet, The Greatest Thing in
the World.

* So Prof. Mackintosh (above).

224 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

we can well believe that a theory which seemed to place the
sinlessness of the historic Jesus out of His power, which
seemed to do away with the reality of His temptation, and
left no room for the play of His human will, or the exercise
of His human intellect, would not have been adopted by
St. Paul. Jesus Christ would not then have been tempted
in all points like as we are, though He might have been
without sin. It is not easy to see what the " limitations
essential to humanity " are, though we cannot get very
much further than that phrase.^ Yet if the subconscious
is human in us, it is human, too, in Christ, and the theory
becomes, as Mr. Thompson has said, but another illuminating
description of His humanity.

The influence of Psychology has worked in another way,
and instead of the two natures of the Creeds there has grown
up the theory of a double consciousness. When the Son of
God became man He lived in two universes, " the macrocosm
of creation and the microcosm of human life." ^ There
seems to Dr. Inge to be a more pressing danger at the mo-
ment of duplicating His personality than of denying His
two natures.^ The theory of the double consciousness seems
to postulate three kinds of wisdom in Christ, (i) An un-
limited Divine wisdom ; (ii) a limited Divine wisdom ; (iii)
a human wisdom,* and we are in danger of dividing the
Persons and in another sense of separating the Jesus of His-
tory and the Christ who made and sustains the Universe.
This would divest the Incarnation and so the Redemption
of its reality. For St. Paul undoubtedly the two are one.

1 See above, p. 227.

2 Diet, of C. and G., Art. " Incarnation," Rev. T. B. Kilpatrick.

3 /. T. S.. vol. xi. p. 584. See Baldensperger, The Self-Con-
sciousness of Jesus. Schweitzer, Quest of the Historical Jesus, p. 365
n. and pp. 233-237.

4 Diet, of C. and G., Art. " ^Yisdomof Christ," Dr.C. Harris. For
the Liberal Protestant view of the consciousness of Jesus see Har-
nack's What is Christianity.^ p. 128.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 225

There is one mediator, one Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ
is born of a woman, and in Him dwells all the fullness of the
Godhead bodily. In so far as the Kenotic theories demand
a double centre of activity, " a centre of self-abandonment,
and a centre of His divine-human or human activities after
the self-abandonment has taken place," we postulate a
dual consciousness ; and in so far as we assume a full con-
sciousness of Godhead during His Incarnation, broken only
by His allowing human limitations sometimes to rule Him,
we make His manhood, as Dr. Weston has pointed out,
unique not only in the degree of its perfection, but also in
its kind.i

We must with St. Paul insist upon the single human con-
sciousness of Christ, So our dilemma is not between thor-
ough-going eschatology and thorough-going scepticism,
but between St. Paul and so many modern writers. Who are
right ? Those who explain the developments in later times
as due to accretions gathered, consciously or unconsciously,
from Greek mystery or Oriental myth, and seek the true
Jesus by " reducing " Him to the " limits " ^ oi the synoptic
gospels, or those who, with St. Paul, hold that in essence
the Christian gospel was from the first a complete and
spiritual message of salvation, proclaiming Him Who had
lived and died among men to be Lord and Saviour of all.^
Did St. Paul interpret his Master rightly, or do the moderns ?

If we have the " wings of faith " of which Professor Gardner
speaks, may we — must we — not cross " the abyss between

1 See Dr. Weston, The One Christ, p. 158 ff.

2 Why the Synoptists, which are later than Saint Paul's Epistles ?
Mr. G. K. Chesterton in his reply to Mr. Roberts {Jesus or Christ ?)
refers somewhat scathingly to the alleged "limitations" of the
Jesus of the Synoptists.

3 Prof. Gardner has put the distinction between the " Synoptic "
and the " Pauline " Gospel as that between " doing the will of
God " and the new element in the disciples' experience — " sharing
the life of Christ " {Rel. Exp. of St. Paul. p. 246).

9

226 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

the transcendent Son of God and Jesus of Nazareth ?
Rather, there is no abyss. They are inseparably One to
faith. We see the Christ of the Synoptists, and the Christ
of St. Paul, and find the same Person demanding our rever-
ence, and the instinctive worship of our lips, " My Lord and
my God."

We are glad to find this conviction strengthened by Prof.
C. A. Scott's words in the Cambridge Biblical Essays.
He acknowledges the difference between the historical and
the Pauline Jesus, but denies that it amounts to a contra-
diction. It is " quantitative not quahtative." It is the
variety of life. Between Jesus and the Pauline Epistles
stand the death and resurrection of the Saviour, the experi-
ence of Paul and of the primitive Church. Because the
picture is different there is no need to deny the identity of the
Person portrayed. " We fail to find any critical necessity for
querying the genuineness of any feature in the teaching of
Jesus simply on the ground that it re-appears in the teaching
of Paul." ^ St. Paul confirms the total impression of the
Gospels. 2 He, with them, assigns to Christ the most absolute
place among men.

For the disciples the Christ of History and the Christ of
experience were inseparable. For the Christian Church of
all generations to the present there has been no doubt of
this identity. As Professor Scott Holland has stated so
forcibly, " The very same people who hold the Christ ological
faith, put together and accept the record that we have
in our hands of the historical Jesus." ^ Though St. Luke,
to take one instance, " must have drunk in the entire Chris-
tology of his great patient," yet his Gospel has no hint of
more than a simple historical record, no hint of conflict or
contrast between the Christ of St. Paul and the Christ of the

^ See p. 352 for the difference and correspondence between the
Pauline Christ and the Christ of the Synoptic Gospels.
2 See p. 375. ' Jesus or Christ ? p. 125.

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 227

Synoptists, or of the struggle with the Law or with Hellenism.
For him, the interest in the earthly life of Jesus was deepened
by the doctrine which he had learnt from the Apostle of
the Gentiles. 1 So, Professor Scott Holland asserts, " Christ-
ianity began as Christology." ^

So it is that amongst members of almost all, except the
most extreme, of the schools above described, we find those
who are willing at least to give to Jesus the supreme place
in the Revelation of God to the world, and even to attribute
to Him the worth of God for the soul. For Father Tyrrell,
Christ seemed to point to Himself as " the embodiment of
the life and truth He taught, He made personal love and
devotion to Himself His equivalent to salvation and the
righteousness it involves. This was implicitly to take
God's place in relation to the soul — the place which Jesus
has actually taken for Christians." ^

So Professor Schmiedel writes : " It is a very serious
question whether we to-day should possess Christianity at
all if Jesus had not been interpreted as a divine being," 4

So Bousset, in his book Jesus, finds that Jesus bound His
disciples to His Person as never again one man has bound
men. He is the Master of the inner life. "He may not be
divine, but He is not to be denied worship."

This brings us to the position we have taken up throughout.
The central impulse, the central study, the central experi-
ence of Christianity is its Christology. It is the personality
of its Founder which proclaims its supreme importance for
mankind. It is no uniqueness of doctrine, but of Person
which makes Christianity the religion of the world.^

1 Contrast the statements of Rev. R. J. Campbell, Jesus or Christ ?
p. i8g. " For Paul, the earthly ministry of Jesus does not exist."
The Christ of St. Paul is " an official, a potentate, a majestic 'sura-
mum bonum ' ; but not a living teacher in homespun."

2 P. 124.

* Jesus or Christ? p. 9. ^ Jesus or Christ? p. 65.

6 It is difficult, if not impossible, to select any special article of

228 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL

It is not merely what He said or did, not merely the example
He left of how life ought to be lived. Religion is not ethics
as Kant held. It is a living faith in a Person — Jesus of
Galilee, the Risen Lord of Glory. St. Paul did not place his
theology on the one hand as cold and barren and dead, and
his devotion to his living Lord on the other as that which
was energizing and vitalizing. He was as we all are. Every
one with religious life and even the simplest faith must,
whether he consciously realize it or not, have a theology of
some kind. The Christ of the Synoptists, the Christ of
experience, the Christ of St. Paul are but one Christ, known
through experience, interpreted in His manifold action and
infinite love in History, portrayed by the inspired words
of our New Testament in that earthly life which gives
content to our faith.

All healthy thought refuses to accept traditional phrases
without testing, searching, and proving. It shrinks from the
conventional and traditional as such, and puts away the
shibboleth — sometimes, it is true, with no little admixture
of the gnostic pride of superior knowledge. Through many
stages and along different lines, the incessant work of exam-
ination, analysis and construction proceeds. Are they
parallel lines ? Do they diverge, or do they converge ?
The landscape is too wide for those engaged on some small
portion of it to take it all in at a glance, or for any such
to judge of the whole work of their day or generation. But
we work on, believing that the paths meet somewhere in
the future out of our ken, and in the hope that some day a
prophet will arise from among us who will show us that not
only at the end of our own path, but of all paths, stands the
One Christ Jesus the Lord. Even now, it may be, as to

religious faith which is in its general aspect a doctrine peculiar to
Christianity. Its uniqueness lies in the Person of the Founder
(Wallace, Gifford Lectures, iii.) quoted Did. of C. and G., Art.
" Divinity of Christ " (Rev. A. S. Martin).

RECENT CHRISTOLOGICAL THOUGHT 229

Moses of old, a vision of the promised land shines swiftly
through the parted mists as we tread the higher lands up
which we toil. In that " native land of the Spirit " the
hard distinctions of history do not fade away into unim-
portance or nothingness; they are seen to compose the
landscape, though now transfigured by the revelation-
through them — of the love of God.

BIBLIOGRAPH Y

GENERAL WORKS

" The Story of St. Paul "

" Paulinism "

" New Testament Theology " .

" The Church's Task under the Empire "

" The Messiah of the Apostles "...

" St. Paul's Conception of Christianity "

" Romans ix. 5 " (/. T. S., vol. v. p. 451)

" Evolution of Religion "

" Cambridge Bibhcal Essays "

" Cambridge Theological Essays "

" St. Paul's Attitude towards Greek
Philosophy " {Expositor, 5th ser., vol. ix)

" Book of Enoch "

" Paulus in Athen " (Studia Biblia) .

" The Living Christ and the Four Gos-
pels "

" Light from the Ancient East " . .

" Studies in Theology "

" Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels "
(cited as Diet, of C. and G.)

" Dictionary of Religion and Ethics "
(cited as Diet, of Rel. and Eth.)

" Doctrine of the Person of Christ " . .

" The God-Man "

" The Gospel of Paul "

" The Expositor " (as cited)

" Studies in Religion and Theology "

" Christ in Modern Theology " .

" The Background of the Gospels " .

" The Christ of History and the Christ
of Experience "

" The Authority of Christ " .

" The Religious Experience of St. Paul "

" Lux Mundi " (edited by) ....

" Dissertations on the Incarnation " .

231

Dr. Bacon
Prof. F. C. Baur
Prof. W. Beyschlag
Dr. Bigg

Prof. C. A. Briggs
Prof. A. B. Bruce
Prof. Burkitt
Prof. Caird

Rev. A. Carr
Dr. Charles
Prof. E. Curtius
Dr. Dale

von. Adolf Deissmann
Dr. Denney

Prof. D. J. A. Dorner
Principal Edwards
Dean Everett

Dr. A. M. Fairbairn
Dr. A.M. Fairbairn
Dr. W. Fairweather
Dr. Forrest

Dr. Forrest
Prof. Gardner
Dr. Gore
Dr. Gore

232

BIBLIOGRAPHY

' The Knowledge of God "

' Expansion of Christianity "

' History of Dogma " .

' What is Christianity ? "

' Hibbert Journal " (cited as H. J.)

' St. Paul and Hellenism " {Studia Biblia)

' The Mystical Element in Religion " .

' Divine Immanence "

' Personality, Human and Divine ".

' Christian Mysticism "

' Jesus or Christ ? " {Hibbert Symposium)
' Journal of Theological Studies " (cited

as /. T. S.)
' St. Paul's Conception of the Last

Things "
' The Testimony of St. Paul to Christ "
' Messianic Interpretation " .
' The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul ".
' The Divinity of Our Lord " {Bampton

Lectures)

' L'fevangile et I'figlise "

' Lectures on the ' Kenosis ' "

' The Spiritual Development of

Paul "
' Christianity in the Apostolic Age "
' St. Paul's View of the Divinity

Our Lord " {Essays for the Times)

'Prolegomena"

' Jesus Christ and the Social Question "
' Paulinism " {Hibbert Lectures, 1888) .
' Early Christian Conceptions of Christ "
' St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman

Citizen "

' Life of Jesus "

' St. Paul "

' Justification and Reconciliation " .
' Psalms of the Pharisees " ....

' St. Paul "

' What the First Christians thought about

Christ "
' Christologies, Ancient and Modern " .
' History of the Jewish People " .
' The Quest of the Historical Jesus "

{von Reimarus zu Wrede)
' St. Paul's Conception of Christ " .

St.

of

Prof. Gwatkin
Dr. Adolf Harnack
Dr. Adolf Harnack
Dr. Adolf Harnack

Dr. Hicks
Baron von Hiigel
Dr. Ilhngworth
Dr. Illingworth
Dr. Inge

Dr. Kennedy

Dr. Knowling
Dr. Knowling
Prof. Kirsopp Lake
Rev. H. P. Liddon

Abbe Loisy
Prof. A. J. Mason
Dr. Matheson

Prof. A. C. McGiffert
Dr. Alan Mcnzies

Prof. Hope Moulton
Prof. F. G. Peabody
Prof. O. Pfieiderer
Prof. O. Pfieiderer
Sir W. M. Ramsay

Prof. E. R^nan
Prof. E. Renan
Dr. Albrecht Ritschl
Prof. Ryle and Dr. James
Prof. Auguste Sabatier
Prof. Sanday

Prof. Sanday

Dr. Emil Schiirer ^

Prof. Schweitzer ,

Rev. D. Somervilie

BIBLIOGRAPHY 233

" The Jewish and Christian Messiah " . Prof. V. H. Stanton
" The Christology of Jesus " . . . . Dr. J. Stalker
" The PauHne Theology " .... Dr. G. B. Stevens
" The Theology of the New Testament " Dr. G. B. Stevens

" The Apostles' Creed " Prof. Swete

" The Relation of St. Paul to Con- Rev. H. St. John

temporary Jewish Thought " Thackeray

" New Testament Synonyms " . . . Archbishop Trench
" St. Paul the Man and his Work " . . Prof. H. Weinel (trans.

by the Rev. G. A.

Bienemann)

" Paul and Jesus " J. Weiss

" History of the Apostolic Age " . . . Prof. Carl von Weiz-

sacker
" The Beginnings of Christianity " . . Prof. Paul Wernle
Dr. Westcott's Works

" The One Clirist " Dr. Weston

" Hulsean Lectures " (1903) .... Dr. Whitworth

COMMENTARIES

" Ephesians and Colossians " ... Dr. T. K. Abbott

" The New Testament in Greek " . . Dean Alford
" The Expositor's Bible "

" Commentary " Dr. EUicott

" Romans " Dr. Gifiord

" Exposition of Phihppians ii. 5-1 1 " . Dr. Gifiord

" Sermon on Romans ix. 5 " . . . . Dr. Kennedy

" Old and New Testament Studies ". . Dr. F. Godet (edited by

Canon Lyttleton)

" I Corinthians " Principal Goudge

" Answer to Sermon by Dr. Kennedy " Dr. Gifford

" Galatians " Dr. Lightfoot

" Colossians " Dr. Lightfoot

" Phihppians and Philemon " ... Dr. Lightfoot

" The Acts of the Apostles " . . . . Rev. T. E. Page

" 2 Corinthians " Dr. A. Plummer

" Ephesians " Dr. A. Robinson

" Romans " Prof. San day and Prin-
cipal Headlam

"Appendices" Drs. Westcott and Hort

" Phihppians and Philemon " ... Prof. M. R. Vincent

HASTINGS' BIBLE DICTIONARY (referred to herein as
"H.D.B."), Articles:—

" Salvation. Saviour " Prof. W. Adams Brown

234

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Second Adam
Philo "

Paul the Apostle "

Eschatology " .

Sacrifice " .

Outlines of the Life of
' The Son of God "
' Messiah " .
' Mysteries "
' The Holy Spirit "

Also many shorter Articles

Christ

. Prof. Denney
. Prof. J. Drummond (ad-
ditional volume)
Prof. G. G. Findlay
. Prof. G. G. Findlay
. Prof. W. P. Paterson
. Prof. W. Sanday
. Prof. W. Sanday
. Prof. V. H. Stanton
. Prof. H. Stewart
. Prof. H. B. Swete
quoted in the text.

INDEX

Abbott, T. K., Colossians, iii

n. 2, 4, i8o n. 2
Alexandrian Speculation, The

Archetypal Man, 60
Alford, New Testament in Greek,

180
Anderson, K. C, The Larger

Faith, 6 n. 2, 219
Angels, Christ's Rule over, 169 fE.
Apollinarianism and St. Paul,

188
Arabia, retirement in, e£Eect on

St. Paul's Gospel, 27
Arius, 188
Athanasius on i Cor. xv. 45-47,

72
Athenodorus Kananites, 13
Avatar doctrine, 145

Bacon, Story of St. Paul, 6 n. i,
17 n. I, 21 n. I, 108, 109,
144. 145, 145 n. I
Jesus or Christ? 21 w. i, 40 w.
2, 196

Baur, 3, 63, 176

Beyschlag, 68, 112

Bousset, Jesus, 57, 210, 227

Brown, W. Adams, Art. Salva-
tion, H.D.B., 78, 80

Browning, R., 16 n. 4, 195, 206,
209

Bruce, A. B., St. PauVs Concep-
tion of Christianity, S n. 1,
21 n. 3, 22 n. I, 3, 38 n. 2,
59, 62 n. 2, 82, 87, 93, 94,
97. 99. 129, 133 n. 5, 149 n. i

Burkitt, on St. Mark xiv. 61, 184
n. I

Caird, Ed., 218

Cambridge Biblical Essays, vii. n.

2, 226
Campbell, R. J., 42 n. 3, 206,

218, 227 n. I
Carpenter, Jesus or Christ.^ 21

n. I, 28 n. 2, 181
Carr, A., Si. Paul's Attitude to

Greek Philosophy, 17
Cerinthus, 100

Charles, R. H., Book of Enoch, 35
Chesterton, G. K., 205 n. 3, 207,

219 n. 4, 225 n. 2
Christ, Person of, and Work of,

vii., 77
as the Rock, 25
the Holy One, and the Right-
eous One, 36
the Seed of David, 39
the Pre-existence of, as Man,

63

as an Idea, 67

as God-Man, 70 {see also 103)
the Redeemer, 77
Death of, see " Death "
moral crucifixion of, and that

of believers, 86, 96
sinlessness of, 98 fE.
as Eternal, 103 ff.
the Image of God, in, 140
and Creation, in
as Head of the Church, 142
the transcendence of, 148 ff.

235

236

INDEX

as Lord, 153 ff., 165 ff., 174

as Judge, 161 fE.

as Head of the Body, 167 ff.

as Perfect God, and Perfect
Man, 176, 187

of Dogma, and of St. Paul, 191,
iggfi. {see also tinder"^ Jesus "
and particular headings)
" Christocentric," School, 208
Christologies, Ancient and Mod-
ern, 221 {also see " Sanday,

wr)

Christology, the central impulse
of Christianity, vii., 227
of St. Paul and Church His-
tory, 4
Theocentric or anthropocen-

tric, 30 n. 2
and dogma, vii., 191 ff.
and Pneumatology, 131
Collier, J., Jesus or Christ? 191

n. I
Conversion of St. Paul, The {see

under " St. Paul ")
Criticism, Position of New Tes-
tament, I ff.
Crucifixion, moral, of Christ and
of believers, 86, 96

Dale, R. W., 71, 148

The Living Christ and the Four
Gospels, 6 n. 2
Dalman, 105
Daniel, Imagery of the Book of,53

Messianic Hope, in the Book

of. 34
Day of the Lord, The, 24 {see

" Parousia ")
Death of Christ, The, and the

Law, 84
and the Love of God, 83
and Redemption, 83
vicarious, 87
propitiatory, 91
representative, 92

Deissmann, von A., 91 n. 3,

138, 156 n. 2
Denney, J., art. H.D.B..

" Adam," 63
Divinity of Christ, The, 116 ff.,

176 ff.
Docetism, 40, 43
Dogma and the Humanity of

Christ, 119
Dorner, D. J. A., The Doctrine

of the Person of Christ, 117,

124
Drews, 204 f.
Driver, Isaiah, His Life and

Times, 29 n. 2
Drummond, H., The Greatest

Thing in the World, 223

n, I
Drummond, J., Philo, 59 n. i
The Jewish Messiah, 34 .-'

Edwards, The God Man, 70
Ellicott, Commentary, iii n. 2
Emmet, C. W., 216 n. 2
Enoch, Similitudes of, 35 and 53

Visions and Dreams of, 35
Eschatology, 215
Eschatology of St. Paul, 157,

216 n. I
Esdras, Bk. of, 53
Ethics and Eschatology, 214
Everett, The Gospel of Paul, 83

ff., 176
Eccperience and Dogma, 193

Fairbairn, A. M., 124, 176, 206,

208
Fairweather, W., 197 n. 3
Fatherhood of God, The, 210 ff.
Findlay, G. G., art. Paul the

Apostle, 14 n. 1, 174
Art. Eschatology, 164
Forrest, The Christ of History

and of Experience, 117 n. 1,

122, 192, 193

INDEX

237

Gamaliel, 20

Gardner, Jesus or Christ? 21 «.

2, 204
Gardner, Religious Experience

of St. Paul, ig n. 2, 61 n. 2,

78 n. 2, 82, 91 n. 4, 144 n.

1, 146 «. 2, 157 «. I, 181 n.

1, 197 f., 206, 218, 225 n. 3
Garvie, Expos., April, 191 1, 16

w. I
Expos., Dec, 1909, 19 n. i
also 190 M. 2, 203, 205, 211,

215 n. 2, 217, 219 w. 3
Gifford, on Romans ix. 5, 181 ff.

on Phil. ii. 3-10, 112 ff.
Gladstone, Proem to Genesis, 160

n. 2
Godet, 123
Gore, Dissertations, etc., 119,

121 ff., 124, 188, 188 n. 3
TAtf Creed of a Christian, 70

n. 2
Gospel, The one, in all the

Epistles, 25
Gregory of Nazianzus, 189
Grimm and Thayer Lexicon,

49, 51 w. 2
Gwatkin, Knowledge of God, 87

n. 5, 119 n. 2, 145 w. 2, 146

n. I, 149 «. 3, 4, 171, 192

Harnack, A., History of Dogma,

4 n. 2, 9, 15 n. 5, 28 «. I,

163
What is Christianity.^ 210,

211, 224 n. 4
Harris, C, 224 n. 4
Hart, J. H. A., 181 n. i, 197
Haupt, 64

Hawkins, Sir J. C, 41 «. i
Hegel, 196, 217
Hero-worship and devotion to

Christ, 95
Hodgkin, The Trial of our Faith,

166 n. I

Holiness, 36, 153

Holland, H. Scott, Jesus or

Christ? 219, 226
Holtzmann, 63
Holy Spirit, The, 95, 132 ff.

lUingworth, Personality, Human
and Divine, 69 «. i, 70 «. i,
71 n. I
Divine Immanence, 70 w. 2
Individualism, 79
Inge, Christian Mysticism, 46, 65,
130 n. 3, 147 n. I
/. T. S., 220 n. 5
Irenaeus, 108 n. i

Jensen, 205

Jesus as Messiah, 29 ff.

Earthly hfe of, in St. Paul's
Christology, 40 ff.

sinlessness of, 42

as the Rock, the Deliverer,
the Lord of Peace, 45 ff.

meaning of Name, 81

of history, 196 ff., 201 ff.
Jesus Christ, as Judge, 53 ff.

as the Second Adam, 57 ff.

as the Son of God, 50 ff.

{see also under " Christ ")
Jesus or Christ ? 204 {and see

separate writers)
Jones, H., Jesus or Christ ? 52

n. 3, 208 «. I, 210
Jubilees, Book of, 35
Judgeship of Jesus Christ, 53 ff.
Justin Martyr, 108 n. i

Kalthoff, 205
Kennedy, 59

St. Paul's Conception of the

Last Things, 82 n. i
on Romans ix. 5, 181 ff,
Kenosis, The, 112 ff., 192, 221
Kilpatrick, art. Incarnation, 190
n. 2, 224 n. 2

238

INDEX

Kirkpatrick, Psalms, 45 n. i
Knowling, Messianic Interpre-
tation, 51 n. I, 156, 197, 202
n. 4, 210
The Testimony of St. Paul to
Christ, 3 n. 2, 41 n. 3
Kuyper, 132 n. 5

Lake, Kirsopp, The Earlier Epis-
tles of St. Paul, 34 n. 2, 38
n. I, 54 n. 6, 78 n, 2, 95 n.
4, 130 n. 3, 139 n. 3, 145 «.
1, 159 w. 2, 169 n. 1, 198, 214
n. 2

Law, and Justification, The, 61

Lessing, 209

Liddon on Romans xvi. 27, 185

Lightfoot, Colossians, iii n. i,
3, 112, 115, 179, 180 n. 2
Philippians, 15 n. i, 19 n. 2,

99 n. 4, 121
University Sermons, 208 w. i

Logos, The, 59, 168, 188

Logos, The, Palestinian and
Alexandrian doctrines of,
104 ff.
of St. John, 107
of St. Paul, 108 ff., 141

Loisy, Abbe, 203, 215, 216 n. 3, 4

Lux Mundi, 160 n. 2

Mackintosh, 221 n. 3, 222 n. 5
Marcion, 4

Mark, Gospel of St., 40 n. 2
Marriage, Metaphor of, applied

to the Church, 171
Martin, A. S,, art. Divinity of

Christ, 42 n. 3, 53 n. 4, 156

n. 2, 177 n. I, 191 n. i, 202,

227 n. 5
Art. Christianity, 206 n. 2
Martineau, 191 n. i
Maurice, F. D., 71

Menzies, A., St. PauVs view of

Christ, 2 n. I
Messiah, Palestinian Ideas of
the, 29 ff., 104
the Suffering, 43 {see also under
" Christ ")
Missionary enthusiasm, modern,

201
Moberly, Atonement and Per-
sonality, 69 n. I, 2
Modernist Christology, The, 216
Moffat, Introduction to Literature
of the New Testament, 2 n. 2,
3 n. I
Morgan, Rev. W., Art. Back to
Christ, 199, 208, 209, 210
n. 3, 212 n. I
Moulton, Hope, Jesus or Christ ?
207
Prolegomena, 87 »z. 5
Myers, F. W. H., St. Paul, 28
Mysteries, The, Oriental, 198 f.
influence of, The, 144
and Christian Sacraments [see
" Sacraments ")
Mysticism, and the Jesus of
History, 150
of St. Paul, 130 ff.

Nature, Christ's rule over, 170
Nestor, 14

Nicaea, Council of, 192
Nietzsche, 214

Orphic Mysteries, Redemption

in the, 81
Orthodoxy, 191 n. 2

Page, E. T., The Acts of the

Apostles, 185
Parousia, The, 162, 174
Paterson, W. P., 88 n. 2
Paul, St., Epistles accepted as

authentic, 3
his faith and our own. 6

INDEX

239

Paul, St., how far the Creator
of Christianity, 7
and the early Christian creed, 8
source of his Christian faith, 8
his reUgious development, 1 2 ff.
his theology and his experi-
ence, 13
at Tarsus, 13
his education, 14 fi.
the Stoic schools, 15
Roman ideals, 18 ff.
at Jerusalem, 20
the subjective preparation for

conversion, 21 ff.
the Heavenly Vision, 22
influence of his Conversion on

his theology, 23
effect of conversion, 31 w. i
accounts of conversion, 31
influence of sojourn in Arabia,

32
missionary preaching, 33
his use oi Q, ^o n. 2
as mystic, 69 ff.
his Christology {see under
" Christ ")
Peabody, Jesus Christ and the
Social Question, 203, 220 n. 4
Person, meaning of the term,

190 n. 2
Personality, influence of, in His-
tory, 200
Pfleiderer, 17, 26, 58, 117, 202,

205
Philo, 58 n. 2, 59, 66 «. 2, 105,

III, 141
Plato, 105
Pleroma, 173
Plummer, 2 Corinthians, 134, 137

St. Matthew, 157 n. i
Polycarp, Ep. of, viii.
Prayer Book, Church of Eng-
land, 85 n. 3, 166 n. 3
Propitiatory Sacrifice, Death of
Christ as a, 91

Psalms of the Pharisees, 39
Psychology and Christology, 220

ff.

Ramsay, Sir W. M., 13, 16 n. 1
Redeemer, Christ the, 77 ff.
Redemption, universal, 65 ff.
in Old Testament, 78 ff.
meaning of, for Jesus, 81
for St. Paul, 81 ff.
in the mysteries, 81
Renan, E., 207
Representative death of Christ,

The, 92
Resurrection, growth of doctrine

of, 80
Righteousness, 37
Ritschlian views, 6 ff., 63, 116,

193 n. 4, 212, 213
Roberts, R., Jesus or Christ ?

204, 206
Robinson, A., Ephesians, 55,

159 n. 2, 172, 173
Ross, ]., on Phil. ii. 3-10, 113
Ruskin, John, 91 n. 1
Ryle and James, Psalms of the
Pharisees, 35

Sabatier, A., The Apostle Paul.
23. 39. 53 ^- 2. 107, 148, 176
Sacraments, Christian, in St.
Paul's Epistles, 139
and the mysteries, 145, 198
Salmond, 163
Salvation, 98 ff.
Sanday, W., Christologies an-
cient and modern, 51 n. 3,
106 n. 2, 119 n. I, 120 n. 2,
137 «. 2,191 w. 2, 193 M.I, 220
Art. Jesus Christ, 5 n. 2, 99,

193 n. 3
on the title Sow of God, 35,

50 n. I, 51, 55, 178, 179
Art. Paul, 202 n. 5
on Eschatology, 215

240

INDEX

Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 6i
a., 64 n. 2, 65, 91 fi, I, 4,
92, 95, 96 M. 2. 155,

Schleiermacher, 69

Schmiedel, 42 n. 3, 52 «. 3, 63,
206, 207, 227

Schiirer, History of the Jewish
People, 15 «. 4

Schweitzer, The Quest of the
Historical Jesus, 196, 202
n. 3, 204, 213, 214, 224 n. 3

Scott, C. A., 52 n. 3, 226

Second Coming, The, 162 ff., 214
{see " The Day of the Lord,'"
" Parousia ")

Second Man from Heaven, The,
71 ff.

SibyUine Fragment, The, 34

Sinlessness of Christ, The, 98 ff.

Smith, G. A., Isaiah, 87 ii. 3, 4,
90 n. I

Social question and PauUne
Christology, The, 220

" SoUdarity " of mankind. The,
92, 200

Solomon, Odes of, 197

Solomon, Ps. of, 35

Somerville, D., St. Paul's Con-
ception of Christ, 10, 70, 76,
88, 97, 104, 106, 112, 117,
120, 122, 126, 134, 138, 139,
141, 148, 167, 174

Son of God, The title, 177 ff.

Sonship of Christ, meaning of,

159
and of Christians, 141, 179,

208 n. I
Souter, Did St. Paul speak Latin ?

18 n. 2
Stalker, Christology of Jestis, 53

n. I
Stanton, V. H,, 47, 68, 104 n. 2,

105, 162, 163
Stewart, 146

Stoic ideas, 151

and St. Paul's education, 15 fi.
Strauss, 204
Stubbs, The Christ of English

Poetry, 106 n. 3
Subordination of the Son, The,

158, 168 ff.
Swete, H. B., St. Mark, 36
Art. The Holy Spirit, 132 n.

7. 135. 136
Swinburne, 73 n. i

Talmud, 58 n. i, 60
Targums, 105
Tertullian, igo

Thessalonians, The Christology

of the Epistles to the, 24

Thompson, J. M., 213 n. 5, 222 n.

I. 3

Transcendence in Eastern Philo-
sophy and Jewish theology.
Idea of, 151

Trench, Synonyms of the New
Testament, 36, 37 n. 1

Trinity, The, 70

Tyrrell, 201, 202, 211, 21G, 217
n. I, 227

Union with Christ, 98 ff.

Warren, W., on Phil. ii. 7-1 1,
113 n. I

Weinel, 40 n. 2, 207, 219 «. 4

Weiss, J., Paul and Jesus, 20 n.
2, 40 n. 3

Weizs3,cker, History of the Apos-
tolic Age, 27, 41 «. I, 64, 67,
74, 112

Wernle, Beginnings of Chris-
tianity, 57, 67, 135, 165
on the doctrine of the Holy
Spirit, 155

INDEX 241

Westcott, F. B., Si. John, 75 n. Westcott and Hort, Appendices,

I, 126 n. 2, 128, 131 n. 2 136

Revelation of the Father, 33, Weston, The One Christ, 121,

131 «• 3 225

The Gospel of Life, 66 Whitworth, A., 152

on the meaning of the Incar- Wisdom, 143

nation, 85, 93 n. 1 Wisdom Literature and the Lo-
on the power of Ideas, 200 n. 2 gos, 108

INDEX OF TEXTS

OLD TESTAMENT

Genesis i. 27. .60.

,, i. 27. . 126, n.2.
,, i. 27. . 140.
,, ii. 7. .60.
ii. 24. .172.
Exodus iv. 22 . .50.
XV. 13.. 79-
,, xvii. 6. .45.
,, XXV. 17. .91.
,, xxxiii. II . . 152.
Leviticus xxiv. 16.. 154.
Deuteronomy vi. 4.. 64.

,, xiii. 1-5. .20, n.2.

1 Samuel iii. i . .152.

2 Samuel vii. 13-14.. 50.

,, xxii. 2 . .46.

,, xxii. 2. .47.
Psalms ii. . .35.
„ ii..,.47.
„ ii. 7.. 50.
,, xvi. 10. .36.
,, xviii. 2 . .45.
,, xviii. 2 . .46.
,, xviii. 2 . .47.
,, xxiv. 5, .38.
,, xxxiv. 18. .79.
,, xxxvii. 39-40.. 79.
,, xxxix. 9. .47.
.. xl. 7.. 47.
,, Ii. 10 ff. . .79, n.6.
„ Ii. 17, 19. .80.
,, Ixix. 28. .45.
„ Ixx. 5.. 47.
,, Ixxii. 17. .105.
„ Ixxviii. 15.. 45-

Psalms Ixxviii. 35.. 46.

,, Ixxxix. 27, .50.
cix. 31.. 79.
ex. I.. 155 {bis).
Proverbs viii. 22.. 143.
Isaiah v. 16. .37.

,, ix. 6. .48.

„ ix. 7..37-

,, xi...48.

„ xi. 5..37-

,, xvi. I . .46.

,, xxxii. I . .37.

,, xlii. I.. 54.

,, xlvi. 13.. 38.

,, xlviii. 22. .48.

.. Ii. 5. 8..38.
Iii. 7. .48.

,, liii...44.

,, liii. . .87 (pis).

,, liii. ..90.

,. liii. 5.. 48.

,, liii. 1 1.. 37.

„ Iv. I.. 47.

., Ivi, I.. 38.

,, Ivii. 19. .48 (pis).

,, Ivii. 21 . .48.

,, lix. 20., 47.

,, lix. 20. .80.
Jeremiah xxxi. 29, 30.. 79.
xxxi. 33-34 -.153.
,, xxxiii. 6. .48.
Ezekiel xviii. . . 79.

,, xviii. 4. .94.
Daniel ii. 47. .154.

„ V. 23.. 154.

242

INDEX OF TEXTS

243

Daniel vii. 13. .54.
Hosea xi. i . .50.
Micah V. 5.. 48.
„ V. 5, 6. ,.48.

Haggai ii. 9.-48.

ii. 21-23.. 39.
Zechariah ix. 10.. 48.

NEW TESTAMENT

St. Matthew v. 3.. 81.

V. 48. .144, W.I.

viii. 1 7.. 87.

X. 32.. 174, W.2.

xi. 29. .41, «.3.

xvi. 14.. 39.

xvi. 16.. 52.

xvi. 25.. 97.

xix. 9. .172.

XX. 28. .87.

xxii. 37. .4, n.i.

xxii. 44 -.155 {bis).

xxiv. 36. .215.

xxvi. 38. .189.

xxvi. 63.. 33.

xxvi. 63 ...52.
St. Mark i. 24. .36.
iii. II.. 51.
V. 7...51.
X. 45. -87.
xi. 3--I55-
,, xii. 29. .64.

xii. 35-37- -155.
,, xii. 30. .4, n.x.
„ xiii. 32. .215.

xiii. 35. -215.

xiv. 61 . .52.
,, xiv. 61 . . 184.
St. Luke vi. 20. .81.

,, X. 27. .4, M.I.

„ xvi. 21. .215.
,, xxii. 70. .52.

xxiii. 47.. 51.
St. John i. I. .177.

i. I.. 186.
„ i. 12... 132.
,, i. 14. ..30, W.2.

i. 14... 123.

St. John i. 15. .vii.
„ i. 18. .71.

i. 21.. 39.

iii. 13.. 75-

iv. 14.. 47-

vi. I4..39-
„ vi. 46, 62. .85.

vii. 37 •.47-

vii. 40.. 39.
„ viii. 12. .141, M.2.
„ viii. 29. .128.

ix. 7..47-

ix. 35- -33.
„ x. I I., 87,

X. 33 ••127.

„ X. 36. .126, M.2.

xi. 25.. 132.
xi. 27.. 33.
„ xi. 49. .114.
„ xii. 27... 189.
„ xii. 36, 46. .132.

xiii. 13.. 155-
„ xiv. 9. .142.
,, xiv. 12 . . 132.
,, xiv. 2-23. .65.
,, xiv. 27. .48.
XV. 3.. 138.
XV. 5.. 172.
XV. 13.. 95.
,, xvi. 13. .viii., K.2.
xvii. 25.. 37.
XX. 28. .177.
Acts iii. 4.-37.
V. 34.. 20.
vi. 9-15-
vii. 53.. 169.
ix. 7. .31, -n.i.
ix. 16. .32.

244

INDEX OF TEXTS

Ad

ts ix. 20.. 33. Romans iv. 13, 25.. 36.

ix. 20.. 53.

iv. 24, 25.. 99.

ix. 22. ,.33.

v. ..92.

ix. 27, 29.. 33.
xiii. 27... 36.

V. I.. 49.
v. I.. 132.

xiii. 32, 33- -36.
xiii. 33.. 50.
xiii. 35 ••36.
xiii. 38... 43-

V. 2. .131.

, V. 8.. 83.
V. 8.. 165.
V. 12. .61.

xvii. 3..33-
xvii. 3.. 44.
xvii. 18... 16. ,

V. 12-21. .67 {bis)
, V. 14. .62.
V. 15.. 62.

xvii. 28. .16.

, V. 16. .62.

xviii. 5.. 33.

V. 17. .62.

xviii. 18. .84.

V. 19. .90.

XX. 28. .177. ,
XX. 28. .184 {bis). ,
xxi. 26. .84.

vi, 1-14..75.
vi. 2. .82 {ter).
vi. 2. .97.

xxii. 9. .31, M.I. ,

vi. 4... 82.

xxii. 14, 15. .31, n.i. ,

vi. 5, 6. .82.

xxii. 24.. 37.
xxiii. 6. .15.

vi. 7.. 44.
vi. 7..97-

xxvi. 14. .,31, n.i. ,

vi. 7, 10.. 95.

Ro

xxvi. 16, 18. .31, n.i.
mansi. i. .161.

vi. 7-13. .21.
vi. 10. .90.

i. 1-5.. 31. >«-i-

vi. 12. .96.

i. 1-14..178.
i. 3.. 39.

vi. 23 ...94.
viii. . . 86.

i. 3.. 41, n.2.

viii. 2. .98.

i- 3- -41.
.. i. 3.. 188.

viii. 2. .133.
viii. 2, 23. .82.

i. 4..50 {bis).
i. 4. .96 {bis).

viii. 3.. 50.
viii. 3.. 94 {bis).

i. 4. -155.

viii. 3. .112.

,. i. 7..48.

i. 18.. 83.
„ i. 25. .184.

viii. 3..I79.
viii. 6. .49.
viii. 1 1.. 96.

ii. 2.. 165.

viii. II. .134.

ii. 3.. 165.

viii. 12-30. .136.

ii. 5.. 165.

viii. 14-16.. 133.

.. iii. 5 -.37.

,, iii. 20. ..61. ,

, viii. 16, 27. .136.
viii. 21. .83.

iii. 21-26. .36.

, viii. 23. .98.

iii. 25. .84.

viii. 32. .179.

iii. 25.. 91.

viii. 35- -96.

INDEX OF TEXTS

245

Romans viii. 38 ...161.
ix. 5..39.
ix. 5.. 41.
ix. 5. .41, n.2.
ix. 5--I75-
ix. 5.. 177.
ix. 5. ,180.
ix. 5. .181.
ix. 5.. 182.
ix. 5.. 183.
X. 7.. 36.
X. 9.. 8.
X. 9. -156.
xi. 34-3 6.. 1 85 {his).
xii. 14. .41, M.3.
xii. 26. .47.
xiv. 8. . 161.
xiv. 9. . 156.
xiv. 10. .165.
xiv. II . .157.
xiv. 17. .82.
xiv. 17. .215.
XV. 3.. 36.
XV. 8. .36.
XV. 8.. 43.
xvi. 3, 9.-138.
xvi. 20. .165.
xvi. 25.. 33.
xvi. 27. .185 {bis).
I Corinthians i.-ii. . . 130.

i.-iv. . .17, M.I.

i. 4--165.

i. 9- -165.

i. 23.. 25.

i. 23.-44.

i. 24. .109.

i. 30. .82.

i. 31. .161.

ii. 1-16. .110.

ii. 6. .144, M.I.

ii. 7. . 109.

ii. 8... 141.

ii- II - .136.

ii. 16. . 139.

iii. I. .144, M.I.

I Corinthians iii. 16 . , 132.

iii. 16.. 133.
„ iii. 20.. 154, «.i.

„ iii. 23. .168.

iv. 5.. 54.

iv. 12-13.. 41, M.3.

V. 7..93-

vi. 3.. 41, M.3.

143.
135.

.132.
.215.
136.

.41, M.3.
.165.

..154, M.I.

VI- 15..

vi. 17.

vi. 19.

vi. 19..

vi. 20..

vii. 4...

vii. 10.

vii. 17.

vii. 25.

viii. 4. ,.64.

viii. 6. ..8.

viii. 6... 112.

viii. 6... 118.

viii. 6... 182.

ix. I . .31, W.I.

ix. I . .161.

ix. 14.. 41, M.3.

x. 4.. .25.

X. 4.,.45-
x. 4. ..46.

X, 4. .112.

X. 15-21.. 131.
X. 16-17, 140.

xi. I.. 99, M.2.

xi. I. .148.

xi. 3.. 142.

xi. 3.. 167.

xi. 3.,. 168.

xi. 4-6. .8.

xi. 7. .III.

xi. 7. .140 {his).

xi. 7.. 141, M.3.

xi.23-34..4i,M.3.

xii... 133.

xii. 2, 3. -.41, M.3.

xii. 3. ,.8.

xii. 3.. 155-

246

INDEX OF TEXTS

1 Corinthians xii. 12.. 143.

„ xii. 12.. 172.

,, xii. 24-26. .83.

xii. 27.. 143.

xiii...4i, n.3.
,, xiii. 2. .133.

,, xiii. 13. .160.

„ XV. 3. .92.

XV. 3-8 ...41, W.3.

XV. 5-9.. 31. «•!•
„ XV. 8., 22.

„ XV. 24-28. .65.

„ XV. 24-28 . . 157

{bis).

XV. 33.. 16.

XV. 45-63 (bis).
„ XV. 45. .100.

XV. 45--I35-
XV. 45-47.. 62.
XV. 45-47.. 71.
XV. 45-47 ...74.
„ XV. 46. .67.

XV. 47.-63.

„ XV. 47... 112, M,5.

2 Corinthians i. 5 . .44.

i. 5... 82.

i. 22 -.133.

i. 19, 20.. 36.
„ iii. 17.. 132.

iii. 17.. 134-

iii. 17, 18.. 136
(bis).
„ iii. i8.,. 161.

,, iv. 4. .30, W.2.

iv. 4.. 141.
„ iv. 4. .181, «.i.

„ iv. 4-6...31, M.I.

iv. 9..215.
„ iv. 10 .,.97.

iv. 13.. 132.

iv. 14.. 139-
,, V. 2. .92.

V. 5.. 133.

V. 7.. 132.

„ V. IO.=. 16, W.2.

2 Corinthians v. 10. .54.
„ v. 10.. 162.

v. 10.. 165.

v. 14. -QS-

v. 14.. 139-
„ v. 16.. 40.

„ V. 16. .219.

„ V. 16-19. .31, n.x.

V. 17... 82.
„ V. 18.. 165.

V. 19.. 70.

V. 19. .83.

V. 21.. 8, M.I,

V. 21. .38.
>> V. 21. ,.43.

V. 21. ..88.

„ V. 21. ,.89.

V. 21.. 95.
„ V. 21.. 127.

vii. I.. 1 30.

viii. 9.. 25.

viii. 9.. 42.

„ viii. 9. .70.

„ viii. 9.. 112.

„ viii. 9. .121.

viii. 1 7.. 1 14.
„ ix. 8... 16, M.2.

„ X. I. ..42.

X. I.. 41, M.3.
xi. 4.. 25.
„ xi. 10.,. 139.

„ xi. 22.. 14.

„ xi. 31... 184.

„ xii. 1-4.. 222.

„ xii. 4.. 144, M.x.

xii. 9..-95-
xiii. 4. ..96.
„ xiii. 14. ,.8.

xiii. 14.. 136.
Galatians i. 6. ,.25.
i. 8. ..25.

i. ii-i7.,.3i, M.I.
i. 12.. 25.
i. 15.. 22.
i. 1 7. ,.27.

INDEX OF TEXTS

Ml

Galatians ii. 16.. 86.

Ephesians i. 7. .92.

,, ii. 16. .131 (6t5).

i. 10.. 65.

ii. 19, 20. .84 {pis).

i. 10. .108.

,, ii. 20. .69.

i. 20-23, .8.

ii. 20.. 95.

i. 20.. 96.

„ ii. 20. .98.

i. 21.. 159.

ii. 20.. 131.

i. 21. .166.

„ ii. 20. .132.

i. 22.. 168.

„ iii. I. .25.

ii. 14. .48.

,, iii. 2. .86.

ii. 16, 17. .165.

iii. 13. .84 {bis).

iii. 9. .109.

iii. 13.. 87.

iii. 12. .131.

iii. 13.. 88.

iii. 14-19. .96.

„ iii. 13. .89 {bis).

iv. 4-6. .8.

iii. 13.. 94-

iv. 5.. 132.

iii. 13.. 98.

iv. 5.. 139.

iii. 19.. 39-

iv. 13.. 9.

iii. 19.. 169.

iv. I3-.I32.

iii. 24.. 85.

iv. 15. .142.

„ iii. 26. .132.

iv. 21 . .138.

„ iii. 26, 27. .131.

V. 2. -.95.

„ iii. 26, 27 — 139.

V. 5- -177.

,, iii. 29... 36.

V. 5--2I5-

iv. 3.. 159.

v. 23. .142.

iv. 4. .25.

V. 23.. 167.

„ iv. 4. .41.

V. 23. .171.

„ iv. 4. .50.

V. 23-33.. I 71.

iv. 4.. 85.

V. 27... 9.

iv. 4-.93-

V. 32... 172.

„ iv. 4. .112.

vi. 5, 9- -154. «•!•

iv. 4.. 188.

vi. 16. .13.

iv. 4-6.. 133.

Pliilippians i. 8.. 139.

„ iv. 6. .134.

i. 27.. 19.

„ iv. 6. . 141.

ii. i-ii . .70.

„ iv. 8. .95.

ii. 3-10. .112 (bis)

iv. 19.. 139.

ii. 5.. 99. «-2.

„ V. 6. .132.

ii. 5.. 148.

v. 16.. 95.

ii. 5-11..41, W.3.

„ V. 19-24. .81.

ii. 5-11 . .42.

„ V. 21 . .215.

ii. 5-1 1.. 64.

„ V. 22. .132.

ii. 5-1 1. .107.

,, vi. 7-10. .162.

ii. 5-1 1 . .121.

Ephesians i. 4. .96.

ii. 6. .64.

i. 6.. 54.

ii. 6.. 177.

i- 6.. 55.

ii. 6-8. .177.

248

INDEX OF TEXTS

Philippians ii. 6-1 1 . . 8.

Colossians i. 27 . . 186.

ii. 7.. 63.

»>

ii. 2.. 177.

ii. 7--73-

ii. 2. .186 {bis).

„ ii. 7-1 1. .156.

ii. 3 -.109.

„ ii. 7-1 1 . .179.

ii. 6.. 25.

„ ii. 7-1 1 . .180.

ii. 9- -177 (bis).

„ ii. 9. .96.

ii. 9. .179 {bis).

ii. 9.. 157.

ii. 14. ..94.

„ ii. 10.. 166.

ii. 19. .168.

„ ii. II. . 156.

ii. 16-18. .169 {bis).

„ ii. 15. .141, W.2.

ii. 22. .168.

iii. 5..15 {bis).

iii. I . .96.

iii. 10.. 95.

iii. I.. 98.

„ iii. 10. .99.

iii. 1 1.. 65.

„ iii. 21. .98.

iii. 12. .99, n.2.

iv. 8.. 18.

iv. I . .154, n.i.

„ iv. II . . 16, n.2.

iv. 7.. 138.

„ iv. 12. .144, n.i.

I Thessalonians i. 10.. 47.

iv. 13.. 139.

i. 10.. 54.

Colossians i. 9-xi. 23 . . 8.

i. 10.. 74.

„

. 3. 4. 8.. 8.

i. 10. .162.

..

. 9.. 30, w.i.

ii. 12. .165.

»>

. 10. .161.

ii. 12. .215.

,,

I. 12-15.. 53 ^4-

iii. 2. .138.

I, ]

• 13-14- -QS-

iii. 12... 161.

,f ]

. 13-14..215.

iii. 1 3.. 54.

»»

. 13-15.- 179-

iii. 13.. 165.

.. I

. 15.. 109.

iv. 6. .154, n.i.

„

. 15.. 140.

iv. 17. .162.

,,

. 15, 16.. 64.

2 Thessalonians i. 7.-54.

,,

I. 15-17.. no.

i. 10... 162.

..

. 15-20.. no {bis).

i. 12.. 177.

t. 1

. 16.. 159.

ii. ..53. W.4.

>>

. 16... 173.

iii. 1-5, 16.

,,

. 16, 17.. 65.

154, M.I.

,,

I. 18... 142.

iii. 3. .161.

,,

. 18.. 167.

iii. 1 6.. 48.

,,

. 19.. 176.

I Timothy ii. 16.. 87.

„

. 19. .179 {bis).

,.

111. 16. .43.

,,

. 20. .101.

,,

iii. 16.. 1 77.

,,

I. 23.. 25.

2 Timothy iv. 18. .182.

,,

. 24.. 44.

Titus ii. ]

[3..I75.

„

I. 24. .82.

,, ii.

[3--I77-

,,

I. 24.. 139.

Hebrews

i. I. .52.

„

I. 27.. 141.

n

i. 2-8 ...53.

INDEX OF TEXTS

Hebrew

s i. 3- -52.

I Peter iv, i. .44.

i. 5.. 50.

„ iv. 2.. 44.

i. 8.. 177.

„ iv. 12-13.. 45.

ii. 2. .169.

2 Peter i. i. .177.

iii- 3-.53-

iii. 18.. 182.

vii. 26, 27.

•95-

1 John i. 7.,93-

ix. 12.. 93.

V. 12. .81.

xii. 14,. 78.

„ V. 20.. 177,

I Peter

i. 1 1. ..44.
iii. 18.. 44.

Revelation xxii. i, 17

249

.47.

APOCRYPHAL AND OTHER BOOKS

2 Esdras xiii. 3. .53.
Wisdom i. 7. . 109.

„ vii. 24. ,109.

,, X. 15 flf. . .46.

1 Maccabees xiv. 41. .39.

2 Maccabees xv. 13 £E. . . 39.
Enoch —

Similitudes xxxvii. 3.. 35.
xl. I.. 53.
xl. 5.. 35.
xlii. 2, 3, 5.. 53.

Simihtudes xlv. 3.. 35.

„ xlvii. 2 £f. . .35.

,, xlviii. 2. .35.

,, xlviii. 10.. 35.

Iii. 4.. 35.

Enoch cv, 2. .5.

Book o'i Jubilees xxxi. 18.. 35.

Psalms of Solomon xvii. 23 ... 35.

xvii. 26 ..35.

xvii. 36.. 1 55.

Printed by Butler & Tanner, Promt and London.