PERSON
OF
CHRIST
Apostles
say
of
the
pre-existing
glory
ot
Christ
with
God,
or
of
creation
as
mediated
through
His
agency,
takes
a
place
quite
naturally
as
part
of
its
implicit
content.
But
at
first
Jesus
usedthenameto
convey
simplyHis
perfectly
filial
human
consciousness,
as
filled,
or
rather
constituted,
by
personal
fellowship
and
ethical
solidarity
with
God.
This
conscious
Sonship
is
for
Jesus
the
supreme
reality
;
and
in
the
light
of
It
He
recognized
from
the
first
with
perfect
clearness
the
work
God
had
given
Him
to
do.
It
was
not
that
He
knew
Himself
to
be
Messiah,
and
rose
from
this
to
the
certainty
that
God
was
His
Father;
the
connexion
of
the
two
facts
is
just
the
reverse.
He
is
Son
of
Man,
and
Head
of
the
Kingdom
of
God,
because
of
the
still
deeper
consciousness
that
He
is
Son
of
God.
The
roots
of
His
vocation
are
in
the
uniqueness
of
His
Person.
Yet
in
the
last
resort
we
cannot
separate
these
two
aspects.
The
loftier
in
the
scale
of
being
a
human
character
stands,
the
more
entirely
personality
and
vocation
coincide;
and
in
the
case
of
Jesus
Christ
the
coincidence
was
absolute.
5.
Self-assertion
of
Jesus.
—
Apart
from
specific
and,
as
it
were,
technical
modes
of
self-designation,
the
Synoptics
picture
Jesus
as
in
many
ways
assuming
an
attitude
to
God
and
men
which
is
scarcely
intelligible
except
upon
a
positive
view
of
His
higher
being.
A
whole
series
of
features
point
in
the
direction
of
the
more
developed
Christology
of
the
Apostles.
He
who
could
speak
of
Himself
as
meek
and
lowly
of
heart
exhibits
also
an
unparalleled
loftiness
and
majesty
ot
bearing.
His
disciples,
the
crowd
at
Nazareth,
and
the
possessed
are
alike
conscious
of
this
singular
elevation.
The
personal
trust
and
allegiance
which
He
never
scrupled
to
ask
from
men,
putting
even
natural
affection
in
the
second
place,
is
yielded
almost
instinctively.
Nor
does
the
source
of
the
impression
thus
produced
lie
in
His
miracles;
it
lies
in
the
feeling
of
His
supreme
authority.
He
spoke
uni-formly
in
the
tones
of
One
who
had
the
keys
of
the
Kingdom
of
heaven,
and
with
whom
it
rested
to
declare
the
conditions
of
entrance.
He
put
aside
the
ancient
ordinances
of
the
Law.
He
called
all
the
weary
to
Himself
for
rest;
most
amazing
of
all.
He
claimed
the
power
to
forgive
sin,
and
actually
bestowed
forgiveness
on
the
sick
of
the
palsy
and
the
dying
malefactor.
His
entire
demeanour
makes
the
impression
of
perfect
acquaintance
with
the
mind
of
God
—
His
thoughts
towards
men.
His
hearing
of
prayer,
the
grounds
of
His
condemnation
and
His
pardon.
With
apparently
not
a
single
interval
of
doubt.
He
knew
Himself
to
be
the
chosen
One
of
God,
by
whose
presence
the
powers
of
evil
were
already
vanquished,
who
should
redeem
many
by
His
death,
who
sliould
rise
from
the
dead
and
come
hereafter
with
Divine
power
as
the
Judge
of
the
world.
It
gradually
became
clear
to
the
disciples
that
no
com-parison
was
really
possible
between
Jesus
and
the
great
figures
of
the
OT.
No
prophet
had
ever
called
upon
men
to
confess
his
name;
no
prophet
had
declared
that
the
relation
of
men
to
him
would
decide
their
final
destiny;
no
prophet
had
ever
said:
'All
things
are
delivered
unto
me
of
my
Father.'
But
Jesus
repeatedly
puts
Himself
forward
as
the
object
of
saving
faith,
and
gives
to
those
who
trust
Him
the
sovereign
promise
that,
as
they
gather
in
His
name.
He
will
be
present
in
their
midst.
These
are
features
of
the
Synoptic
portraiture
of
Jesus
which
it
is
impossible
to
eliminate;
and
while
they
do
not
amount
to
a
doctrine
of
HisPerson,
they
insist
on
doctrinal
interpretation.
In
view
of
such
things
it
is
futile
to
say
blankly,
with
Bousset,
that
Jesus
simply
places
Himself
at
the
side
of
ordinary
humanity,
and
reserves
for
Himself
only
the
distinction
of
a
unique
vocation.
On
the
con-trary,
even
in
the
first
three
Gospels
the
Person
of
Jesus
has
factors
of
mystery
in
it
which
lead
the
mind
towards
the
Apostolic
doctrine
of
His
transcendent
relation
to
God.
6.
Sinlessness
of
Jesus
.—The
NT
belief
in
the
sinless-ness
of
Jesus,
which
we
may
suitably
consider
at
this
point,
is
not
really
an
a
priori
dogma
—
though
as
Lamb
of
PERSON
OF
CHRIST
God
He
was
viewed
as
being
necessarily
without
spot
or
blemish
;
it
is
a
conclusion
drawn
from
convincing
facts
at
which
we
have
a
clear
look
in
the
Synoptics.
Nor,
on
the
other
hand,
is
it
quite
accurate
to
say
that
the
NT
bids
us
regard
the
sinlessness
of
Jesus
as
something
which
only
a
believer
can
grasp
or
assent
to,
and
which,
from
the
nature
of
the
case,
cannot
be
established
historically.
As
against
this,
there
is
great
force
in
Dr.
Forrest's
argument
(.Authority
of
Christ,
p.
22fl.),
that
even
as
historians,
and
irrespectively
of
any
judgment
of
faith,
we
are
bound
to
accept
the
Apostolic
interpretation
of
the
facts,
since
'
the
facts
concerning
Him
must
have
been
such
as
to
sanction
and
necessitate
the
interpretation.'
The
Synoptic
Gospels,
it
is
true,
contain
no
express
claim
on
Jesus'
part
to
be
sinless;
certainly
nothing
so
strong
as
Jn
8''.
Yet
we
find
traits
in
His
demeanour
which
reveal
His
self-consciousness
more
plainly
than
even
words
could
do.
He
called
men
to
repentance;
He
condemned
the
'righteous'
unsparingly;
He
pre-dicted
that
He
should
one
day
judge
the
world;
He
urged
confession
upon
His
disciples,
and
put
the
Lord's
Prayer
upon
their
lips:
yet
He
Himself
never
uttered
the
cry
of
the
burdened
conscience,
never
spoke
one
word
of
contrition.
We
do
not
need
to
defend
Him
against
the
charge
of
harsh
judgment
(Mt
12"),
or
a
lack
of
family
affection
(v."),
or
an
excess
of
passion
(21");
these,
surely,
are
intelligible
manifestations
of
fidelity
to
His
Messianic
task,
and
it
has
been
fitly
said
that
their
final
justification
is
that
such
a
one
as
He
should
have
done
such
things
without
any
subsequent
regret.
The
really
decisive
fact
is
that
in
the
mature
mind
of
Jesus
there
is
no
trace
ot
old
defeats,
no
memories
of
weakness
overcome,
no
healed
scars.
It
may
be
said,
indeed,
that
one
may
be
sinful
without
being
conscious
of
it,
but
the
familiar
distinction
is
inapposite;
for
the
moral
pain
ot
Jesus'
answer
to
Peter's
suggestion
(Mt
16^)
proves
with
what
infinite
sensitiveness
He
felt
the
movings
of
sin
in
another,
so
that
He
could
not
have
been
unconscious
of
its
presence
in
Himself.
Besides,
in
view
of
His
duty
to
remove
a
mistaken
impression
on
such
a
point.
His
silence,
were
He
aware
ot
the
slightest
imperfection
in
His
own
nature,
would
have
been
an
added
hypocrisy.
Finally,
on
every
page
of
the
Evangelists
we
read
de-mands
for
perfect
obedience,
as
well
as
promises
of
grace
and
help,
which
it
would
have
been
an
enormity
for
a
sinful
man
to
utter.
From
these
facts
the
only
per-missible
conclusion
is
that
Jesus
had
no
experimental,
interior
knowledge
of
moral
evil.
Nor
may
His
partici-pation
in
the
baptism
of
John
be
urged
against
this;
for
that
was
'
a
great
act
of
loving
communion
with
our
misery,'
in
which
He
identified
Himself
with
sinful
men,
and
took
all
their
burdens
and
responsibilities
as
His
own
(cf.
Denney,
Death
of
Christ,
p.
21).
His
repudia-tion
of
the
epithet
'
good
'
(Mk
10")
has
perplexed
many,
and
must
certainly
not
be
explained
away;
but,
in
the
first
place,
it
is
surely
obvious
that
Jesus
meant
very
much
what
the
writer
to
the
Hebrews
means
by
the
words
(5'):
'
He
learned
obedience
by
the
things
that
he
suffered.'
He
was
being
made
perfect
from
the
outset
to
the
end;
and
we
see
now
that
to
attribute
to
Him
the
eternal,
changeless
perfection
of
God
Himself
would
be
to
forget
the
ethical
conditions
of
incarnation.
And,
in
the
second
place,
should
we
have
thought
more
highly
ot
one
who
calmly
accepted
the
facile
word
of
praise?
Are
not
even
we
pained
by
careless
eulogy?
Many
recent
writers,
in
view
ot
the
apparently
negative
character
of
the
term
'sinlessness,'
have
preferred
to
predicate
of
Jesus
absolute
fidelity
to
His
vocation.
And
it
is
true
not
merely
that
this
conception
brings
out
a
fact
ot
the
utmost
significance,
but
that
several
NT
passages
which
are
commonly
adduced
as
proofs
of
our
Lord's
sinlessness
(.e.g.
1
P
2^1,
Ph
2'-
',
1
Jn
3«)
may
more
suitably
be
referred
to
the
other
category.
Yet
the
idea
of
sinlessness
is
not
one
with
which
we
can
dispense.
We
need
some
term
which
will
include,
not
merely
Jesus'
actual
fulfilment
of
His
Divine
commission,
