Difference between revisions of "Jesus Christ"

<p> <strong> JESUS CHRIST </strong> . There is no historical task which is more important than to set forth the life and teaching of Jesus Christ, and none to which it is so difficult to do justice. The importance of the theme is sufficiently attested by the fact that it is felt to be His due to reckon a new era from the date of His birth. From the point of view of [[Christian]] faith there is nothing in time worthy to be set beside the deeds and the words of One who is adored as God manifest in the flesh, and the [[Saviour]] of the world. In the perspective of universal history. His influence ranks with Greek culture and [[Roman]] law as one of the three most valuable elements in the heritage from the ancient world, while it surpasses these other factors in the spiritual quality of its effects. On the other hand, the superlative task has its peculiar difficulties. It is quite certain that a modern European makes many mistakes when trying to reproduce the conditions of the distant province of Oriental antiquity in which Jesus lived. The literary documents, moreover, are of no great compass, and are reticent or obscure in regard to many matters which are of capital interest to the modern biographer. And when erudition has done its best with the primary and auxiliary sources, the historian has still to put the heart-searching question whether he possesses the qualifications that would enable him to understand the character, the experience, and the purpose of Jesus. ‘He who would worthily write the Life of Jesus Christ must have a pen dipped in the imaginative sympathy of a poet, in the prophet’s fire, in the artist’s charm and grace, and in the reverence and purity of the saint’ (Stewart, <em> The Life of Christ </em> , 1906, p. vi.). </p> <p> <strong> 1. The Literary Sources </strong> </p> <p> (A) Canonical </p> <p> (1) <em> The [[Gospels]] and their purpose </em> . It is now generally agreed that the <strong> [[Gospel]] according to Mk </strong> . is the oldest of the four. Beginning with the [[Baptism]] of Jesus, it gives a sketch of His Public Ministry, with specimens of His teaching, and carries the narrative to the morning of the Resurrection. The original conclusion has been lost, but there can be no doubt that it went on to relate at least certain Galilæan appearances of the risen Lord. This Gospel supplies most of our knowledge of the life of Jesus, but its main concern is to bring out the inner meaning and the religious value of the story. It is, in short, a history written with the purpose of demonstrating that Jesus was the expected Messiah. In proof of this it is sufficient to point out that it describes itself at the outset as setting forth the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God (&nbsp; Mark 1:1 ), that the faith of the disciples culminates in Peter’s confession that He is the Christ (&nbsp; Mark 8:29 ), that the ground of His condemnation is that He claims to be ‘the Christ, the Son of the Blessed’ (&nbsp; Mark 14:61-62 ), and that the accusation written over His cross is ‘The King of the Jews’ (&nbsp; Mark 15:26 ). </p> <p> The <strong> Gospel according to Mt </strong> . is now usually regarded as a second and enlarged edition of an [[Apostolic]] original. The earlier version, known as the <em> Logia </em> on the ground of a note of [[Papias]] (Euseb. <em> HE </em> iii. 39), was a collection of the Memorabilia of Jesus. As the Logia consisted mainly of the sayings of our Lord, the later editor combined it with the narrative of Mk. in order to supply a more complete picture of the Ministry, and at the same time added fresh material from independent sources. Its didactic purpose, like that of Mk., is to exhibit Jesus as the Messiah, and it supports the argument by citing numerous instances of the fulfilment in the life of Jesus of OT prediction. It is sometimes described as the Gospel of the [[Jewish]] Christians; and it appears to have addressed itself specially to the difficulties which they felt in view of the destruction of Jerusalem. Could Jesus, they may well have asked, be the Messiah, seeing that His mission had issued, not in the deliverance of Israel, but in its ruin? In answer to this the Gospel makes it plain that the overthrow of the Jewish State was a punishment which was foreseen by Jesus, and also that He had become the head of a vaster and more glorious kingdom than that of which, as Jewish patriots, they had ever dreamed (&nbsp; Matthew 28:18-20 ). </p> <p> The <strong> Gospel according to Luke </strong> is also dependent on Mk. for the general framework, and derives from the original Mt. a large body of the teaching. It follows a different authority from Mt. for the Nativity, and to some extent goes its own way in the history of the Passion; while ‘the great interpolation’ (&nbsp; Luke 9:51 to &nbsp; Luke 18:14 ), made in part from its special source, forms a priceless addition to the Synoptic material. Lk. approached his task in a more consciously scientific spirit than his predecessors, and recognized an obligation to supply dates, and to sketch in the political background of the biography (&nbsp; Luke 2:2 , &nbsp; Luke 3:1; &nbsp; Luke 3:23 ). But for him also the main business of the historian was to emphasize the religious significance of the events, and that by exhibiting Jesus as the Saviour of the world, the Friend of sinners. He is specially interested, as the companion and disciple of St. Paul, in incidents and sayings which illustrate the graciousness and the universality of the gospel. Prominence is given to the rejection of Jesus by [[Nazareth]] and [[Jerusalem]] (&nbsp; Luke 4:16-30 , &nbsp; Luke 19:41-44 ), and to His discovery among the [[Gentiles]] of the faith for which He sought (&nbsp; Luke 17:18-19 ). It is also characteristic that Lk. gives a full account of the beginnings of the missionary activity of the Church (&nbsp; Luke 10:1-20 ). </p> <p> The author of the <strong> Fourth Gospel </strong> makes considerable use of the narratives of the Synoptists, but also suggests that their account is in important respects defective, and in certain particulars erroneous. The serious defect, from the Johannine point of view, is that they represent [[Galilee]] as the exclusive scene of the [[Ministry]] until shortly before the end, and that they know nothing of a series of visits, extending over two years, which Jesus made to Jerusalem and Judæa in fulfilment of His mission. That there was a design to correct as well as to supplement appears from the displacement of the [[Cleansing]] of the [[Temple]] from the close to the beginning of the Ministry, and from the emphatic way in which attention is drawn to the accurate information as to the day and the hour of the Crucifixion. And still more designedly than in the earlier Gospels is the history used as the vehicle for the disclosure of the secret and the glory of the Person of Jesus. The predicate of the [[Messiah]] is reaffirmed, and as the Saviour He appears in the most sublime and tender characters, but the [[Prologue]] furnishes the key to the interpretation of His Person in a title which imports the highest conceivable dignity of origin, being, and prerogative: ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only-begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth’ (&nbsp; John 1:1; &nbsp; John 1:14 ). </p> <p> <em> Trustworthiness of the Gospels </em> . It is impossible to proceed on the view that we possess four biographies of Jesus which, being given by inspiration, are absolutely immune from error. The means by which they were brought into shape was very different from the method of [[Divine]] dictation. The [[Evangelists]] were severely limited to the historical data which reached them by ordinary channels. They copied, abridged, and amplified earlier documents, and one document which was freely handled in this fashion by Mt. and Lk. was canonical Mk. That mistakes have been made as to matters of fact is proved by the occurrence of conflicting accounts of the same events, and by the uncertainty as to the order of events which is often palpable in Mt. and Mk., and which to some extent baffled Lk. in his attempt ‘to trace the course of all things accurately.’ There is also considerable diversity in the report of many of our Lord’s sayings, which compels us to conclude that the report is more or less inaccurate. Whether giving effect to their own convictions, or reproducing changes which had been made by the mind of the Church on the oral tradition, writers coloured and altered to some extent the sayings of our Lord. At the same time the Synoptics, when tested by ordinary canons, must be pronounced to be excellent authorities. They may be dated within a period of forty to fifty years after the death of Christ Mk. about a.d. 69, Mt. and (probably) Lk. not later than a.d. 80. ‘The great mass of the Synoptic Gospels had assumed its permanent shape not later than the decade a.d. 60 70, and the changes which it underwent after the great catastrophe of the fall of Jerusalem were but small, and can without difficulty be recognized’ (Sanday, <em> Outlines </em> ). Further, that Gospels composed in the second generation can be trusted to have reproduced the original testimony with general accuracy may be held on two grounds. There is every reason to believe the ecclesiastical traditions that the contents of original Mt. were compiled by one of the Twelve, and that the reminiscences of Peter formed the staple of Mk. (Euseb. <em> HE </em> iii. 39). It is also certain that the Synoptic material was used throughout the intervening period in the Christian meetings for worship, and the memory of witnesses must thus have been in a position to ensure the continuity of the report, and to check any serious deviations from the oldest testimony. The general trustworthiness is further supported by the consideration of the originality of the Synoptic picture of Jesus and His teaching. The character of Jesus, and the acts in which it is revealed, form a whole which has the unmistakable stamp of historical reality, and forbids us to think that to any great extent it can have been the product of the collective Christian mind. Jesus, in short, is needed to explain the Church and cannot be Himself explained as the product of His own creation. It is also to be noticed that the Synoptic teaching has a clear-cut individuality of its own which shows that it has sturdily refused to blend with the Apostolic type of theology. </p> <p> With the Fourth Gospel the case stands somewhat differently. If it be indeed the work of John the ‘beloved disciple, its authority stands higher than all the rest. In that case the duty of the historian is to employ it as his fundamental document, and to utilize the Synoptics as auxiliary sources. In the view of the present writer the question is one of great difficulty. It is true that there is a powerful body of Patristic testimony in support of the tradition that the Fourth Gospel was composed by the [[Apostle]] Johnin [[Ephesus]] in his old age about a.d. 95. It is also true that the Gospel solemnly stakes its credit on its right to be accepted as the narrative of an eye-witness (&nbsp;John 19:35; &nbsp; John 21:24 ). And its claim is strengthened by the fact that, in the judgment even of many unsympathetic witnesses, it embodies a larger or smaller amount of independent and valuable information. On the other hand, it is a serious matter that a Gospel, appearing at the close of the century, should practically recast the story of Jesus which had circulated in the Church for sixty years, and should put forward a view of the course of the Ministry which is not even suspected in the other Apostolic sources. Passing to the teaching, we find that the process which was in discoverable in the Synoptic report has here actually taken place, and that the discourses of Jesus are assimilated to a well-marked type of Apostolic doctrine. There is reason to believe that for both history and doctrine the author had at his disposal Memorabilia of Jesus, but in both cases also it would seem that he has handled his data with great freedom. The treatment of the historical matter, it may be permitted to think, is more largely topical, and the chronological framework which it provides is less reliable, than is commonly supposed. The discourses, again, have been expanded by the reporter, and cast in the moulds of his own thought, so that in them we really possess a combination of the words of Jesus of Nazareth with those of the glorified Christ speaking in the experience of a disciple. The hypothesis which seems to do justice to both sets of phenomena is that John was only the author in a similar sense to that in which Peter was the author of Mk., and Matthew of canonical Mt., and that the actual composer of the Fourth Gospel was a disciple of the second generation who was served heir to the knowledge and faith of the Apostle, and who claimed considerable powers as an executor. In view of these considerations, it is held that a sketch of the life of Jesus is properly based on the Synoptic record, and that in utilizing the Johannine additions it is desirable to take up a critical attitude in regard to the form and the chronology. There is also much to be said for expounding the teaching of Jesus on the basis of the Synoptics, and for treating the Johannine discourses as primarily a source for Apostolic doctrine. It is a different question whether the interpretation of Christ which the Fourth Gospel supplies is trustworthy, and on the value of this, its main message, two remarks may be made. It is, in the first place, substantially the same valuation of Christ which pervades the [[Pauline]] Epistles, and which has been endorsed by the saintly experience of the Christian centuries as answering to the knowledge of Christ that is given in intimate communion with the risen Lord. Moreover, the doctrine of [[Providence]] comes to the succour of a faith which may be distressed by the breakdown of the hypothesis of inerrancy. For it is a reasonable belief that God, in whose plan with the race the work of Christ was to be a decisive factor, took order that there should be given to the after world a record which should sufficiently instruct men in reply to the question, ‘What think ye of Christ?’ </p> <p> (2) <em> The [[Epistles]] </em> . From the Epistles it is possible to collect the outstanding facts as to the earthly condition, the death, and the resurrection of Christ. Incidentally St. Paul shows that he could cite His teaching on a point of ethics (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 7:11 ), and give a detailed account of the institution of the Lord’s Supper (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 11:23 ff.). It is also significant that in allusions to the [[Temptation]] (&nbsp; Hebrews 4:15 ), the [[Agony]] (&nbsp; Hebrews 5:7 ), and the [[Transfiguration]] (&nbsp; 2 Peter 1:17 ), the writers can reckon on a ready understanding. </p> <p> (B) Extra-Canonical Sources </p> <p> (1) <em> Christian </em> </p> <p> ( <em> a </em> ) <em> Patristic references </em> . The [[Fathers]] make very trifling additions to our knowledge of the facts of the life of Jesus. There is nothing more important than the statement of Justin, that as a carpenter Jesus made ploughs and yokes ( <em> [[Dial]] </em> . 88). More valuable are the additions to the canonical sayings of Jesus (Westcott, <em> Introd. to the Gospels </em> 8 , 1895; Resch, <em> [[Agrapha]] </em> 2 , 1907). Of the 70 Logia which have been claimed, Ropes pronounces 43 worthless, 13 of possible value, and 14 valuable ( <em> Die Sprüche [[Jesu]] </em> , 1896). The following are deemed by Huck to be noteworthy ( <em> Synopse der drei ersten Evangelien </em> 3 , 1906): </p> <p> (1) ‘Ask great things, and the small shall be added to you; and ask heavenly things, and the earthly shall be added to you’ (Origen, <em> de Orat </em> . § 2). </p> <p> (2) ‘If ye exalt not your low things, and transfer to your right hand the things on your left, ye shall not enter into my kingdom’ ( <em> Acta [[Philippi]] </em> , ch. 34). </p> <p> (3) ‘He who is near me is near the fire, he who is far from me is far from the kingdom’ (Origen, <em> Hom. in &nbsp;Jeremiah 20:3 </em> ). </p> <p> (4) ‘If ye kept not that which is small, who will give you that which is great?’ (Clem. Rom. ii. 8). </p> <p> (5) ‘Be thou saved and thy soul’ (Exc. e. Theod. <em> ap </em> . Clem. Alex. [Note: lex. Alexandrian.] § 2). </p> <p> (6) ‘Show yourselves tried bankers’ (Clem. Alex. [Note: lex. Alexandrian.] <em> Strom </em> . i. 28). </p> <p> (7) ‘Thou hast seen thy brother, thou hast seen God’ <em> ib. </em> i. 19). </p> <p> More recent additions to the material are to be found in Grenfell and Hunt, <em> Sayings of our Lord </em> (1897) and <em> New Sayings of Jesus </em> (1904). </p> <p> ( <em> b </em> ) <em> Apocryphal Gospels </em> . These fall into three groups according as they deal with the history of [[Joseph]] and [[Mary]] ( <em> [[Protevangelium]] of James </em> ), the [[Infancy]] ( <em> Gospel of [[Thomas]] </em> ), and Pilate ( <em> Acts of Pilate </em> ). They are worthless elaborations, with the addition of grotesque and sometimes beautiful fancies (‘Apocryphal Gospels, Acts and Revelations,’ vol. xvi. of the <em> Ante-Nicene [[Library]] </em> , 1870). Of more value are the fragments of the Gospels of the <em> Hebrews </em> , the <em> [[Egyptians]] </em> , and <em> Peter </em> (Hilgenfeld, <em> NT extra canonem receptum </em> 2 , 1876 84; Swete, <em> The Akhmim [[Fragment]] of the Gospel of Peter </em> , 1903). </p> <p> (2) <em> Jewish sources </em> . [[Josephus]] mentions Jesus ( <em> Ant </em> . XX. ix. 1), but the most famous passage (XVIII. iii. 3) is mainly, if not entirely, a Christian interpolation. The Jews remembered Him as charged with deceiving the people, practising magic and speaking blasphemy, and as having been crucified; but the calumnies of the [[Talmud]] as to the circumstances of His birth appear to have been comparatively late inventions (Huldricus, <em> Sepher Toledot Jeschua </em> , 1705; Laible, <em> Jesus Christus im Talmud </em> , 1900). </p> <p> (3) <em> Classical sources </em> . There is evidence in the classical writers for the historical existence, approximate date, and death of Jesus, but otherwise their attitude was ignorant and contemptuous (Tac. <em> Ann </em> . xv. 44; Suetonius, <em> Lives of [[Claudius]] and [[Nero]] </em> ; the younger Pliny, <em> Epp </em> . x. 97, 98; Lucian, <em> de Morte Peregrini </em> ; [[Celsus]] in Origen; cf. Keim, <em> Jesus of Nazara </em> [Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] ], 1876, i. pp. 24 33). </p> <p> <strong> 2. Presuppositions </strong> . It is impossible to write about Christ without giving effect to a philosophical and religious creed. The claim to be free from presuppositions commonly means that a writer assumes that the facts can be accommodated to a purely naturalistic view of history. As a fact, there is less reason to construe Christ in naturalistic terms than to revise a naturalistic philosophy in the light of ‘the fact of Christ.’ A recent review of the whole literature of the subject (Schweitzer, <em> Von [[Reimarus]] zu Wrede </em> , 1906) shows how profoundly the treatment has always been influenced by a writer’s attitude towards ultimate questions, and how far the purely historical evidence is from being able to compel a <em> consensus sapientium </em> . There are, in fact, as many types of the Life of Christ as there are points of view in theology, and it may be convenient at this stage to indicate the basis from which the work has been done in the principal monographs. </p> <p> Types of the Life of Christ </p> <p> I. Elimination of the supernatural, from the standpoint of (1) Eighteenth Century [[Deism]] Paulus, <em> Das Leben Jesu </em> , 1828; (2) Modern [[Pantheism]] D. F. Strauss, <em> Leben Jesu </em> , 1835 36 (Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] 1846); (3) Philosophical [[Scepticism]] Renan, <em> La Vie de Jésus </em> , 1863 (Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] 1864). </p> <p> II. Reduction of the supernatural, with eclectic reservation, from the standpoint of [[Theism]] Seeley, <em> Ecce Homo </em> , 1866; Hase, <em> Die Gesch. Jesu </em> , 1876; Keim, <em> Die Gesch. Jesu von Nazara </em> , 1867 72 (Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] 1873 77); O. Holtzmann, <em> Das Leben Jesu </em> , 1901 (Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] 1904). </p> <p> Within the rationalistic school there have emerged somewhat radical differences in the conception formed of Jesus and His message. One group conceives of Him as a man who is essentially modern because the value of His ideas and of His message is perennial (Harnack, <em> Das Wesen des Christenthums </em> , Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] 1901); another regards Him as, above all, the spokesman of unfulfilled apocalyptic dreams (J. Weiss, <em> Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes </em> , 1892). Bousset mediates between the two views ( <em> Jesus </em> . 1906). </p> <p> III. Reproduction of the Biblical account in general agreement with the faith of the Church Neander, <em> Das Leben Jesu [[Christi]] </em> , 1837 (Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] 1848); B. Weiss, Das <em> Leben Jesu </em> , 1882 (Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] 1883); Edersheim, <em> The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah </em> , 1884; Didon, <em> Jesus Christ </em> , 1891; Sanday, <em> Outlines of the Life of Christ </em> , 1906. </p> <p> The books of this group have a second common feature in their acceptance of the Fourth Gospel as a valuable history. The works of Weiss and Sanday dispose of the arrogant assumption of Schweitzer ( <em> op. cit. </em> ) that competent scholarship now regards the cardinal questions as settled in a negative sense. (For a full bibliography see Schweitzer, <em> op. cit. </em> , art. ‘Jesus Christ’ in <em> PRE </em> <em> [Note: RE Real-Encykl. für protest. Theol. und Kirche] </em> 3 ). </p> <p> <strong> 3. The [[Conditions]] in [[Palestine]] </strong> (Schürer, <em> GJV </em> <em> [Note: JV Geschichte des Jüdischen Volkes.] </em> 3 [ <em> HJP </em> <em> [Note: JP History of the Jewish People.] </em> ii. i. 1 ff.]). The condition of the Jews at the birth of Christ may be summarily described as marked by political impotence and religious decadence. </p> <p> (1) <em> The political situation </em> . From the age of the Exile, the Jews in Palestine were subject to a foreign domination Persian, Greek, Egyptian, Syrian, in rapid succession. Following upon a century of independence under the Maccabees, the country was incorporated in the Roman Empire as a division of the province of Syria. In certain circumstances, which have a parallel in British India, the Romans recognized a feudatory king, and it was with this status that [[Herod]] the Great reigned over Palestine. At his death in b.c. 4, his dominions were divided among his three sons; but on the deposition of [[Archelaus]] in 6 a.d., Judæa and [[Samaria]] were placed under a Roman procurator. Herod [[Antipas]] and [[Philip]] continued to rule as vassal princes, with the title of tetrarchs, over Galilee and Ituræa respectively. The pressure of the Roman rule was felt in the stern measures which were taken to suppress any dangerous expressions of national feeling, and also in the exactions of the publicans to whom the taxes were farmed. Internal administration was largely an affair of the Jewish Church. To a highly spirited people like the Jews, with memories of former freedom and power, the loss of national independence was galling; and their natural restlessness under the foreign yoke, combined as it was with the Messianic hopes that formed a most vital element of their religion, was a source of anxiety not only to the Roman authorities but to their own leaders. </p> <p> (2) <em> The religious situation </em> . From the religious point of view it was a decadent age. No doubt there is a tendency to exaggerate the degradation of the world at our Lord’s coming, on the principle that the darkest hour must have preceded the dawn; and in fairness the indictment should be restricted to the statement that the age marked a serious declension from the highest level of OT religion. It had, in fact, many of the features which have re-appeared in the degenerate periods of the Christian Church. ( <em> a </em> ) One such feature was the disappearance of the prophetic man, and his replacement as a religious authority by representatives of sacred learning. As the normal condition of things in the Christian Church has been similar, it cannot in itself be judged to be symptomatic of anything worse than a silver age that the exponents of the [[Scriptures]] and of the tradition were now the chief religious guides of the people (see Scribes). Moreover, a very genuine religious originality and fervour had continued to find expression in the [[Apocalyptic]] literature of later [[Judaism]] (see Apocalyptic Literature). ( <em> b </em> ) A more decisive proof of degradation is the exaltation of the ceremonial and formal side of religion as a substitute for personal piety and righteousness of life. This tendency had its classic representatives in the Pharisees. The best of their number must have exhibited, as Josephus shows, a zeal for God and a self-denial like that of Roman [[Catholic]] saints otherwise the veneration of the people, which Josephus shared, would be inexplicable ( <em> Ant </em> . XVII. ii. 4); but as a class our Lord charges them with sins of covetousness and inhumanity, which gave the colour of hypocrisy to their ritualistic scruples (&nbsp; Matthew 24:1-51; see Pharisees). ( <em> c </em> ) A further characteristic of decadence is that the religious organization tends to come in the place of God, as the object of devotion, and there appears the powerful ecclesiastic who, though he may be worldly and even sceptical, is indispensable as the symbol and protector of the sacred institution. This type was represented by the [[Sadducees]] in their general outlook men of the world, in their doctrine sceptics with an ostensible basis of conservatism, who filled the priestly offices, controlled the Sanhedrin, and endeavoured to maintain correct relations with their Roman masters. It can also well be believed that, as Josephus tells us, they professed an aristocratic dislike to public business, which they nevertheless dominated; and that they humoured the multitude by an occasional show of religious zeal (see Sadducees). </p> <p> In this world presided over by pedants, formalists, and political ecclesiastics, the common people receive a fairly good character. Their religion was the best that then had a footing among men, and they were in earnest about it. They had been purified by the providential discipline of centuries from the last vestiges of idolatry. It is noteworthy that Jesus brings against them no such sweeping accusations of immorality and cruelty as are met with in Amos and Hosea. Their chief fault was that they were disposed to look on their religion as a means of procuring them worldly good, and that they were blind and unreceptive in regard to purely spiritual blessings. The influence which the [[Pharisees]] had over them shows that they were capable of reverencing, and eager to obey, those who seemed to them to speak for God; and their response to the preaching of John the [[Baptist]] was still more to their honour. There is evidence of a contemporary strain of self-renouncing idealism in the existence of communities which sought deliverance from the evil of the world in the austerities of an ascetic life (Jos. [Note: Josephus.] <em> Ant </em> . XVIII. i. 5; see Essenes). The Gospels introduce us to not a few men and women who impress us as exemplifying a simple and noble type of piety nourished as they were on the religion of the OT, and waiting patiently for the salvation of God. Into a circle pervaded by this atmosphere Jesus was born. </p> <p> <strong> 4. Date of Christ’s Birth </strong> (cf. art. Chronology, p. 135 b , and in Hastings’ <em> DB </em> <em> [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] </em> ). If John began to baptize in the fifteenth year of [[Tiberius]] Cæsar (&nbsp; Luke 3:1 ) being a.d. 29 and if Jesus Was thirty years of age when He was baptized (v. 23), the traditional date fixed by [[Dionysius]] Exiguus would be approximately correct. But it is probable that the reign of Tiberius was reckoned by Lk. from his admission to joint-authority with [[Augustus]] in a.d. 11 12, so that Jesus would be thirty in a.d. 25 6, and would be born about b.c. 5. This agrees with the representation of Mt. that He was born under Herod, since Herod died b.c. 4, and a number of events of the Infancy are mentioned as occurring before his death. A reference in &nbsp; John 2:20 to the forty-six years during which the Temple had been in course of construction leads to a similar result viz. a.d. 26 for the second year of the Ministry, and b.c. 5 for the Birth of Jesus. </p> <p> <strong> 5. Birth and Infancy </strong> (cf. Sweet, <em> The Birth and Infancy of Jesus Christ </em> , 1907). Mt. and Lk. have a narrative of the Infancy, and agree in the following points that Jesus was of David’s line, that He was miraculously conceived, that He was born in Bethlehem, and that the Holy Family permanently settled in Nazareth. The additional incidents related by Mt. are the appearance of the angel to Joseph (&nbsp; Matthew 1:18-24 ), the adoration of the [[Magi]] (&nbsp; Matthew 2:1-12 ), the flight into [[Egypt]] (&nbsp; Matthew 2:13-15 ), the massacre at [[Bethlehem]] (&nbsp; Matthew 2:16-18 ). Lk.’s supplementary matter includes the promise of the birth of John the Baptist (&nbsp; Matthew 1:5-23 ), the [[Annunciation]] to Mary (&nbsp; Luke 1:26-38 ), the visit of Mary to [[Elisabeth]] (&nbsp; Luke 1:39-56 ), the birth of the Baptist (&nbsp; Luke 1:57-80 ), the census (&nbsp; Luke 2:1 ff.), the vision of angels (&nbsp; Luke 2:8-14 ), the adoration of the shepherds (&nbsp; Luke 2:15-20 ), the circumcision (&nbsp; Luke 2:21 ), the presentation in the Temple &nbsp; Luke 2:22-23 ). </p> <p> The narratives embody two ideas which are singly impressive, and in conjunction make a profound appeal to the feelings and the imagination. The humiliation of the Saviour is emphasized by one set of events the lowly parentage, the birth in a stable, the rage of Herod, the flight of His parents to a distant land. The other series shows Him as honoured and accredited by heaven, while earth also agrees, in the representatives of its wealth and its poverty, its wisdom and its ignorance, to do Him honour at His coming. ‘A halo of miracles is formed around the central miracle, comparable to the rays of the rising sun’ (Lange, <em> Life of Christ </em> , Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] i. 257, 258). </p> <p> At this point the influence of theological standpoint makes itself acutely felt. In the ‘Lives’ written from the naturalistic and Unitarian standpoints, the mass of the material is described as mythical or legendary, and the only points left over for discussion are the sources of invention, and the date at which the stories were incorporated with the genuine tradition. The residuum of historical fact, according to O. Holtzmann, is that ‘Jesus was born at Nazareth in Galilee, the son of Joseph and Mary, being the eldest of five brothers and several sisters, and there He grew up’ ( <em> Life of Jesus </em> , Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] p. 89). The chief grounds on which the negative case is rested may be briefly considered. </p> <p> (1) The narratives of the Infancy are not a part of the original tradition, since they are known to only two of the Evangelists, and have no Biblical support outside these Gospels. To this it seems a sufficient reply that additions may have been made later from a good source, and that there were obvious reasons why some at least of the incidents should have been treated for a time with reserve. </p> <p> (2) The two Gospels which deal with the Infancy discredit one another by the incompatibility of their statements. Mt., it is often said, supposes that Bethlehem was Joseph’s home from the beginning; Lk. says that he made a visit to Bethlehem on the occasion of a census. According to Mt., the birth in Bethlehem was followed by a flight into Egypt; according to Lk., they visited Jerusalem and then returned to Nazareth. But the difficulties have been exaggerated. Though it is quite possible that Mt. did not know of an original residence in Nazareth, he does not actually deny it. And although neither [[Evangelist]] may have known of the other’s history, it is quite possible, without excessive harmonistic zeal, to work the episodes of Mt. into Lk.’s scheme. ‘The accounts may be combined with considerable plausibility if we suppose that Joseph and Mary remained a full year in Bethlehem, during which the presentation in the Temple took place, and that the visit of the Magi was much later than the adoration of the shepherds’ (Gloag, <em> Introd. to the Synoptic Gospels </em> , pp. 136, 137). </p> <p> (3) The events narrated are said to be inconsistent with the indirect evidence of other portions of the Gospels. If they really occurred, why was Mary not prepared for all that followed? and why aid Jesus’ brethren not believe in Him? (&nbsp;Mark 3:21; &nbsp; Mark 3:31 ff., &nbsp; Matthew 12:46-50 ). In particular, the body of the Gospels contains, it is said, evidence which is inconsistent with the Virgin-birth. The difficulty is a real one, but hardly greater than the difficulty presented in the fact that the mighty works of the Ministry did not overbear doubt and disbelief in those who witnessed them. </p> <p> (4) The narratives in question are also said to have had their origin in man’s illusory ideas as to the proper manner of the coming of a Divine messenger. The history of the founders of other religions <em> e.g. </em> [[Confucius]] and [[Gautama]] shows a fond predisposition to invest the birth of a Saviour or a mighty prophet with a miraculous halo; and it is suggested that similar stories were invented about Christ, with the effect of obscuring the distinctive thought and purpose of God. They are ‘deforming investitures, misplaced, like courtdresses on the spirits of the just’ (Martinean, <em> [[Loss]] and [[Gain]] </em> ). There is undeniable force in this, but it will be noticed that it is an observation which would make an end, as indeed those who use it intend, of the whole miraculous element in the life. If, on the other hand, we believe that the life of Christ was supernatural, it is easily credible that the rising of the Sun was heralded, in Lange’s image, by rays of glory. </p> <p> Of the events of the glorious cycle which have the joint support of Mt. and Lk. there are three which have been felt to have religious significance. </p> <p> (1) <em> The Davidic descent </em> . It was an article of common belief in the primitive Church that Jesus was descended from David (&nbsp; Romans 1:3 ). Mt. and Lk. supply genealogies which have the purpose of supporting the belief, but do not strengthen it <em> prima facie </em> , as one traces the descent through [[Solomon]] (&nbsp; Matthew 1:6 ), the other through a son of David called [[Nathan]] (&nbsp; Luke 3:31 ). The favourite way of harmonizing them is to suppose that Mt. gives the descent through Joseph, Lk. through Mary, while others think that Mt. gives the list of heirs to the Davidic throne, Lk. the actual family-tree of Jesus. It may well be believed that descendants of the royal house treasured the record of their origin; and on the other hand it seems unlikely that Jesus could have been accepted as Messiah without good evidence of Davidic origin, or that a late fabrication would have been regarded as such. </p> <p> (2) <em> The Virgin-birth </em> (cf. Gore, <em> Dissertations on the [[Incarnation]] </em> , 1895; Lobstein, <em> The Virgin-Birth of Christ </em> , Eng. tr. [Note: translate or translation.] 1903). The student is referred for a full statement on both sides to the works above cited, but a remark may be made on the two branches of the evidence. ( <em> a </em> ) The objections based on historical and literary grounds, as distinct from anti-dogmatic prejudice, are of considerable weight. No account of Mk.’s purpose satisfactorily explains his omission if he knew of it, and it seems incredible that, if known, it would not have been utilized in the Pauline theology. Upon this it can only be said that it may have been a fact, although it had not yet come to the knowledge of Mk. and Paul. Further, Mt. and Lk. themselves raise a grave difficulty, since the whole point of the genealogies seems to be that Jesus was descended from David through Joseph. The usual, though not quite convincing, answer is, that Jesus was legally the son of Joseph, and therefore David’s heir. It must probably be admitted that the original compilers of the genealogies shared the ignorance of the earliest Gospel, but ignorance or silence is not decisive as to a fact. ( <em> b </em> ) It has been common to exaggerate the doctrinal necessity of the tenet. It is usually held to have been necessary to preserve Jesus from the taint of original sin; but as Mary was truly His mother, an additional miracle must have been necessary to prevent the transmission of the taint through her, and this subsidiary miracle could have safeguarded the sinlessness of Jesus without the miraculous conception. Nor can it be said that it is a necessary corollary of the [[Eternal]] Sonship of Christ; since it is found in the Gospels which say nothing of His pre-existence, and is absent from the Gospel which places this in the forefront. And yet it would be rash to say that it has no value for Christian faith. The unique character of Christ, with its note of sinless perfection, cannot be explained by purely natural factors; and the doctrine of the Virgin-birth at least renders the service of affirming the operation of a supernatural causality in the constitution of that character. It must also be said that the negation is generally felt to be a phase of an anti-supernatural campaign to which the overthrow of this position means the capture of an outwork, and a point of departure for a more critical attack. It is also difficult for a Christian thinker to abandon the dogma without feeling puzzled and distressed by the alternative explanations which open up. </p> <p> (3) <em> The Birth at Bethlehem </em> (cf. Ramsay, <em> Was Christ born at Bethlehem? </em> 1902). For the birth at Bethlehem we have the statement of the Gospels. Lk. seems to have investigated the point with special care, and explains the presence of Joseph and Mary at Bethlehem as due to a census which had been ordered by Augustus (&nbsp; Luke 2:1 ). It has frequently been assumed that Lk. has blundered, as <strong> [[Quirinius]] </strong> was not governor of [[Syria]] until a.d. 6, when he made an enrolment; and the impossible date to which we are thus led seems to discredit the whole combination. In defence of Lk. it is pointed out that Quirinius held a military appointment in Syria about b.c. 6 which may have been loosely described as a governorship, and that there is evidence for a twelve years’ cycle in Imperial statistics which would give a first enrolment about the same date. </p> <p> <strong> 6. Years of [[Preparation]] </strong> (cf. Keim, vol. &nbsp; 2 Peter 2 ). The silence of the Gospels as to the boyhood and early manhood of Jesus is broken only by the mention of a pilgrimage to Jerusalem (&nbsp; Luke 2:41 ff.). Even if it be true that none of His townsfolk believed on Him, it might have been expected that the piety of His disciples would have recovered some facts from the public memory, and that in any case the tradition would have been enriched at a later date by members of the family circle. The only possible explanation of the silence is that during the years in Nazareth Jesus did and said nothing which challenged notice. It is also evident that the silence is an indirect testimony to the credibility of the great events of the later years, as there was every reason why the tradition, had it not been bound by facts, should have invested the earlier period with supernatural surprises and glories. </p> <p> (1) <em> [[Education]] of Jesus </em> . Earliest in time, and probably chief in importance, was the education in the home. The Jewish Law earnestly impressed upon parents, especially upon fathers, the duty of instructing their children in the knowledge of God, His mighty acts and His laws, and also of disciplining them in religion and morality. ‘We take most pains of all,’ says Josephus, ‘with the instruction of children, and esteem the observation of the laws, and the piety corresponding with them, the most important affairs of our whole life’ (c. <em> [[Apion]] </em> , i. 12). ‘We know the laws,’ he adds, ‘as well as our own name.’ It was the home in Nazareth that opened to Jesus the avenues of knowledge, and first put Him in possession of the treasures of the OT. It also seems certain that in His home there was a type of family life which made fatherhood stand to Him henceforward as the highest manifestation of a love beneficent, disinterested, and all-forgiving. It is probable that Jesus had other teachers. We hear in the course of the same century of a resolution to provide teachers in every province and in every town; and before the attempt was made to secure a universal system, it was natural that tuition should be given in connexion with the synagogue to boys likely to ‘profit above their equals.’ Of the officers connected with the synagogue, the ruler and the elders may sometimes have done their work as a labour of love, and there is evidence that it could be laid on the <em> chazzan </em> as an official duty. The stated services of the synagogue, in which the chief part was the expounding of the Scriptures by any person possessed of learning or a message, must have been an event of the deepest interest to the awakening mind of Jesus. From early childhood He accompanied His parents to Jerusalem to keep the [[Feast]] the utmost stress being laid by the Rabbis upon this as a means for the instilment of piety. It has also been well pointed out that the land of Palestine was itself a wonderful educational instrument. It was a little country, in size less than the Scottish Highlands, of which a great part could be seen from a mountain-top, and every district visited in a few days’ journey; and its valleys and towns, and, above all, Jerusalem, were filled with memories which compelled the citizen to live in the story of the past, and to reflect at every stage and prospect on the mission of his people and the ways of God (Ramsay, <em> The Education of Christ </em> , 1902). To these has to be added the discipline of work. Jesus learned the trade of a carpenter, and appears to have practised this trade in Nazareth until He reached the threshold of middle age (&nbsp; Mark 6:3 ). It is perhaps remarkable that none of His imagery is borrowed from His handicraft. One has the feeling that the work of the husbandman and the vinedresser had more attraction for Him, and that His self-sacrifice may have begun in the workshop. The deeper preparation is suggested in the one incident which is chronicled. The point of it is that even in His boyhood Jesus thought of God as His Father, and of His house as His true sphere of work (&nbsp; Luke 2:49 . The holy of holies in the silent years was the life of communion with God in which He knew the Divine Fatherhood to be a fact, and became conscious of standing to Him in the intimate relationship of a Son. </p> <p> (2) <em> [[Knowledge]] of Jesus </em> . There is no reason to suppose that Jesus studied in the Rabbinical schools. Nor is there more ground for the belief, which has been made the motive of certain ‘Lives of Christ’ (Venturini, <em> Natürliche Gesch. des grossen Propheten von Nazareth </em> , 1800 2), that He had acquired esoteric wisdom among the Essenes. It has also become difficult for those who take their impressions from the historical records to believe that, while in virtue of His human nature His knowledge was progressive and limited, in virtue of His Divine nature He was simultaneously omniscient. All we can say is that He possessed perfect knowledge within the sphere in which His vocation lay. The one book which He studied was the OT, and He used it continually in temptation, conflict, and suffering. He knew human nature in its littleness and greatness the littleness that spoils the noblest characters, the greatness that survives the worst pollution and degradation. He read individual character with a swift and unerring glance. But what must chiefly have impressed the listeners were the intimacy and the certainty with which He spoke of God. In the world of nature He pointed out the tokens of His bounty and the suggestions of His care. The realm of human affairs was to Him instinct with principles which illustrated the relations of God and man. He spoke as One who saw into the very heart of God, and who knew at first hand His purpose with the world, and His love for sinful and sorrow-laden men. </p> <p> <strong> 7. Jesus and the Baptist </strong> . The religious common-placeness of the age, which has been described above, was at length broken by the appearance of John the Baptist, who recalled the ancient prophets. He proclaimed the approach of the Day of the Lord, when the Messiah would take to Himself His power and reign. He rejected the idea that the Jews could claim special privileges on the ground of birth (&nbsp; Matthew 3:9 ), and proclaimed that the judgment, with which His work would begin, would be searching and pitiless. Along with other Galilæans Jesus repaired to the scene of the ministry in the lower [[Jordan]] valley, and received baptism (&nbsp; Mark 1:9 ), not, indeed, as though He needed repentance, but as a symbol and means of consecration to the work which lay before Him. The Gospels are more deeply interested in the impression made by Jesus on John, modern writers in the influence exerted by John upon Jesus. According to all the Synoptics, John proclaimed the near advent of the Messiah; according to Mt., he may have implied that Jesus was the Messiah (&nbsp; Mark 3:14 ); while the Fourth Gospel states that he explicitly pointed Him out as the Messiah to his disciples (&nbsp; Mark 1:29; &nbsp; Mark 1:36 ). If we suppose that Jesus held intercourse for a time with the Baptist, it is easy to believe that the stainlessness and commanding greatness of His character at least evoked from the Baptist an avowal of his own inferiority. That he went so far as to declare Him the Messiah whom he preached is a statement which it is difficult to accept literally, or as meaning more than that the school of the Baptist pointed to its consummation in the school of Christ. On the other hand, contact with the Baptist’s ministry evidently precipitated the crisis in the life of Christ. The man who re-discovered the need and the power of a prophetic mission was an instrument in bringing Jesus face to face with His prophetic task; while his proclamation of the impending advent of the Messiah must have had the character for Jesus of a call to the work for which, as the unique Son, He knew Himself to be furnished. It is evident that the act of baptism was accompanied by something decisive. According to Mk., Jesus then had a vision of the Spirit descending upon Him like a dove, and heard a voice from heaven, ‘Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased’ (&nbsp; Mark 1:10-11 ). This is more probable than the statement that it was a public revelation (&nbsp; Luke 3:21-22 ), or that it was the Baptist to whom the vision was vouchsafed (&nbsp; John 1:32 ). We shall hardly err if we suppose that Jesus spoke to the disciples of His baptism as the time when His Messianic consciousness became clear, and He received an endowment of strength for the task to which He was called. </p> <p> <strong> 8. The Temptation </strong> . The view taken of the significance of the Baptism is confirmed by the narrative of the Temptation, which would naturally follow closely upon the acceptance of the Messianic vocation (&nbsp; Mark 1:12-13 , &nbsp; Matthew 4:1-11 , &nbsp; Luke 4:1-13 ). Like the scene at the Baptism, the temptations probably came to Jesus in the form of a vision, which He afterwards described to His disciples. It has generally been agreed that the temptations must be understood as growing out of the Messianic commission, but there is wide difference of opinion as to their precise significance. The view which seems most probable to the present writer may be briefly set forth, it being premised that Luke’s order seems to answer best to the logic of the situation. Assuming that in the Baptism Jesus accepted the Messianic call, the possibilities of the ensuing ordeal of temptation were three that He should recoil from the task, that He should misconceive it, or that, rightly apprehending it, He should adopt wrong methods. The first temptation, accordingly, may very naturally be supposed to have consisted in the suggestion that He should choose comfort rather than hardship that He should turn back, while there was yet time, from the arduous and perilous path, and live out His days in the sheltered life of Nazareth. This He rejected on the ground that there are higher goods than comfort and security; ‘man shall not live by bread alone’ (&nbsp; Matthew 4:4 ). The heroic course resolved on, the great question to be next faced was if He was to aim at establishing a kingdom of the political kind which the people generally expected, or a kingdom of a spiritual order. To found and maintain an earthly kingdom. He knew, meant the use of violence, craft, and other Satanic instruments; and of such means, even if the end had approved itself to Him as His vocation, He refused to make use (&nbsp; Matthew 4:8 ff.). This decision taken, the question remained as to the way in which He was to win belief for Himself and His cause. For one with perfect trust in God it was a natural suggestion to challenge God to own Him by facing risks in which His life could be saved only through the interposition of a stupendous miracle (4:5ff.). But this He put aside as impious, and cast upon the Father the care of making His path plain, while He awaited, prudently as well as bravely, the gradual disclosure of His call to work and danger. </p> <p> <strong> 9. Duration of the Ministry </strong> (cf. art. [[Chronology]] above and in <em> DB </em> <em> [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] </em> ). The Synoptics give no certain indication of the length of the period. It is argued that the incident of plucking the ears of corn (&nbsp; Mark 2:23 ) points to April or June of one year, and that at the feeding of the five thousand we are in the spring (‘green grass,’ &nbsp; Mark 6:39 ) of the year following; while at least another twelve months would be required for the journeys which are subsequently recorded. The chronological scheme usually adopted is based on the Fourth Gospel, which has the following notes of time: a [[Passover]] (&nbsp; John 2:13 ), four months to harvest (&nbsp; John 4:35 ), a feast of the Jews (&nbsp; John 5:1 ), another Passover (&nbsp; John 6:4 ), the feast of [[Tabernacles]] (&nbsp; John 7:2 ), the feast of [[Dedication]] (&nbsp; John 10:22 ), the last Passover (&nbsp; John 11:55 ). The first four ‘can be combined in more than one way to fit into a single year <em> e.g. (a </em> ) Passover May any lesser feast Passover; or ( <em> b </em> ) Passover January [[Purim]] (February) Passover.’ ‘From &nbsp; John 6:4 to &nbsp; John 11:55 the space covered is exactly a year, the autumn Feast of Tabernacles (&nbsp; John 7:2 ), and the winter Feast of Dedication (&nbsp; John 10:22 ), being signalized in the course of it’ (art. ‘Chronology’ in <em> DB </em> <em> [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] </em> i. 409 a , 408 a ). </p> <p> It was a wide-spread opinion in Patristic times, supported by the phrase ‘the acceptable year of the Lord’ (&nbsp;Luke 4:19 ), that the ministry lasted only one year; and in the opinion of some modern scholars it can be maintained that even the Fourth Gospel includes its material between two Passovers (Westcott and Hort, <em> Greek Test. </em> ; Briggs, <em> New Light on the Life of Jesus </em> ). On the other hand, it was asserted by Irenæus ( <em> adv. Hær </em> . ii. 22) on the ground of &nbsp; John 8:57 , and of an alleged Johannine tradition, that from ten to twenty years elapsed between the Baptism and the Crucifixion. &nbsp; John 8:57 is quite inconclusive, and the best authority for the Johannine tradition must be the Gospel, the evidence of which may be summed up by saying that ‘while two years <em> must </em> , not more than two years <em> can </em> , be allowed for the interval from &nbsp; John 2:13; &nbsp; John 2:23 to &nbsp; John 11:55 ’ (art. ‘Chronology’ in <em> DB </em> <em> [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] </em> ). </p> <p> <strong> 10. Periods of the Life of Christ </strong> . The divisions are necessarily affected by the view which is taken of the value of the chronological scheme of the Fourth Gospel. </p> <p> Keim, who generally follows the guidance of the Synoptics, divides as follows: </p> <p> Preliminary period of self-recognition and decision. </p> <p> 1. The Galilæan spring-time, beginning in the spring of a.d. 34 [certainly much too late], and lasting for a few months. Characteristics: the optimism of Jesus, and the responsiveness of the people. </p> <p> 2. The Galilæan storms, extending over the summer and autumn of a.d. 34 and the spring of the following year. Scene: Galilee and the neighbouring regions. Characteristics: increasing opposition, and intensification of the polemical note in the teaching of Jesus. </p> <p> 3. The Messianic progress to Jerusalem, and the Messianic death at the Passover of a.d. 35. Scene: Peræa and Jerusalem ( <em> Jesus of Nazara </em> ). </p> <p> The Johannine material can be combined with the Synoptic in two periods, each of which lasted about a year. The following is the scheme of Hase: </p> <p> Preliminary history. </p> <p> 1. The ‘acceptable year of the Lord,’ marked by hopefulness, active labour, and much outward success. Scene: Judæa and Galilee. Time: from the Baptism to the [[Feeding]] of the [[Multitude]] (some months before Passover of the year a.d. 30 or 31 to shortly before Passover of the following year). </p> <p> 2. The year of conflict. Scene: Galilee, Peræa, Judæa. Time: from the second to the last Passover. </p> <p> 3. The [[Passion]] and Resurrection. Scene: Jerusalem. Time: Passover ( <em> Gesch. Jesu </em> ). </p> <p> The months between the Baptism and the first Passover may be regarded as a period with distinct characteristics, and we may distinguish (1) the year of obscurity, (2) the year of public favour, (3) the year of opposition (Stalker, <em> Life of Jesus Christ </em> , 1879). </p> <p> The division into sub-periods has been most elaborately carried out by Dr. Sanday ( <em> Outlines of the Life of Jesus Christ </em> ). </p> <p> A. Preliminary period from the Baptism to the call of the leading Apostles. Sources: &nbsp;Matthew 3:1 to &nbsp; Matthew 4:11 , &nbsp; Mark 1:1-13 , &nbsp; Luke 3:1 to &nbsp; Luke 4:13 , &nbsp; John 1:6 to &nbsp; John 4:54 . Scene: mainly in Judæa, but in part also in Galilee. Time: winter a.d. 26 to a few weeks before Passover, a.d. 27. </p> <p> B. First active or constructive period. Sources: &nbsp;Matthew 4:13 to &nbsp; Matthew 13:53 , &nbsp; Mark 1:14 to &nbsp; Mark 6:13 , &nbsp; Luke 4:14 to &nbsp; Luke 9:6 , &nbsp; John 5:1-47 . Scene: mainly in Galilee, but also partly in Jerusalem. Time: from about Pentecost, a.d. 27, to shortly before Passover, a.d. 28. </p> <p> C. Middle or culminating period of the active ministry. Sources: &nbsp;Matthew 14:1 to &nbsp; Matthew 18:35 , &nbsp; Mark 6:14 to &nbsp; Mark 9:50 , &nbsp; Luke 9:7-50 , &nbsp; John 6:1-71 . Scene: Galilee. Time: Passover to shortly before Tabernacles, a.d. 28. </p> <p> D. Close of the active period the Messianic crisis in view. Sources: &nbsp;Matthew 19:1 to &nbsp; Matthew 20:34 , &nbsp; Mark 10:1-52 , &nbsp; Luke 9:51 to &nbsp; Luke 19:28 , &nbsp; John 7:1 to &nbsp; John 11:57 . Scene: Judæa and Peræa. Time: Tabernacles, a.d. 28, to Passover, a.d. 29. </p> <p> E. The Messianic crisis the last week, passion, resurrection, ascension. Sources: &nbsp;Matthew 21:1 to &nbsp; Matthew 28:20 , &nbsp; Mark 11:1 to &nbsp; Mark 16:8 [&nbsp; Mark 16:9-20 ], &nbsp; Luke 19:29 to &nbsp; Luke 24:52 , &nbsp; John 12:1 to &nbsp; John 21:23 . Scene: mainly in Jerusalem. Time: six days before Passover to ten days before Pentecost, a.d. 29. </p> <p> Weiss’s scheme agrees with the above so far as regards the duration of the ministry (from &nbsp;2 Timothy 3 years), and the date of the [[Crucifixion]] (Passover, a.d. 29). His periods are: (1) the preparation, corresponding to Dr. Sanday’s ‘preliminary period’ down to the wedding in [[Cana]] of Galilee; (2) the seed-time, including the remainder of ‘the preliminary period,’ and the first active or constructive period; (3) the period of first conflicts, and (4) the period of crisis, corresponding to the ‘middle or culminating period’; (5) the Jerusalem period, corresponding to the close of the active period; (6) the Passion and the subsequent events. </p> <p> Useful as the above schemes of Weiss and Sanday are for arranging the subject-matter, and deserving as they are of respect for their scholarly grounding, the writer doubts if we can pretend to such exact knowledge of the course of events. Even if we assume that the Fourth Gospel gives a reliable chronological framework, it is a very precarious assumption that the Synoptic material, which is largely put together from a topical point of view, can be assigned its proper place in the scheme. Further, it is by no means clear that we are right in supposing that there was a Judæan ministry which ran parallel with the Galilæan ministry. There is much to be said for the view that the narratives of the Fourth Gospel presuppose a situation towards the close of them inistry, and that in interweaving them with the Synoptic narratives of the Galilæan perio </p>

<p> By anyone's account, Jesus of Nazareth is the most significant person who has ever lived. He has influenced more lives and had more written about him than any other person in history. He is the only one who ever made a credible claim to being more than just another human being and to this day almost a billion people revere him as the supreme revelation of God. The purpose of this article is to provide a summary of Jesus' life and his basic teachings, with each topic being introduced by a short account of the modern discussion that surrounds it. Introducing the whole is a brief discussion of the nature of the sources from which Jesus' life and teachings are derived and concluding it is a discussion of who Jesus understood himself to be. </p> <p> <i> The Nature of the Sources </i> . The primary sources for the life of Jesus are and will probably always be the four Gospels of the New Testament. New discoveries are made periodically, such as the [[Dead]] Sea Scrolls and the [[Gnostic]] Scriptures at Nag Hammadi, but immensely valuable as they are, they tell us nothing new about Jesus. They are either too late in time, too tangential, too geographically distant, or too obviously a distortion of more traditional Christian thought to be of much value. Some of this material has been available for a long time and has been made available in such works as R. McL. Wilson's <i> New [[Testament]] [[Apochrypha]] </i> (2 vols.), but no one was inclined to rewrite the story of Jesus on the basis of that. Other fragmentary material from Jewish and pagan sources is also well known and has a certain corroborative value that is quite helpful. We learn that Jesus lived during the reign of Tiberius [[Caesar]] (a.d. 14-37) somewhere in Palestine; that he was a religious leader who worked miracles and exorcised demons and was later regarded as a deity by his followers; that he was executed by crucifixion by the Jewish and Roman authorities during a Passover season; that reports circulated about his resurrection from the dead. All of this is very helpful, even if the Christian faith is sometimes described by these very sources as an unfounded superstition, because in its own way it reflects what [[Christians]] believes. It does not add anything new to what we know about Jesus, however. For that, one must turn to the four Gospels. </p> <p> Because the Gospels are basically the only sources we possess for the life of Jesus, the question inevitably arises concerning reliability. [[Regarding]] this, four things can be said. First, there is no agreed definition of reliability. Everyone approaches sources from a point of view that either includes, excludes, or leaves open the possibility of what is recorded. Given Christian presuppositions, the story makes perfect sense; given non-Christian presuppositions, the rejection of the sources as unreliable is understandable. It is not really a question of the sources, but a question of the interpreter of the sources. Second, the Gospel writers and their subject matter argue in favor of their truthfulness. They were attempting to present a true account of the One who claimed to be the Truth, did so on the basis of careful research (&nbsp;Luke 1:1-4 ), and were willing to die for the results of their efforts. That does not necessarily make it true, but it does mean they were not inventing things they knew to be false. Third, the church from the beginning believed that God had a hand in the writing of the material and that guaranteed its trustworthiness. This does not make it so, but that belief did arise from contact with those who knew Jesus and contact with the risen Jesus who confirmed in their own experience what the sources said about him as incarnate. If they were right in this, it confirms the reliability of the sources. Fourth, the Gospels are all we have. If they are allowed to speak for themselves, they present a consistent picture that gave rise to the Christian faith and has been confirmed in the lives of believers from that day to this. The simple fact is, there is no other Jesus available than the one presented in the Gospels. [[Either]] that is accepted or one creates his or her own Jesus on the basis of what is thought to be possible or likely. It might be a Jesus acceptable to the modern or postmodern mind, but it will not be the Jesus of the Gospels. </p> <p> The Gospels as sources are what they are, shot through with supernatural occurrences from beginning to end and they present a Jesus who is both powerful and puzzling to our modern mind. They ought to be examined with the utmost care, but allowed to speak for themselves and appreciated for what they are, documents written from within the faith, honestly depicting what they believed Jesus said and did, to the best of their recollection. </p> <p> <i> The Life of Jesus </i> . <i> The [[Search]] for the [[Real]] Jesus </i> . From the time when Jesus lived until the eighteenth century it would never have occurred to anyone to search for a real Jesus. The Gospels were considered to be divinely inspired, accurate accounts of Jesus' life; hence, the real Jesus was found by reading them. A change occurred with the coming of the [[Enlightenment]] that no longer saw the truth of the Gospels as guaranteed by God. They were to be read as any other book; the supernatural elements were to be discounted entirely or taken as myths or symbols of some higher truth. This meant that the real Jesus, a Jesus fully explainable in human terms, had to be disentangled from the pious, but historically inaccurate elements that smothered him. </p> <p> During the nineteenth century an enormous number of lives of Jesus were written that attempted to reconstruct who Jesus really was, some of them showing real insight but most straying so far from the Gospels as to make Jesus virtually unrecognizable. A few achieved immense popularity because of their radical originality, like D. F. Strauss's <i> The Life of Jesus Critically [[Examined]] </i> (1835) and E. Renan's <i> Life of Jesus </i> (1863), but most came and went and in fact are almost unknown today. In 1903Albert Schweitzer surveyed over two hundred such lives and convincingly showed that none of them had found the real Jesus. </p> <p> This earliest attempt to find the real Jesus, which came to be known as "the Old Quest, " was set aside in the early twentieth century by a group of theologians led by Rudolph Bultmann, who felt that the "historical" Jesus was essentially irrelevant to Christian faith. Christians were to put their faith in the risen Christ, not a reconstructed historical Jesus. They also believed that none of the supernatural elements of the Gospels, such as the virgin birth, the miracles of Jesus, or his bodily resurrection was true, anyway, but only an ancient way of describing an existential experience of the present day. </p> <p> The extreme skepticism of this movement brought about a strong reaction in the 1950s, called the "New Quest of the [[Historical]] Jesus, " led by some of Bultmann's students, notably E. K emann and G. Bornkamm. Bornkamm's <i> Jesus of Nazareth </i> (1956) and J. M. Robinson's <i> A New Quest of the Historical Jesus </i> (1959) were the high points, but this quest also faded away, itself being too problematic and inconclusive to help much. </p> <p> Following this, numerous renewed attempts to find the real Jesus were made, which are together called the "Third Quest." They include everything from depicting Jesus as a magician (M. Smith, Jesus the Magician, 1979), a Marxist (M. Machorec, A Marxist Looks at Jesus, 1976), to an outright fraud (B. Thiering, Jesus the Man, 1992). Others wrote of Jesus along more traditional lines (D. Guthrie, Jesus the Messiah, 1972; B. F. Meyer, The Aims of Jesus, 1979) and yet others wrote scholarly attempts to understand what could be known purely as history about Jesus, such as E. P. Sanders (The Historical [[Figure]] of Jesus, 1995) and J. P. Meier (A Marginal Jew, 2 vols., 1991,1995). John Reumann has attempted to classify all of this (taking it back to 1900) into twenty different categories as "Types of Lives Some [[Key]] Examples" (The New Testament and its Modern Interpreters, eds. E. J. Epp and G. W. MacRae, pp. 520-24). </p> <p> This confusing welter of lives raises the question whether there is a "real" Jesus. The answer to that, in the end, must go back to the only real sources that we have, namely, the four Gospels of the New Testament. Any reconstruction that differs fundamentally from what is depicted there will not qualify, nor strengthen the church, nor stand the test of time. Jesus will always elude us if we look for him only in history and any attempt to depict him as simply another part of history will inevitably be unconvincing. </p> <p> <i> The Life of Jesus. Jesus' Birth and [[Youth]] </i> . Two of our four canonical gospels (Matthew and Luke) contain material dealing with Jesus' earthly life prior to the beginning of his public ministry. Matthew's basic emphasis is on Jesus as descendant of David; hence he focuses on Joseph's line, Jesus being the legal heir of Joseph. Luke presents information gathered from Mary's side, either from Mary herself or from those who knew her. There is very little overlap between the accounts. </p> <p> The events that precede Jesus' birth concern primarily two miraculous conceptions, that of John the Baptist and, of course, Jesus. John's father, the priest Zechariah, was told by the angel [[Gabriel]] that his aged wife [[Elizabeth]] would bear a son in her old age. Mary was told by the same angel, Gabriel, that she would bear a son, though a virgin. Zechariah's response was incredulity, where Mary's was respectful joy and acceptance (&nbsp;Luke 1:18,38 ). </p> <p> A census decreed by Caesar Augustus sent Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem where, during the last years of Herod the Great, Jesus was born to the acclaim of angels and shepherds. The exact date of Jesus' birth is debated by any time from late 7 to 5 b.c. is possible. Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day (&nbsp;Luke 2:21 ) and on the fortieth day taken to the temple in Jerusalem, where he was presented to the Lord and his parents were ceremonially purified according to levitical custom (&nbsp;Luke 2:22-38; &nbsp;Leviticus 12:1-8 ). They returned to Bethlehem were, apparently, they intended to stay. Magi came from the east, following a miraculous star. They found Jesus after making inquiries in Jerusalem, upsetting the rulers there. This visit could have been up to two years after Jesus' birth. Herod's desire to kill the child Jesus was thwarted by God and the family escaped to Egypt. After Herod the Great's death in 4 b.c., the family decided to return to Nazareth after hearing that Archelaus was ruling over [[Judea]] (where Bethlehem was) in place of his father. Only one episode is recorded of Jesus' early years. When he was twelve years old, on the eve of adulthood according to Jewish custom (&nbsp;Luke 2:41-50 ), he showed his profound identification with the temple and the things of God. </p> <p> These events are characterized by the miraculous and the extraordinary. Modern attempts to make them pious fiction or mythological are only required if one is unable to accept God's direct intervention in human affairs. They are wholly consistent with the rest of Jesus' extraordinary career and, indeed, make an appropriate introduction to it. </p> <p> <i> The Year of [[Obscurity]] </i> . James Stalker described the three-year public ministry of Jesus as the year of obscurity, the year of public favor, and the year of opposition. Although not wholly accurate, this does serve as a handy guide to those years. </p> <p> The year of obscurity began sometime in a.d. 26. John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness near the Dead Sea preaching a message of baptism and repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Some scholars have connected John with the Qumran community. Although this is possible, the message of John is altogether different from theirs. He was an exceptional figure, recalling the days of Elijah. He spoke out against false trust in one's Jewishness, demanded conversion in the light of the coming judgment, required a changed life as evidence of conversion, and spoke of the coming Messiah, of whom he was the forerunner. John's denunciation of Herod Antipas's illegal marriage to his brother's wife provoked her ire, his imprisonment, and ultimately his death. Jesus spoke in the highest possible terms of John and his ministry, in spite of John's troubled questionings while in prison at Machaerus. </p> <p> Jesus went from Nazareth to be baptized by John in order "to fulfill all righteousness" (&nbsp;Matthew 3:15 ). Jesus showed his sense of mission by identifying with the sins of the world at the very beginning of his ministry. Divine confirmation came from heaven with the voice of God and the descent of the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove (&nbsp;Matthew 3:16-17 ). This affirmation of the [[Trinity]] will later by repeated at the end of Matthew's Gospel (28:19). </p> <p> A time of severe testing in the wilderness followed Jesus' baptism, in which Jesus' commitment to his task and understanding of his mission were resolved. </p> <p> After a short trip to Cana in Galilee where the water was turned into wine Jesus returned to Jerusalem for the Passover of a.d. 27. His expulsion of the moneychangers from the temple was more than just a rejection of corrupt practices. He was rejecting the temple itself by offering himself as a new temple for a new people of God (&nbsp;John 2:18-21 ). </p> <p> [[Sometime]] in the fall of a.d. 27 John the Baptist was arrested. Jesus took this as a sign to return to Galilee to begin his own ministry. As long as John was preaching, he held back. Now that John was gone, the time of fulfillment had arrived. On the trip back to Galilee, Jesus rather openly declared to the woman at Jacob's well in Samaria some of his challenging, new ideas. The time has arrived when true worship of God will not concern where it takes place, whether in Samaria or Jerusalem, but how it takes place. God seeks the right attitude, spirituality, and truth, not the right location (&nbsp;John 4:21-24 ). </p> <p> Jesus was warmly received upon his arrival in Galilee (&nbsp;John 4:45 ) and everyone praised him as he began to preach the gospel of the kingdom of God (&nbsp;Mark 1:15; &nbsp;Luke 4:14-15 ). </p> <p> <i> The Year of Public [[Favor]] </i> . Jesus' ministry in Galilee and the regions to the north of it are described in some detail by the Gospel writers and, although, in general, it was a time of public acclaim by the people, the clouds of opposition were arising from official quarters in Jerusalem. </p> <p> After an initial rebuff in his hometown of Nazareth, Jesus settled in at [[Capernaum]] by the Sea of Galilee, using it as a base of operations for his ministry in Galilee. Large crowds began to follow Jesus because of the miraculous events and healing that were taking place, but also because of the gracious words that he spoke. Rather than focusing on the minute regulations that had grown up along with biblical tradition, Jesus stressed the love and nearness of God to everyone personally. Rules were made for people, not people for the rules. The [[Good]] News of the kingdom is that the power of God is available for all who put their trust in God and are poor in spirit, pure in heart, loving, merciful, and followers of peace. Jesus saw himself as the embodiment and establisher of that kingdom and offered himself to the people as the one who was bringing that kingdom to pass (&nbsp;Matthew 11:25-30 ). Matthew summarizes this by saying "Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people" (4:23). </p> <p> Jesus made at least three major preaching tours through Galilee at this time, as well as two that took him into [[Gentile]] territory to the north and east. In one instance, he felt it necessary to send out his recently appointed leaders, the apostles, to engage in ministry in his name, because the task was too large to be done single-handedly (&nbsp;Mark 9:1-2 ). </p> <p> It would be hard to say which of the many episodes that are recounted in the Gospels are the most important, because what we have are a selection of those deemed most important to begin with. However, four stand out as particularly instructive. First, Jesus chose twelve of his followers to become a nucleus of leadership (&nbsp;Mark 3:13-19 ). This was to establish a new [[Israel]] that would in time replace the old Israel as the people of God. Second, when John the Baptist asked Jesus from prison if he was the Messiah, Jesus replied with a definition of messiahship that was one of service and suffering rather than of immediate triumph (&nbsp;Matthew 11:2-19 ). Here, again, Jesus pointed out that the old age was drawing to a close and that the new age was dawning. Third, at the miraculous feeding of the five thousand and the subsequent sermon in Capernaum reflecting on that event, Jesus offers himself as the essence of the kingdom, as the bread come down from heaven and a new manna in a new wilderness (&nbsp;Matthew 14:13-21; &nbsp;John 6:1-69 ). Fourth, during Jesus' second trip outside of Galilee, he disclosed at [[Caesarea]] Philippi and at his transfiguration who he really was and what his ultimate task was to be (&nbsp;Mark 8:27-38; &nbsp;9:2 ). He was the eternal Son of God who had come to die for the sins of the world. </p> <p> <i> The Year of [[Opposition]] </i> . As Jesus' ministry in Galilee was drawing to a close, he was preparing to move south to continue his work in the regions of Perea and Judea. He knew that he was moving into dangerous territory. Even while he was in Galilee spies and representatives were being sent from Jerusalem to observe his actions and, perhaps, to find some grounds for legal action against him. In three areas they were dissatisfied with what he was doing: he was violating the [[Sabbath]] rules (&nbsp;Matthew 12:1-8; &nbsp;Mark 3:1-6 ); his miraculous healings were attributed to demonic activity, rather than to divine intervention (&nbsp;Mark 3:22-30 ); and he set aside traditional rules regarding hand washing, and, adding insult to injury, accused the leadership of being hypocritical (&nbsp;Mark 7:1-13 ). While he was in Galilee, he was more or less out of their jurisdiction, but traveling to Jerusalem would provoke open conflict. </p> <p> Jesus arrived in time for the feast of Tabernacles (September-October) in a.d. 29. [[Conflict]] immediately broke out, some saying he was the Messiah or a Prophet, others denying it (&nbsp;John 7:11-13,40-43 ). Jesus proclaimed himself to be the water of life, the light of the world, the special representative of the Father, the dispenser of eternal life, and timeless in his existence (&nbsp;John 7:16,37-38; &nbsp;8:12,16 , &nbsp;28,51 , &nbsp;56-58 ). Further controversy arose after Jesus healed a man who had been born blind. This could not be denied by the rulers and only deepened their hostility toward him. </p> <p> Jesus traveled throughout Judea and Perea, teaching, preaching, and healing, as he had done in Galilee. At one point he sent out a group of seventy-two disciples, by twos, to preach and heal in his name, knowing that his time was growing short. He spent some time in Bethany, where another notable miracle took place (the raising of [[Lazarus]] from the dead). After a short trip back north, taking him to the border of Galilee once more, Jesus returned by way of [[Jericho]] to Jerusalem for the last time. </p> <p> During this time Jesus was preparing his disciples for what was coming, although they had a difficult time accepting the fact that he was going to Jerusalem to die and rise again. Their thoughts were full of coming glory and the power that Jesus so manifestly displayed. For Jesus triumph in Jerusalem meant death and resurrection; for the disciples it meant a special and obvious place in God's kingdom. Jesus tried to explain what the cost of discipleship would be, but his disciples seemed incapable of hearing it (&nbsp;Luke 14:25-35 ). </p> <p> <i> The [[Trial]] and Death of Jesus </i> . Jesus arrived in Jerusalem on the Sunday before Passover (March-April) of a.d. 30, entering the city to the acclaim of the people and in triumphal glory. He repeated his actions of three years earlier, again demonstrating his authority over the temple. This created a great stir among the people and a murderous hatred in the hearts of the leaders. </p> <p> During that week there was public and unresolved conflict with the authorities and they made plans to do away with Jesus, penetrating the group by way of Judas, one of the twelve apostles. </p> <p> On Thursday night Jesus ate a Passover meal with his followers and established a communal ceremony for them that consisted of a participation in his coming death, concretized in the partaking of bread and wine. This was the establishment of the New [[Covenant]] that had been prophesied by Jeremiah (&nbsp;Luke 22:17-20; see &nbsp;Jeremiah 31:31-34 ). </p> <p> Jesus' agony began in the garden of [[Gethsemane]] where he was arrested after going there to pray. He was taken to the high priest's compound where he was interviewed, first by Annas, then by Caiphas, then when it had fully gathered, by the whole Sanhedrin, the ruling body of the Jews. It was difficult to get the witnesses to agree, but a charge of blasphemy was settled on, because Jesus had claimed to be equal to God (&nbsp;Matthew 26:63-68 ). By now it was near morning and Peter had disgraced himself by denying publicly that he even knew Jesus. </p> <p> The Jewish authorities took Jesus to [[Pontius]] Pilate, the Roman procurator, for him to ratify their sentence of death (they did not have the authority to execute it). The grounds of their condemnation of Jesus had expanded considerably on their way to Pilate. They charged that Jesus had actively misled the people, opposed payment of taxes to Caesar, and claimed to be the Messiah, a king (&nbsp;Luke 23:2 ). They later added a fourth charge—Jesus was a revolutionary, inciting people to riot (&nbsp;Luke 23:5 ). Pilate made a series of attempts to release Jesus, including the offer to release a prisoner (they chose [[Barabbas]] instead) and the flogging of Jesus as punishment, but death by crucifixion was their ultimate demand. With mingled contempt and fear, Pilate granted them their wish when they accused him of being unfaithful to Caesar, by allowing one who claimed to be a king to live. </p> <p> Jesus was crucified at 9 a.m. on Friday morning, the actual day of Passover, and died at 3 p.m. that afternoon. He prayed forgiveness for his tormentors, went through a sense of abandonment by God, and expired with "It is finished; Father, into your hands, I commit my spirit." Jesus had finished the work he had come to do — to die for the sins of the world. </p> <p> Jesus' body was hastily placed in a tomb by Joseph of [[Arimathea]] and Nicodemus, because the day ended at 6 p.m. according to Jewish reckoning and everything must be finished before the Sabbath. A seal was set on the tomb and the women were waiting for the Sabbath to end so they could prepare the body properly for permanent burial. </p> <p> <i> Jesus' [[Resurrection]] and [[Ascension]] </i> . Early on Sunday morning, when the women went to visit the tomb, they were startled to see that the tomb was empty and an angel announced the good news: "He has risen! He is not here" (&nbsp;Mark 16:6 ). There followed that day a confusing set of actions that included other visits to the tomb, visits to the apostles, and appearances of Jesus. Three of these appearances are especially noteworthy. First, Jesus appeared to two disciples as they were on their way out of town in utter dejection and nearing Emmaus. Jesus explained the Scriptures to them, especially the necessity of his suffering, in order to enter his glory (&nbsp;Luke 24:35 ). Jesus fellowshiped together with them and their eyes were opened to see the truth. Second, a special appearance was granted to the apostle Peter (&nbsp;Luke 24:34; cf. &nbsp;John 21:15-23 ) in order to strengthen him after his ignominious failure. Third, Jesus appeared to the eleven (minus Judas) in Jerusalem to show that the reports were true; he had, indeed, risen and was the same Jesus, now glorified. He was not a ghost or spirit, but risen in a body capable of being seen, touched, and participating in events related to this life (&nbsp;Luke 24:36-43 ). </p> <p> Other appearances followed over a period of forty days, both in Jerusalem and in Galilee. There were appearances to individuals, groups of individuals, and in one case to over five hundred people at one time (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:6 ). They occurred in various places and at various times of day. All of this was to remove any doubt whatsoever about the reality of what had taken place. Jesus had risen and the once fearful flock was now emboldened and empowered to preach the message of the risen Christ as the salvation of the world. In the end neither rejection, nor persecution, nor death could shake their conviction that Jesus had conquered death. He had risen, indeed. </p> <p> After forty days Jesus left this earth as miraculously as he had come. During the forty days Jesus had confirmed the fact of his resurrection, instructed his disciples about his new relationship to them, and promised them a new work by the Holy Spirit in their lives. His ascension was the return to his Father that he had spoken about (&nbsp;John 20:17 ) and the inauguration of his reign that would be consummated on this earth with his second coming (&nbsp;Acts 1:9-11 ). Thus began a new phase of Jesus' dealings with his followers. His physical presence was replaced by a spiritual presence (&nbsp;Matthew 28:20 ) as they set out to fulfill his last commission to them, to be witnesses unto the ends of the earth (&nbsp;Acts 1:8 ). </p> <p> <i> The Teaching of Jesus </i> . <i> The Search for the Real Words of Jesus </i> . The search for the real words of Jesus arose at the same time that the search for the real Jesus began, with the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century. With the collapse of confidence in the Gospels as infallible sources of information about Jesus came skepticism about what Jesus said as well. However, that did not come to the same degree or at the same time as skepticism about his life, the reason being it was easier to reinterpret what Jesus said in modern terms than many of the things he was recorded to have done. His walking on water or raising the dead could only be understood as ancient superstitions or myth. His statements about the kingdom of God or messiahship could rather easily be turned into modern ethical statements and made consistent with other religious teachings. </p> <p> The teaching of Jesus as understood by the "Old Quest" concerned individual piety, personal relations, and the social betterment of the world. The kingdom of God that Jesus proclaimed was understood to be the gradual improvement of society by permeating it with the lofty moral ideals of Jesus. This conception reached its classic statement in Adolf von Harnack's <i> What Is Christianity? </i> (1901) with his epitomizing Jesus' teachings as the Fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of all human beings, and the infinite value of the human soul. </p> <p> It was [[Johannes]] Weiss ( <i> Jesus' Teaching on the [[Kingdom]] of God, </i> 1892) and [[Albert]] Schweitzer ( <i> The Quest of the Historical Jesus, </i> 1903) who helped bring an end to this understanding of Jesus' words by pointing out that just as Jesus as a person did not fit into modern categories, neither did his message. Jesus was not a Kantian ethicist, but rather an ancient apocalyptic prophet, proclaiming the end of the age with the coming of an enigmatic figure called the "Son of Man." </p> <p> The existentialist underpinnings of both the Bultmannian rejection of the Old Quest and the subsequent New Quest of the Historical Jesus made the search for Jesus' real words theologically secondary. The primary importance of Jesus' words—what we may know of them—is to challenge us to new life or a new self-understanding. Taken in their historical context Jesus' words were nothing more than what historical research could show them to be, whether rabbinic, apocalyptic, esoteric, or basically indeterminate. But as used by God, they become an existential challenge to our smug self-satisfaction and a call to encounter the living God. </p> <p> The need to know what Jesus really said did not go away, however, and many in the New Quest and the subsequent "Third Quest" went back to the task of seeking Jesus' real words. There was a problem, however. The problem was now, in the light of developed Gospel studies, how to sift the material so that later additions and changes made by the church communities, the redactors, the legend-making propensities of the time, the oral transmitters of the tradition and the final "author" of the finished gospel can be set aside, leaving us only what Jesus really said. So the search for criteria to distinguish the authentic from the inauthentic began. To date, no fewer than twenty-five such criteria have been suggested, some of them mutually exclusive, such as multiple source attestation, dissimilarity, consensus of scholars, multiple forms of a statement, and Palestinian environment. Interestingly, rather than create more confidence in the gospel materials, in general, this has brought about a greater skepticism. </p> <p> The recent "Jesus Seminar" has also taken a skeptical line on this. After working six years trying to answer the question "What did Jesus really say?" these seventy scholars published their results in <i> The Five Gospels: The Search for the [[Authentic]] Words of Jesus </i> (1993)—the fifth gospel being the apocryphal "Gospel of Thomas." They concluded "Eighty-two percent of the words ascribed to Jesus in the gospels were not actually spoken by him" ( <i> The Five Gospels, </i> p. 5). </p> <p> [[Responses]] to this excessive skepticism are now arising in such works as C. Blomberg's <i> The Historical Reliability of the Gospels </i> (1987), <i> Jesus Under Fire </i> (1995), eds. M. J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland, and <i> Is the New Testament Reliable? </i> by Paul Barnett. No doubt, the pendulum will swing back toward a more sensible position in the future. </p> <p> <i> The Teaching of Jesus. Jesus' Teaching Method </i> . Jesus was in every respect a master communicator. He employed methods that were sufficiently familiar to his hearers to make them comfortable but sufficiently different to arrest their attention. What struck them most forcefully of all, however, was the person himself—Jesus taught them as one having authority. It is hard to define, even inhuman terms, what authority really is, but in Jesus' case it is even more difficult, because his authority made claims that went beyond the merely human, causing those who heard him to exclaim "Who is this man?" At least three things combined to make Jesus' very presence an unsettling challenge, a call to decision. First and foremost, he embodied what he taught, and what he taught seemed clearly beyond human capacities. Yet he embodied those principles to the highest degree without any embarrassment or arrogance. Was he <i> more </i> than merely human?—that was the implied question on everyone's mind. Second, his teaching was derived solely from the Old Testament, which was, of course, God's Word, and it was mediated directly through himself; he identified directly with it. The rabbis found it necessary to bolster their interpretations by extensive references to one another. Jesus never quoted another rabbi. "You have heard it said, but I say unto you" is how Jesus taught. God's word and his own words merged into one. Third, Jesus' words were backed up by demonstrations of power. Anyone can claim anything, but only one with more than human authority can say to the waves "Be still" and have those waves obey him. </p> <p> Jesus' very presence caused the crowds to gather, but what he said caused them to gather as well. His teaching method was very much like the parables that he taught. It was designed to reveal enough of the truth to draw people it, but to conceal enough to cause people to stop and reflect. These people had heard biblical truth on many occasions; Jesus' task was to cause them to hear it afresh, perhaps even to hear it as a reality for the first time. To accomplish this Jesus would sometimes bury his meaning somewhere below the surface, so that people would have to dig for it. On other occasions, Jesus would use highly graphic language to make a point. It certainly caught their attention when he told them to take the plank out of their eye in order to see the speck in another's (&nbsp;Matthew 7:3-5 ) and called their religious leaders snakes (&nbsp;Matthew 23:33 ). Sometimes Jesus' words were seemingly self-contradictory ("The first will be last, and the last will be first" — &nbsp;Mark 10:31 ) and at times even shocking ("Cut off your hand cut off your foot" — &nbsp;Mark 9:42-48 ). In all of this, Jesus' creative use of language was designed to force his hearers to a decision. He knew that giving them information was not enough. They must be challenged to embody and act on that information in order for it to change them. When attempting to do that they would be forced to confront their own inabilities and cast themselves on God, which was Jesus' ultimate intention. So Jesus and his message and his method of delivery all blended together to challenge the people. They either believed or they were offended and left. </p> <p> <i> Jesus' View of God </i> . The foundation of everything that Jesus said and did was his conviction that God existed, knew what he was doing, and was involved in human affairs. From the very earliest time of Jesus' life of which we have record, he was in the house of God busy about his Father's affairs (&nbsp;Luke 2:46-49 ). Jesus lived in unbroken and immediate fellowship with God, virtually a life of prayer. He spent long periods of time in intimate communion with God and at critical junctures during his public career, such as his baptism, his transfiguration, his agony in the garden, and his death, God's presence was a vivid reality, more real than even the seemingly substantial reality around him. It was out of this profound personal experience that what Jesus had to say about God arose. He never doubted that God existed nor did it occur to him to attempt to prove that there was a God. All of Jesus' reassuring began with the fact of God and moved downward toward human affairs. He never started with an undefined human situation and argued his way to the conclusion that somehow God must be there. For him that God existed was a given. </p> <p> For Jesus, that God could be known personally, directly, and intimately was also a given. This meant that religious ritual and complicated ceremonial activity should not be inserted between a person and God. Too often these things become primary and the vision of God is obscured. The term that Jesus used most frequently to define what kind of person God is was heavenly Father. This term is found in the Old Testament, as, indeed, virtually everything Jesus says about God's nature and actions is, but it had become so vague by Jesus' time as to be almost meaningless. Consequently, Jesus emphasized this in order to make it alive for us once more. Jesus' chief concern was to renew in the people of his day a sense of the divine reality—the presence of a personal, loving God, who is our heavenly Father. It is for this reason that Jesus never mentioned what might be called the harder aspects of God's being, calling God King or Judge. He knew very well that God was both King and Judge, but he wanted people to know that a heavenly Father ruled and judged. </p> <p> The attributes, or qualities, that God possesses are all derived from God's self-revelation in the Old Testament and can be verified anew in the life of the believer. God is good, glorious, true, loving, giving, righteous, perfect, all-powerful, all-knowing, wise, and sovereign, to mention just a few. Sometimes these are stated as abstract theological truth or fact (e.g., "All things are possible with God" — &nbsp;Mark 10:27 ) but most often they are related to concrete human situations. God, in the totality of his being, is vitally concerned with human beings in every aspect of their lives, from the number of hairs on their head, to the need for daily bread, to their eternal salvation. </p> <p> It was Jesus' supreme desire that people know God as he really is once more. He set out to accomplish this by offering himself as the unique embodiment of that reality and introducing them to the one true God, their heavenly Father. </p> <p> <i> The Kingdom of God </i> . That God existed was the essence of Jesus' teaching; that God ruled over the world he had created was the way in which what might have been simply an abstract idea (God is) was concretely related to everyday human life. The term Jesus chose to express this understanding was the "kingdom of God." This was no new idea, but drawn directly from the Old Testament (&nbsp;1 Chronicles 16:31; &nbsp;Psalm 9:7-8; &nbsp;97:1 ). What Jesus wanted the people to see was that the reign of God had been brought down from heaven to earth in the work that he was doing and in the gospel of salvation that he was preaching. </p> <p> What was this kingdom that Jesus was proclaiming? Primarily, it was a spiritual realm or reality where God's will was being accomplished and people were invited to enter it. It was not restricted to one small nation or geographical place, but included everything. God exercised his sovereignty everywhere. But Jesus was proclaiming more than just the generalized providence of God. Jesus was preaching the kingdom as the realm where God's saving will was being done. In this sense the kingdom of God was nothing less than eternal salvation. To be in the kingdom was to be saved; to refuse entrance into the kingdom was to be lost. </p> <p> Another important aspect of the kingdom as Jesus proclaimed it was that it is both a present and a future reality. In Jewish theology the kingdom was commonly understood to be arriving at the end of this sinful age. When this world ends, the kingdom of God will begin. For Jesus the kingdom is both present and future. We may enter into God's eternal salvation now and begin to experience its benefits at this present time, while still living in this fallen age. From now until the end of this age we will be in the world but not of it. But the kingdom is also future, in that, when this age ends only the kingdom will remain. So we look forward to that day when God will be all in all and pray "Your kingdom come." </p> <p> Many things are said by Jesus about entering into the kingdom. The simplest way to say it was repent and believe the gospel (&nbsp;Mark 1:14-15 ). In another instance Jesus said we must be converted and become like little children (&nbsp;Matthew 18:3 ). To [[Nicodemus]] he says "you must be born again" (&nbsp;John 3:3 ). Jesus likens this to entering through a narrow gate (&nbsp;Matthew 7:13-14 ) and building a house upon a rock (&nbsp;Matthew 7:24-27 ). It is of such immense value that we should be willing to sacrifice anything for it (&nbsp;Matthew 18:8-9 ), hard as that might be, as it was for the rich young man (&nbsp;Matthew 19:23-24 ). When Jesus' disciples asked how then anyone could be saved, his answer was, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" (&nbsp;Matthew 19:26 ), which is the whole point. To enter the kingdom by our own effort is impossible; it takes the renewing power of God to make us new people and establish us in God's kingdom. </p> <p> <i> [[Salvation]] as New Life in God's Kingdom </i> . When, by the renewing grace of God, one enters the kingdom, that person is converted, born again, made new, and a whole new life begins. The newness of life is not an option, but a fact. Being in the kingdom means being new. If there is no newness of life, regardless of what one says—even, "Lord, Lord" (&nbsp;Matthew 7:21)—;that person is not truly known by God. Jesus likens this to a bush or a tree. Good trees produce good fruit, bad trees produce bad fruit (&nbsp;Matthew 7:16-20 ). </p> <p> Jesus' mission was that we might have life at its fullest (&nbsp;John 10:10 ) and that is to be found in the kingdom. Life outside the kingdom is not really life at all. Throughout his teaching Jesus contrasted true life in the kingdom and false life on the outside. Those outside the kingdom imagine that the true purpose of life is to amass possessions, or gain status, or appear pious, or see the fruits of our human endeavors, or achieve some inner self-realization. None of these things embody the essence of true life. Life does not consist of the abundance of our possessions (&nbsp;Luke 12:15-21 ) and we are not to store up for ourselves treasures on earth (&nbsp;Matthew 6:19-20 ). Nor does life consist of our privileged position or status no matter how exalted that might be (&nbsp;Matthew 21:43; &nbsp;Luke 11:27-28 ). Even outward piety and religious correctness are of no value in defining what life is (&nbsp;Matthew 6:16 ). As for human endeavor, what profit would there be if we gained the whole world and lost our soul in the process (&nbsp;Mark 8:36-37 )? And the one who seeks to fulfill life by saving it, will in fact lose it (&nbsp;Mark 8:35 ). All of the values that are operative in the world are to be left behind when one enters the kingdom. There is an entirely different set of values operating that in fact reverse the values of the world. </p> <p> The new life that Jesus offers when we enter the kingdom is like an inexhaustible well of water within us that refreshes us in this life and springs up into life eternal (&nbsp;John 4:13-14; &nbsp;7:37-38 ). The most characteristic feature of the new being that we have become is love. We are to love God with all of our being as or highest priority (&nbsp;Mark 12:30 ). The second requirement of living in the kingdom is to love our neighbor as well (&nbsp;Mark 12:31 ). The transformed heart is able to do what humanly cannot be done. We are enabled to dethrone ourselves and our own ambitions and give God his proper place in our lives and see him reflected in those around us (&nbsp;Matthew 25:44-45 ). A new set of positive spiritual qualities replaces the destructive, self-defeating characteristics of the old life. Jesus summarizes these in the [[Beatitudes]] as poverty of spirit, meekness, desire for righteousness, mercy, purity of heart, the ability to bring peace, and the ability to love and forgive those who revile us (&nbsp;Matthew 5:1-12 ). All of these spiritual qualities will express themselves in concrete action toward those around us, even our enemies, and in doing this we will be showing that we are true children of our heavenly Father, who also loves in this way (&nbsp;Matthew 5:43-48 ). </p> <p> <i> [[Humanity]] and [[Sin]] </i> . In Jesus' teaching there is no finely developed doctrine of the human person and of sin. He was too busy dealing with the practical consequences of humanity's weaknesses and sinfulness to spend much time speculating about it. He had compassion on the crowds, seeing them as sheep without a shepherd (&nbsp;Mark 6:34 ). It is possible, however, to draw together what Jesus did say and get a rather clear picture of what he taught. </p> <p> The most fundamental thing to be said about human beings is that they are created by God. When this is understood, everything else falls into its proper place. As creatures of God, we are not answerable to ourselves or to anyone else, but to God. We do not own ourselves, or define ourselves, or live for ourselves, but rather for God. By the same token, we cannot own someone else or define them either. We are all alike in our creaturely status, made in God's image and responsible for one another to God. Being made by God, we must find out what God intended us to be, if we are to fulfill our true destiny. It is only when we live up to what he intended that we find out who we really are. For Jesus, the finding of our true selves will take place only in the kingdom of God, which is our true home. </p> <p> Jesus taught that all human beings are valuable (&nbsp;Matthew 10:31; &nbsp;12:11-12 ), we are not to be anxious about our lives and the necessities of life. We have a heavenly Father who knows our needs and has made provision for them (&nbsp;Matthew 6:25-33 ). Even the hairs of our head are numbered (&nbsp;Matthew 10:30 ). God does not discriminate, but sends his blessings, rain and sun, upon the just and the unjust alike (&nbsp;Matthew 5:45 ). Because we are valued by God, we can value ourselves and others, and relax in the knowledge that God cares infinitely for us and has our best interest at heart. </p> <p> That we are sinful was also taught by Jesus. He made no special point of emphasizing this. It was simply taken for granted (&nbsp;Matthew 7:11 ). What is extraordinary about Jesus' attitude is that he did not see this as an ultimate barrier between us and God but as a platform from which to rise. Indeed, we must start with the frank recognition of our helplessness if we are to make any progress at all. "I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance, " is how Jesus put it (&nbsp;Luke 5:32 ). Jesus saw the tragic consequences of sin everywhere, rebuked the self-righteous who would not acknowledge their own sinfulness, and severely criticized those who caused other people to sin (&nbsp;Luke 17:1-2 ). But Jesus looked beyond sin to the ultimate intention of God for us. Our sinfulness is not the essence of what we are but rather a distortion of that essence. Salvation in God's kingdom restores us to what God intended us to be. </p> <p> <i> [[Eschatology]] </i> . Eschatology is the doctrine of the last things and deals with the ultimate fate of both the individual and the universe. Jesus had much to say on both aspects of this subject, but never as an attempt to satisfy mere curiosity. He always spoke in terms of the subject's profound significance and of the effect it should have on our life as we live it now. What awaits the individual is death, the intermediate state, the resurrection of the body, the last judgment, and the eternal state in heaven or hell. What awaits the universe, in particular the world in which we live, is the events leading up to the end of the age, the second coming of the Messiah, the millennial age, the renovation of this world order, and the final state of the cosmos. Personal and cosmic eschatology intersect at the point of the messiah's second coming when the resurrection of the just and the last judgment occur. There will be one generation of people, the very last, who experience both personal and cosmic eschatology at the same time. Many theologians, from the earliest days of the church until now, do not believe Jesus taught a millennial age for this earth, so they would telescope the return of Christ, the resurrection of the just and the unjust, the last judgment, the renovation of the universe, and entrance into the eternal state into one momentous event. </p> <p> Individuals, whether redeemed or unredeemed, will live out their lives in this age and pass through death to the intermediate state, there to await the end of the age, either in blessedness or in self-chosen separation from God (&nbsp;Luke 16:19-31 ). We will take with us into the afterlife what we are, either our redemption or our condemnation. Jesus speaks of no second chance after death or of any reincarnation to provide an opportunity for salvation in a second or third lifetime. Jesus speaks of the believer's death as in fact not being death at all, but a shift from a more limited interaction with God to a fulfillment of that, hence "whoever lives and believes in me will never die" (&nbsp;John 11:25-26 ). To the thief on the cross he says, "Today you will be with me in paradise" (&nbsp;Luke 23:43 ). The unbelievers, however, will die in their sins and cannot go where Jesus is (heaven) because they have refused the salvation of God (&nbsp;John 3:18,36; &nbsp;8:21-24 ). </p> <p> This age continues on until it is brought to a close with the second coming of Christ. Jesus was asked by his disciples to explain all of this and much of what he said is found in the so-called [[Olivet]] [[Discourse]] (&nbsp;Matthew 24-25 ). There he outlines the conditions that will prevail until this age ends and some of the events that must take place before that occurs, such as apostasy (&nbsp;Matthew 24:10 ), false christs (&nbsp;Matthew 24:11,24 ), increase of evil (&nbsp;Matthew 24:12 ), wars and rumors of wars (&nbsp;Matthew 24:8 ) and the worldwide proclamation of the gospel (&nbsp;Matthew 24:14 ). The exact time of Jesus' second coming is unknown to us (&nbsp;Matthew 24:42; &nbsp;25:13 ); it will be sudden (&nbsp;Mark 13:33-36 ) and unexpected (&nbsp;Matthew 24:44 ), like a thief in the night (&nbsp;Matthew 24:42-44 ). </p> <p> When Jesus returns at the end of the age, it will be from heaven in great glory, accompanied by angels, to gather his saints together for the new age that is arriving (&nbsp;Matthew 24:29-31 ). It is at this point that the resurrection takes place (&nbsp;Mark 12:26-27; &nbsp;Luke 20:37-38; &nbsp;John 5:21-29; &nbsp;6:39-40 ). Some theologians make this a general resurrection, in which both the saved and the lost are raised. At this point also the last judgment takes place that Jesus frequently spoke of in general terms to emphasize the contrast between the saved and the lost, such as the parables of the net (&nbsp;Matthew 13:47-50 ), the sheep and the goats (&nbsp;Matthew 25:31-46 ), and the wheat and the weeds (&nbsp;Matthew 13:24-43 ). The judgment will be based upon the use of our opportunities on earth (&nbsp;Matthew 11:20-24; &nbsp;16:27; &nbsp;Luke 12:42-48 ). </p> <p> After the millennial reign on earth (&nbsp;Matthew 5:5; &nbsp;19:27-28; &nbsp;25:34; &nbsp;Luke 22:29-30 ), the redeemed inherit eternal life in heaven (&nbsp;Matthew 6:19-21; &nbsp;Luke 10:20 ). Jesus calls this his father's house (&nbsp;John 14:2 ) and the place where he is (&nbsp;John 12:26; &nbsp;14:4; &nbsp;17:24 ). Those who have rejected the salvation that God offered to them will enter into a place of condemnation (&nbsp;John 5:29 ), anguish (&nbsp;Matthew 25:29-30 ), and destruction (&nbsp;Matthew 7:13 ). Jesus likens it to a burning furnace (&nbsp;Matthew 13:42 ) of eternal fire (&nbsp;Matthew 25:41 ), and calls it hell, where both body and soul are destroyed (&nbsp;Matthew 10:28 ). </p> <p> The heavens and earth all pass away in accordance with Jesus' word (&nbsp;Matthew 5:18; &nbsp;24:35 ) and the final state begins. The Gospels do not record exactly what Jesus said about the new heavens and the new earth that is to come but no doubt his two apostles, Peter (&nbsp;2 Peter 3:10-13 ) and John (&nbsp;Revelation 21:1-22:6 ), reflect this when they speak of the glories to come. </p> <p> <i> Jesus' [[Understanding]] of Himself </i> . The Jesus who is presented to us by the four Gospels is a figure who defies purely human characterization. The only conclusion the rest of the New Testament can draw with respect to him is that he was in fact Immanuel, God with us (&nbsp;Matthew 1:23; &nbsp;John 1:1,18; &nbsp;20:28; &nbsp;Romans 9:5; &nbsp;Colossians 1:19; &nbsp;Titus 2:13; &nbsp;Revelation 19:16 ). Jesus was a human being, fully human in every way, but was vastly more than that, and that "moreness" could only be understood as essential deity. Jesus was nothing less than an incarnation of the eternal God himself. But the question arises, What did Jesus claim about this? Did he see himself as in some way an incarnation of God? If the Gospels are taken at face value, the answer must be yes. Modern critical scholarship denies this by asserting that the early church, convinced by its "Easter faith" that Jesus was something exceptional, altered his historical utterances and made up yet others reflecting this and then read them back into the life of this historical Jesus, a Jesus who never made such claims. This theory is based on the presupposition that Jesus could not be more than human and that God could not have become incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth. If, however, one does not categorically reject that possibility, then Jesus' claims, the teaching of the Gospels, and the rest of the New Testament paint a consistent picture that challenges the confronted person to the utmost. Is Jesus or is Jesus not the ultimate revelation and embodiment of the eternal God? The challenge was no different two thousand years ago than it is today. </p> <p> The evidence for the uniqueness of Jesus as presented in the Gospels falls into two categories: those things that Jesus did not say and do and those things that he did in fact say and do. Both sets point to Jesus as unique among us. </p> <p> <i> What Jesus did not say and do </i> . Simply put, Jesus never put himself in the same category as other human beings. What he was with respect to God was something he was alone; he never invited anyone to share his relationship with God. Consequently, Jesus never said to his disciples, Let us worship God together; Let us put our faith in God; Let us pray together; Let us trust or hope in God. Jesus never asked forgiveness from God, nor showed any awareness of sin in his life. He never called God his savior, as though he needed saving. Jesus never even called God Father or God and included his followers. It is always "your heavenly Father; your God" and "my Father; my God." He never used an expression that includes them, such as our Father, our God, our faith, our trust. The one time he did use an expression like that was to accentuate the difference that existed between him and his followers. When asked by his disciples to teach them to pray, he said to them, "This is how you should pray, our Father " (&nbsp;Matthew 6:9-13 ), but he himself never prayed that with them. When he did pray, it was as one wholly apart, as at the transfiguration (&nbsp;Luke 9:28-36 ). Jesus knew that he was not simply one of us and never invited us to become what he was, nor did he put himself in the same category that he put us. </p> <p> <i> What Jesus claimed for himself </i> . When asked about his origin, Jesus said "I am from above I am not of this world I came from God and now am here You are from below You are of this world" (&nbsp;John 8:21-23,42 ); "I have come down from heaven I am the bread that came down from heaven" (&nbsp;John 6:32-42 ). He who has come down from heaven is the only one who has ever known God (&nbsp;John 6:46 ) and those who have seen him, have seen the Father (&nbsp;John 14:8-11 ) because he and the Father are one (&nbsp;John 10:30-33 ). At another point Jesus startles his hearers by claiming to be the "I Am" who antedated [[Abraham]] and spoke to [[Moses]] in the desert (&nbsp;John 8:54-59 ). The Gospel of John also provides a series of supernatural claims by Jesus based on the "I Am" formula—I am the bread of life (6:35), the light of the world (8:12), the gate for the sheep (10:7), the good shepherd (10:11), the resurrection and the life (11:25), the true vine (15:1), and the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). All of these claims are deeply rooted in God's revelation of himself in the Old Testament and are claims by Jesus to represent deity. </p> <p> In other instances Jesus exercised God's authority in forgiving sins (&nbsp;Mark 2:1-12; &nbsp;Luke 7:44-49 ) and accepted honors that are due to God alone, such as prayer, praise, and worship (&nbsp;Matthew 14:33; &nbsp;15:25; &nbsp;21:15-16; &nbsp;28:9,17 ). </p> <p> The Scriptures were understood by Jesus and the Jews of his day to be the Word of God. Jesus claimed that the Scriptures spoke directly about him (&nbsp;John 5:39 ) and he was the fulfillment of its prophecies ( </p>

<p> The Lord and Saviour of mankind. He is called Christ (anointed, ) because he is anointed, furnished, and sent by God to execute his mediatorial office; and Jesus (Saviour, ) because he came to save his people from their sins. For an account of his nativity, offices, death, resurrection, &c. the reader is referred to those articles in this work. We shall here more particularly consider his divinity, humanity, and character. The divinity of Jesus Christ seems evident, if we consider, </p> <p> 1. The language of the New Testament, and compare it with the state of the Pagan world at the time of its publication. If Jesus Christ were not God, the writers of the New Testament discovered great injudiciousness in the choice of their words, and adopted a very incautions and dangerous style. The whole world, except the small kingdom of Judea, worshipped idols at the time of Jesus Christ's appearance. Jesus Christ; the evangelists, who wrote his history; and the apostles, who wrote epistles to various classes of men, proposed to destroy idolatry, and to establish the worship of one only living and true God. To effect this purpose, it was absolutely necessary for these founders of [[Christianity]] to avoid confusion and obscurity of language, and to express their ideas in a cool and cautious style. </p> <p> The least expression that would tend to deify a creature, or countenance idolatry, would have been a source of the greatest error. Hence Paul and [[Barnabas]] rent their clothes at the very idea of the multitude's confounding the creature with the Creator, &nbsp;Acts 14:1-28 : The writers of the New Testament knew that in speaking of Jesus Christ, extraordinary caution was necessary; yet, when we take up the New Testament, we find such expressions as these: "The word was God, &nbsp; John 1:1 . God was manifest in the flesh, &nbsp;1 Timothy 3:16 . God with us, &nbsp;Matthew 1:23 . The Jews crucified the Lord of glory, &nbsp;1 Corinthians 2:8 . Jesus Christ is Lord of all, &nbsp;Acts 10:36 . Christ is over all; God blessed for ever, Rom.ix. 5." These are a few of many propositions, which the New Testament writers lay down relative to Jesus Christ. If the writers intended to affirm the divinity of Jesus Christ, these are words of truth and soberness; if not, the language is incautious and unwarrantable; and to address it to men prone to idolatry, for the purpose of destroying idolatry, is a strong presumption against their inspiration. It is remarkable, also, that the richest words in the Greek language are made use of to describe Jesus Christ. This language, which is very copious, would have afforded lower terms to express an inferior nature; but it could have afforded none higher to express the nature of the [[Supreme]] God. </p> <p> It is worthy of observation, too, that these writers addressed their writings not to philosophers and scholars, but to the common people, and consequently used words in their plain popular signification. The common people, it seems, understood the words in our sense of them; for in the Dioclesian persecution, when the Roman soldiers burnt a Phrygian city inhabited by Christians; men, women, and children submitted to their fate, calling upon Christ, THE GOD OVER ALL. </p> <p> 2. Compare the style of the New Testament with the state of the Jews at the time of its publication. In the time of Jesus Christ, the Jews were zealous defenders of the unity of God, and of that idea of his perfections which the Scriptures excited. Jesus Christ and his apostles professed the highest regard for the Jewish Scriptures; yet the writers of the New Testament described Jesus Christ by the very names and titles by which the writers of the Old Testament had described the Supreme God. Compare &nbsp;Exodus 3:14 . with &nbsp;John 8:58 . Is. 44: 6. with &nbsp;Revelation 1:11; &nbsp;Revelation 1:17 . &nbsp;Deuteronomy 10:17 . with &nbsp;Revelation 17:14 . &nbsp;Psalms 24:10 . with &nbsp;1 Corinthians 2:8 . &nbsp;Hosea 1:7 . with &nbsp;Luke 2:1-52 . &nbsp;Daniel 5:23 . with &nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:47 . &nbsp;1 Chronicles 29:11 . with &nbsp;Colossians 2:10 . If they who described Jesus Christ to the Jews by these sacred names and titles intended to convey an idea of his deity, the description is just and the application safe; but if they intended to describe a mere man, they were surely of all men the most preposterous. They chose a method of recommending Jesus to the Jews the most likely to alarm and enrage them. Whatever they meant, the Jews understood them in our sense, and took Jesus for a blasphemer, &nbsp;John 10:33 . </p> <p> 3. Compare the perfections which are ascribed to Jesus Christ in the Scriptures, with those which are ascribed to God. Jesus Christ declares, "All things that the Father hath are mine, " &nbsp;John 16:15 . a very dangerous proposition, if he were not God. The writers of revelation ascribe to him the same perfections which they ascribe to God. Compare &nbsp;Jeremiah 10:10 . with &nbsp;Isaiah 9:6 . &nbsp;Exodus 15:13 . with &nbsp;Hebrews 1:8 . &nbsp;Jeremiah 32:19 . with Is. 9: 6. &nbsp;Psalms 102:24; &nbsp;Psalms 102:27 . with &nbsp;Hebrews 13:8 . &nbsp;Jeremiah 23:24 . with &nbsp;Ephesians 1:20; &nbsp;Ephesians 1:23 . &nbsp;1 Samuel 2:5 . with &nbsp;John 14:30 . If Jesus Christ be God, the ascription of the perfections of God to him is proper; if he be not, the apostles are chargeable with weakness or wickedness, and either would destroy their claim of inspiration. </p> <p> 4. [[Consider]] the works that are ascribed to Jesus Christ, and compare them with the claims of Jehovah. Is creation a work of God? "By Jesus Christ were all things created, " &nbsp;Colossians 1:1-29 . Is preservation a work of God? "Jesus Christ upholds all things by the word of his power, " &nbsp;Hebrews 1:3 . Is the mission of the prophets a work of God? Jesus Christ is the Lord God of the holy prophets; and it was the Spirit of Christ which testified to them beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow, &nbsp;Nehemiah 9:30 . &nbsp;Revelation 22:6; &nbsp;Revelation 22:16 . &nbsp;1 Peter 1:11 . Is the salvation of sinners a work of God? Christ is the Saviour of all that believe, &nbsp;John 4:42 . &nbsp;Hebrews 5:9 . Is the forgiveness of sin a work of God? The Son of Man hath power to forgive sins, &nbsp;Matthew 9:6 . The same might be said of the illumination of the mind; the sanctification of the heart; the resurrection of the dead: the judging of the world; the glorification of the righteous; the eternal punishment of the wicked; all which works, in one part of Scripture, are ascribed to God; and all which, in another part of Scripture, are ascribed to Jesus Christ. Now, if Jesus Christ be not God, into what contradictions these writers must fall! They contradict one another: they contradict themselves. Either Jesus Christ is God, or their conduct is unaccountable. </p> <p> 5. Consider that divine worship which Scriptures claim for Jesus Christ. It is a command of God, "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve, " &nbsp;Matthew 4:20 . yet the Scriptures command "all the angels of God to worship Christ, " &nbsp;Hebrews 1:6 . Twenty times, in the New Testament, grace, mercy, and peace, are implored of Christ, together with the Father. Baptism is an act of worship performed in his name, &nbsp;Matthew 28:19 . [[Swearing]] is an act of worship; a solemn appeal in important cases to the omniscient God; and this appeal is made to Christ, &nbsp;Romans 9:1 . The committing to the soul to God at death is a sacred act of worship: in the performance of this act, [[Stephen]] died, saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit, &nbsp;Acts 7:59 . The whole host of heaven worship him that sitteth upon the throne, and the Lamb, for ever and ever, &nbsp;Revelation 5:14; &nbsp;Revelation 15:1-8 : </p> <p> 6. [[Observe]] the application of Old Testament passages which belong to Jehovah, to Jesus in the New Testament, and try whether you can acquit the writers of the New Testament of misrepresentation, on supposition that Jesus is not God. St. Paul says, "We shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ." That we shall all be judged, we allow; but how do you prove that Christ shall be our Judge? Because, adds the apostle, it is written, "As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God, " &nbsp;Romans 14:10-11 , with Is. 45: 20, &c. What sort of reasoning is this? How does this apply to Christ, if Christ be not God? And how dare a man quote one of the most guarded passages in the Old Testament for such a purpose? John the Baptist is he who was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, [[Prepare]] ye the way, &nbsp;Matthew 3:1; &nbsp;Matthew 3:3 . Isaiah saith, Prepare ye the way of THE LORD; make straight a highway for OUR GOD, Is. 40: 3, &c. But what has John the Baptist to do with all this description if Jesus Christ be only a messenger of Jehovah, and not Jehovah himself? for Isaiah saith, Prepare ye the way of Jehovah. Compare also &nbsp;Zechariah 12:10 . with &nbsp;John 19:1-42 . Is. 6: with &nbsp;John 12:39 . Is. 8: 13, 14. with &nbsp;1 Peter 2:8 . Allow Jesus Christ to be God, and all these applications are proper. If we deny it, the New Testament, we must own is one of the most unaccountable compositions in the world, calculated to make easy things hard to be understood. </p> <p> 7. [[Examine]] whether events have justified that notion of Christianity which the prophets gave their countrymen of it, if Jesus Christ be not God. The calling of the Gentiles from the worship of idols to the worship of the one living and true God, is one event, which, the prophets said, the coming of the Messiah should bring to pass. If Jesus Christ be God, the event answers the prophecy; if not, the event is not come to pass, for Christians in general worship Jesus, which is idolatry, if he be not God, &nbsp;Isaiah 2:1-22 : &nbsp; Zephaniah 2:11 . &nbsp;Zechariah 14:9 . the primitive Christians certainly worshipped Him as God. Pliny, who was appointed governor of the province of [[Bithynia]] by the emperor Trajan, in the year 103, examined and punished several Christians for their non-conformity to the established religion of the empire. In a letter to the emperor, giving an account of his conduct, he declares, "they affirmed the whole of their guilt, or their error, was that they met on a certain slated day, before it was light, and addressed themselves in a form of prayer to Christ as to some God." </p> <p> Thus Pliny meant to inform the emperor that Christians worshipped Christ. Justin Martyr, who lived about 150 years after Christ, asserts, that the Christians worshipped the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Besides his testimony, there are numberless passages in the fathers that attest the truth in question; especially in Tertullian, Hippolytus, Felix, &c. Mahomet, who lived in the sixth century, considers Christians in the light of infidels and idolaters throughout the Koran; and indeed, had not Christians worshipped Christ, he could have had no shadow of a pretence to reform their religion, and to bring them back to the worship of one God. That the far greater part of Christians have continued to worship Jesus, will not be doubted; now, if Christ be not God, then the Christians have been guilty of idolatry; and if they have been guilty of idolatry, then it must appear remarkable that the apostles, who foretold the corruptions of Christianity, &nbsp;2 Timothy 3:1-17 : should never have foreseen nor warned us against worshiping Christ. In no part of the Scripture is there the least intimation of Christians falling into idolatry in this respect. Surely if this had been an error which was so universally to prevail, those Scriptures which are able to make us wise unto salvation, would have left us warning on so important a topic. Lastly, consider what numberless passages of Scripture have no sense, or a very absurd one, if Jesus Christ be a mere man. </p> <p> See &nbsp;Romans 1:3 . &nbsp;1 Timothy 3:16 . &nbsp;John 14:9; &nbsp;John 17:5 . &nbsp;Philippians 2:6 . &nbsp;Psalms 110:1; &nbsp;Psalms 110:4 . &nbsp;1 Timothy 1:2 . &nbsp;Acts 22:12; &nbsp;Acts 9:17 . </p> <p> But though Jesus Christ be God, yet for our sakes, and for our salvation, he took upon him human nature; this is therefore called his humanity. Marcion, Apelles, Valentinus, and many other heretics, denied Christ's humanity, as some have done since. But that Christ had a true human body, and not a mere human shape, or a body that was not real flesh, is very evident from the sacred Scriptures, Is. 7: 12. &nbsp;Luke 24:39 . &nbsp;Hebrews 2:14 . &nbsp;Luke 1:42 . &nbsp;Philippians 2:7-8 . &nbsp;John 1:14 . Besides, he ate, drank, slept, walked, worked, and was weary, He groaned, bled, and died, upon the cross. It was necessary that he should thus be human, in order to fulfil the divine designs and prophecies respecting the shedding of his blood for our salvation, which could not have been done had he not possessed a real body. It is also as evident that he assumed our whole nature, soul as well as body. If he had not, he could not have been capable of that sore amazement and sorrow unto death, and all those other acts of grieving, feeling, rejoicing, &c. ascribed to him. It was not, however, our sinful nature he assumed, but the likeness of it, &nbsp;Romans 8:2 . for he was without sin, and did no iniquity. His human nature must not be confounded with his divine; for though there be an union of natures in Christ, yet there is not a mixture or confusion of them or their properties. </p> <p> His humanity is not changed into his deity, nor his deity into humanity; but the two natures are distinct in one person. How this union exists is above our comprehension; and, indeed, if we cannot explain how our own bodies and souls are united, it is not to be supposed we can explain this astonishing mystery of God manifest in the flesh. </p> <p> See MEDIATOR. We now proceed to the character of Jesus Christ, which, while it affords us the most pleasing subject for meditation., exhibits to us an example of the most perfect and delightful kind. "Here, " as an elegant writer observes "every grace that can recommend religion, and every virtue that can adorn humanity, are so blended, as to excite our admiration, and engage our love. In abstaining from licentious pleasures, he was equally free from ostentatious singularity and churlish sullenness. When he complied with the established ceremonies of his countrymen, that compliance was not accompanied by any marks of bigotry or superstition: when he opposed their rooted prepossessions, his opposition was perfectly exempt from the captious petulance of a controversialist, and the undistinguishing zeal of an innovator. His courage was active in encountering the dangers to which he was exposed, and passive under the aggravated calamities which the malice of his foes heaped upon him: his fortitude was remote from every appearance of rashness, and his patience was equally exempt from abject pusillanimity: he was firm without obstinacy, and humble without meanness. </p> <p> Though possessed of the most unbounded power, we behold him living continually in a state of voluntary humiliation and poverty; we see him daily exposed to almost every species of want and distress; afflicted without a comforter, persecuted without a protector; and wandering about, according to his own pathetic complaint, because he had not where to lay his head. Though regardless of the pleasures, and sometimes destitute of the comforts of life, he never provokes our disgust by the sourness of the misanthrope, or our contempt by the inactivity of the recluse. His attention to the welfare of mankind was evidenced not only by his salutary injunctions, but by his readiness to embrace every opportunity of relieving their distress and administering to their wants. In every period and circumstance of his life, we behold dignity and elevation blended with love and pity; something, which, though it awakens our admiration, yet attracts our confidence. We see power; but it is power which is rather our security than our dread; a poser softened with tenderness, and soothing while it awes. With all the gentleness of a meek and lowly mind, we behold an heroic firmness, which no terrors could restrain. In the private scenes of life, and in the public occupation of his ministry; whether the object of admiration or ridicule, of love or of persecution; whether welcomed with hosannas, or insulted with anathemas, we still see him pursuing with unwearied constancy the same end, and preserving the same integrity of life and manners. </p> <p> " White's Sermons, ser. 5. [[Considering]] him as a Moral Teacher, we must be struck with the greatest admiration. As Dr. Paley observes, "he preferred solid to popular virtues, a character which is commonly despised, to a character universally extolled, he placed, in our licentious vices, the check in the right place, viz. upon the thoughts; he collected human duty into two well-devised rules; he repeated these rules, and laid great stress upon them, and thereby fixed the sentiments of his followers; he excluded all regard to reputation in our devotion and alms, and, by parity of reason, in our other virtues; his instructions were delivered in a form calculated for impression; they were illustrated by parables, the choice and structure of which would have been admired in any composition whatever: he was free from the usual symptoms of enthusiasm, heat, and vehemence in devotion, austerity in institutions, and a wild particularity in the description of a future state; he was free also from the depravities of his age and country; without superstition among the most superstitious of men, yet not decrying positive distinctions or external observances, but soberly recalling them to the principle of their establishment, and to their place in the scale of human duties; there was nothing of sophistry or trifling, though amidst teachers, remarkable for nothing so much as frivolous subtilties and quibbling expositions: he was candid and liberal in his judgment of the rest of mankind, although belonging to a people who affected a separate claim to divine favour, and, in consequence of that opinion, prone to uncharitableness, partiality, and restriction; in his religion there was no scheme of building up a hierarchy, or of ministering to the views of human governments; in a word, there was every thing so grand in doctrine, and so delightful in manner, that the people might well exclaim </p> <p> Surely, never man spake like this man!" As to his example, bishop Newcome observes, "it was of the most perfect piety to God, and of the most extensive benevolence and the most tender compassion to men. He does not merely exhibit a life of strict justice, but of overflowing benignity. His temperance has not the dark shades of austerity; his meekness does not degenerate into apathy; his humility is signal, amidst a splendour of qualities more than human; his fortitude is eminent and exemplary in enduring the most formidable external evils, and the sharpest actual sufferings. His patience is invincible; his resignation entire and absolute. Truth and sincerity shine throughout his whole conduct. Though of heavenly descent, he shows obedience and affection to his earthly parents; he approves, loves, and attaches himself to amiable qualities in the human race; he respects authority, religious and civil; and he evidences regard for his country, by promoting its most essential good in a painful ministry dedicated to its service, by deploring its calamities, and by laying down his life for its benefit. Every one of his eminent virtues is regulated by consummate prudence: and he both wins the love of his friends, and extorts the approbation and wonder of his enemies. </p> <p> Never was a character at the same time so commanding and natural, so resplendent and pleasing, so amiable and venerable. There is a peculiar contrast in it between an awful greatness, dignity, and majesty, and the most conciliating loveliness, tenderness, and softness. He now converses with prophets, lawgivers, and angels; and the next instant he meekly endures the dulness of his disciples, and the blasphemies and rage of the multitude. He now calls himself greater than Solomon; one who can command legions of angels; and giver of life to whomsoever he pleaseth; the Son of God, who shall sit on his glorious throne to judge the world: at other times we find him embracing young children; not lifting up his voice in the streets, nor quenching the smoking flax; calling his disciples not servants, but friends and brethren, and comforting them with an exuberant and parental affection. Let us pause an instant, and fill our minds with the idea of one who knew all things, heavenly and earthly; searched and laid open the inmost recesses of the heart; rectified every prejudice, and removed every mistake of a moral and religious kind; by a word exercised a sovereignty over all nature, penetrated the hidden events of futurity, gave promises of admission into a happy immortality, had the keys of life and death, claimed an union with the Father; and yet was pious, mild, gentle, humble, affable, social, benevolent, friendly, and affectionate. Such a character is fairer than the morning star. Each separate virtue is made stronger by opposition and contrast: and the union of so many virtues forms a brightness which fitly represents the glory of that God 'who inhabiteth light inaccessible.'" </p> <p> See Robinson's Plea for the [[Divinity]] of Christ, from which many of the above remarks are taken; [[Bishop]] Bull's Judgment of the Catholic Church; Abbadie, Waterland, Hawker, and Hey, on the Divinity of Christ; Reader, Stackhouse, and Doyley's Lives of Christ; Dr. Jamieson's View of the [[Doctrine]] of Scripture, and the Primitive Faith concerning the Deity of Christ; Owen on the [[Glory]] of Christ's Person; Hurrion's Christ Crucified; Bishop Newcome's [[Observation]] on our Lord's Conduct; and Paley's Evidences of Christianity. </p>

<p> The believers of the New Testament did not first “read” Jesus Christ chronologically. That is, they did not set down to construct a doctrine called [[Christology]] that would move from preexistence to <i> parousia </i> (final coming). Rather, they were caught up in the historical reality of what God was doing for them and all the world through Jesus Christ. Looking at the different episodes of the Christ event should show the New Testament understanding of Jesus, God's Christ. </p> <p> Resurrection Jesus' resurrection grasped the early believers. The walk of the risen Christ with those burning hearts en route to Emmaus, the appearance of the risen Christ first to Mary Magdalene, the appearance and commissions of the risen Christ to His disciples—these things which no other experience can duplicate nor any other religious movement validate claimed the Christians' attention in an unforgetable way. People of the first century had seen people die before. None before or since had seen a person bring God's resurrection life to bear on this world's most pressing problem, death. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the center of the Christian gospel (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:1 ). </p> <p> The Death of Jesus Christ He who was raised on the first day of the week was the same as the One who had died three days earlier. His was not simply a natural death. It was a ritual murder carried out by the authorities of Rome, engineered by the religious leaders of that day, but made necessary by the sins of all who ever lived. Jesus was delivered up by His own people and put to death by a cruel political regime, but the earliest New Testament communities saw in this tragedy the determinate will of God (&nbsp;Acts 1-12 ). Paul connected Jesus' death to the sacrificial ideas of the Old Testament and saw in the giving of this life a vicarious act for all humankind. Jesus' death was a major stumbling block for Israel. How could God's Christ be “hung on a tree” and fall under the curse of the law (&nbsp;Galatians 3:1 ) when He did not deserve it. </p> <p> Jesus as Doer of God's Mighty Works This One who was raised, the same One who died, had performed the miracles of God's kingdom in our time and space. John testified that in the doing of God's mighty works Jesus was the prophet sent from God (&nbsp;John 6:14 ). He healed all kinds of persons, a sign of God's ultimate healing. He raised some from the dead, a sign that He would bring God's resurrection life to all who would receive it. He cast out evil spirits as a preview of God's final shutting away of the evil one (&nbsp;Revelation 20:1 ). He was Lord over nature, indicating that by His power God was already beginning to create a new heaven and a new earth (&nbsp;Revelation 21:1 ). The spectacular impact of His mighty works reinforced and called to mind the power of His teachings. </p> <p> Jesus' Teachings “Never man spake like this man” with such authority (&nbsp;John 7:46; compare &nbsp;Matthew 7:29 ). His teachings were about “the Father,” what He wanted, what He was like, what He would do for His creation. Jesus' teachings required absolute obedience and love for God and the kingdom of God. He dared claim that the kingdom had begun in His ministry but would not be culminated until Christ's final coming. Until that coming, Christians were to live in the world by the ethical injunctions He gave (&nbsp;Matthew 5-7 ) and in the kind of love He had shown and commanded (&nbsp;John 14-16 ). To help earthly people understand heavenly things, He spoke in parables. These parables were from realistic, real-life settings. They were about the kingdom of God—what it was like, what was required to live in it, what was the meaning of life according to its teachings, what the kingdom promised. One of the promises of the kingdom was that the King would return and rule in it. </p> <p> Jesus' Ultimate Coming Just as the first coming of Jesus Christ was according to prophecy, so the final coming of Christ is to be by divine promise and prediction. The earliest Christians expected Christ's coming immediately (&nbsp;1 Thessalonians 4:1 ). This must be the expectation of the churches in every age (&nbsp;Revelation 1-3 ). It was the same Jesus who ascended who will return (&nbsp;Acts 1:1 ). His return heralds the end and brings an end to the struggle of good and evil, the battle between the kingdoms of this world which must become the kingdom of our God and of His Christ (&nbsp;Revelation 11:15 ). In the meanwhile His followers must work to eat (&nbsp;2 Thessalonians 3:1 ). His followers must go and tell; His followers must unite the hope of eschatology and the life of ethics in a fashion that will share the gospel with all the world (&nbsp;Matthew 28:19-20 ). The time of His final coming is not a Christian's primary concern (&nbsp;Acts 1:5-6 ). Natural calamities, man-made tragedies, and great suffering will precede His coming (&nbsp;Matthew 13:1; &nbsp;Matthew 24-25 ). All of these will find His people faithful, even as He is to His promise—found faithful even as God was to God's promises in sending this Child of promise to the world. </p> <p> The Birth of Jesus Christ The Gospels began in the heart of God and in the resurrection faith of the writers, but Matthew and Luke begin with the story of Jesus' birth. His conception was virginal. His advent was announced by angels. His actual birth occurred in a place and time that seemed to be no place and time for a baby to be born. [[Angels]] announced. [[Shepherds]] heard, came, and wondered. Magi came later to bring gifts. A wrathful and jealous King (Herod) killed many innocent children hoping to find the right one. The “right One” escaped to Egypt. Upon returning, He went to Nazareth, was reared in the home of the man Joseph, was taken to Jerusalem where His knowledge of His Father's business surprised and inconvenienced them all—the doctors and the parents. At birth He seemed destined for death. At baptism He was sealed to be a suffering Messiah. Those were times in which He and the Father were working things out, so that when ministry came Jesus could “work the works of him that sent me, while it is day” (&nbsp;John 9:4 ). But Bethlehem was not the beginning of the story. </p> <p> Jesus' Preexistence [[Eternity]] began the story. If this one is the Son of God, then He must be tied on to the ancient people of God. He must be in the beginning. with God (&nbsp;John 1:1 ). Preexistence was not the first reflection of the early church about Jesus Christ, nor was it merely an afterthought. The purpose of Jesus' preexistence is to tie Him onto God and to what God had been doing through Israel. &nbsp;Matthew 1:1 established by His genealogy that Jesus is related to David, is related to Moses, is related to Abraham—one cannot be more integrally related to Israel than that. &nbsp; Luke 3:1 established by His genealogy that Jesus is vitally related to all humans. Jesus came from Mary; but ultimately He came from God via a lineage that extends back to Adam, who was the direct child of God. Paul spoke of the fully divine Son of God who came down from God, who redeems us, and who returns to God (&nbsp; Ephesians 3:1 ). This heavenly Christ emptied Himself and became like us for our sake (&nbsp;Philippians 2:1 ). God determined, before the foundation of the world, that the redemption of the world would be accomplished through Jesus, the Lord of Glory (&nbsp;Ephesians 1:1 ). John began a new [[Genesis]] with his bold assertion that “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God” (&nbsp;John 1:1 ). This Word (Greek, <i> logos </i> ) has become flesh (&nbsp;John 1:14 ) so that qualified witnesses can see, touch, and hear the revelation of God (&nbsp;1 John 1:1-4 ). It may have been in this way from resurrection to preexistence that early Christians stitched together, under the guidance of God, the story of Jesus. But His story lay also in His names, His titles, what He was called. </p> <p> The Names and Titles of Jesus Jesus' own proper name is a Greek version of the Hebrew “Joshua,” salvation is from Yahweh. His very name suggests His purpose. “He shall save his people from their sins” (&nbsp;Matthew 1:21 ). This One is Immanuel, God with us (&nbsp;Isaiah 7:14; &nbsp;Matthew 1:23 ). Mark began his brief Gospel in some manuscripts by introducing Jesus as the Son of God (&nbsp;Mark 1:1 ). Luke's shepherds knew Him as “a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord” (&nbsp;Luke 2:11 ). John pulled out all the stops in his melodic introduction of Jesus Christ: the Word who made the world (&nbsp;John 1:1-3 ), the Life (&nbsp;John 1:4 ), the Light (&nbsp;John 1:5 ), the Glory of God (&nbsp;John 1:14 ), One full of grace and truth (&nbsp;John 1:17 ), the Son who makes the Father known (&nbsp;John 1:18 ). Paul addressed Him as “the Lord”—the earliest Christian confession was that Jesus (is) Lord. The lordship of Christ is tied to the reverence for the name of God and is an assessment of Jesus' worth as well as Paul's relationship to Him. Since Christ is Lord ( <i> kurios </i> ), Paul is servant ( <i> doulos </i> ). The Gospels herald the message of the Son of Man, He who was humbled, who suffered, who will come again. Hebrews cast Jesus in the role of priest, God's great and final High Priest, who both makes the sacrifice and is the sacrifice. Thomas, known for his doubting, should also be remembered for faith's greatest application about Christ: “My Lord and my God” (&nbsp;John 20:28 ). The metaphors of John's Gospel invite us to reflect on Jesus Christ, God's great necessity. John portrays Jesus as the [[Water]] of life (&nbsp;John 4:14 ); the [[Bread]] of life (&nbsp;John 6:41 ); the Light (&nbsp;John 8:12 ); the [[Door]] (&nbsp;John 10:7 ); the Good [[Shepherd]] (&nbsp;John 10:11 ); the Resurrection and the Life (&nbsp;John 11:25 ); the Way, the Truth, the Life (&nbsp;John 14:6 ). </p> <p> Summary Christ is the way to God. His way of being in the world was a way of obedience, faithfulness, and service. The earliest Christians saw who He was in what He did. In the great deed of the cross they saw the salvation of the world. The inspired writers offered no physical descriptions of the earthly Jesus. The functional way the New Testament portrays Him is found in the statement that He was a man “who went about doing good” (&nbsp;Acts 10:38 ). The good that He did came into dramatic conflict with the evil all mankind has done. This conflict saw Him crucified, but a Roman soldier saw in this crucified One (the) Son of God (&nbsp;Mark 15:39 ). God did not “suffer thine Holy One to see corruption” (&nbsp;Acts 2:27 ). With the one shattering new act since creation, God raised Jesus from the dead. See Christ; Christology. </p> <p> J. [[Ramsey]] Michaels </p>

<p> '''Jesus Christ.''' The name of the Saviour, signifying his work and authority; Jesus (the Greek form of the Hebrew Joshua) means Jehovah saves, or Saviour, &nbsp;Matthew 1:21. Christ (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Messiah) means anointed. Jesus was his common, name during his life on earth) generally used in the gospels. Christ is his official name, frequently used alone or with Jesus in the epistles. Jesus occurs in the [[Bible]] 711 times; Christ 304 times; Jesus Christ, Lord Jesus Christ, and Christ Jesus (anointed Saviour), 244 times, and Messiah 4 times. He has many other titles and names in Scripture, as "Immanuel," &nbsp;Matthew 1:23; "Son of God," &nbsp;John 1:34; "Son of man," &nbsp;John 8:28; "Son of David," etc., &nbsp;Mark 10:47-48; in all, upwards of 100 titles, indicating his character, life, and work. </p> <p> The predictions concerning Christ were many—about 150 or more—and were made at various periods of Old Testament history. He was to be born in Bethlehem, a small village, &nbsp;Micah 5:2; he was to be a king with a universal and perpetual empire, &nbsp;Psalms 2:6; &nbsp;Psalms 45:2-7; &nbsp;Psalms 72:1-20; &nbsp;Isaiah 9:6-7; yet would be despised and rejected. &nbsp;Isaiah 53:1-12. He was to open the eyes of the blind and the ears of the deaf, &nbsp;Isaiah 35:5-6, and yet to be betrayed, sold and slain and his grave appointed with the wicked. Yet his sufferings should make many righteous. &nbsp;Isaiah 11:1-9; &nbsp;Isaiah 60:1-11. He was to do the work of a prophet, &nbsp;Isaiah 42:1-7; of a priest, &nbsp;Psalms 110:4; &nbsp;Zechariah 6:13; and of a king. &nbsp;Daniel 7:14. These predictions, and many others of like nature, were all fulfilled in Jesus the Son of Mary. </p> <p> He is the centre of all Jewish and Christian history; the "Holy of Holies" in the history of the world. There is space here for the briefest outline only of his human life, Ms mysterious person, and his work. </p> <p> His Life.—While Augustus was emperor of Rome, and Herod the Great king in Jerusalem, Jesus was born four years before 1 a.d., the Christian era having been fixed by Dionysius Exiguus of the sixth century, four years too late. Mary, a virgin, betrothed to Joseph of Nazareth, gave birth to Jesus at Bethlehem according to Micah's prophecy. &nbsp;Micah 5:2. Angels celebrated it with songs, and wise men from the East brought precious gifts to the new-born babe. To escape Herod's threats, the child Jesus was taken to Egypt, but later settled with his parents at Nazareth. Only one event of his childhood is known—a visit when 12 years old to Jerusalem, when he astonished the doctors by his words and questions. He was trained as other Jewish lads of his station. At three the boy was weaned, and wore for the first time the fringed or tasselled garment prescribed by &nbsp;Numbers 15:38-41 and &nbsp;Deuteronomy 22:12. His education began at first under the mother's care. At five he was to learn the law, at first by extracts written on scrolls of the more important passages, the Shemà or creed of &nbsp;Deuteronomy 2:4; the [[Hallel]] or festival psalms, &nbsp;Psalms 114:1-8; &nbsp;Psalms 118:1-29; &nbsp;Psalms 136:1-26, and by catechetical teaching in school. At 12 he became more directly responsible for Ms obedience to the law; and on the day when he attained the age of 13, put on for the first time the phylacteries which were worn at the recital of his daily prayer. In addition to this, Jesus learned the carpenter's trade of Joseph. </p> <p> Ministry.—His public ministry is usually regarded as lasting upwards of three years. John records more of the Judæan ministry, Luke more of his Peræan ministry, while Matthew and Mark give his Galilean ministry, as does Luke also. John the Baptist, in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, &nbsp;Luke 3:1, produced a deep impression by preaching repentance. Jesus sought baptism at his hands, and was tempted of the devil. He then went to Cana of Galilee, where he worked his first miracle at a wedding. With some disciples, he set out for Jerusalem to keep the passover. His first work was the cleansing of the temple from traffickers and money-changers—which he repeated near the close of his ministry. &nbsp;Matthew 21:12. He received a visit by night from Nicodemus. [[Presently]] the Baptist was thrown into prison and the Saviour withdrew to Galilee. On his way through Samaria he conversed with a woman at Jacob's well. At Nazareth ho was rejected by the people, and went to Capernaum, which henceforth became "his own city." Here he called Peter and Andrew and James and John, and made his first tour through Galilee, performing many miracles. Early in the second year of his ministry Jesus went up to Jerusalem to a feast of the Jews, &nbsp;John 5:1, and healed a lame man at the pool of Bethesda, explained the right use of the Sabbath, a subject which he resumed when his disciples were plucking ears of corn on Ms return to Galilee. When he reached the Sea of Galilee multitudes followed him. He appointed the twelve apostles and delivered the Sermon on the Mount, and commenced a second tour in Galilee, during which he delivered the series of parables in &nbsp;Matthew 13:1-58, stilled the storm on Galilee, healed the demoniacs of Gadara, raised the daughter of Jairus, and after other miracles came again to Nazareth, where he was again rejected. He then made a third tour in Galilee, and sent forth the apostles, giving the instructions recorded in &nbsp;Matthew 10:11. After an interval of some months the twelve returned, and with them he retired to the Sea of Galilee, fed the 5000, walked on the water, and delivered his sermon on the bread or life, &nbsp;John 6:1-71, in the synagogue at Capernaum. Early in the third year of his ministry, Jesus disputed with the Pharisees about eating with unwashed hands, and went toward the northwest, healed the daughter of the Syrophœnician woman, and then passed around to Decapolis, where he wrought many miracles and fed 4000. Near [[Cæsarea]] Philippi Peter made his confession of faith, and then Jesus foretold his own death and resurrection and the trials of Ms followers. The transfiguration followed, and the next morning the healing of an epileptic child. On the way back to Capernaum he again foretold his sufferings, and exhorted the disciples to humility, forbearance, and brotherly love. About this time he instructed and sent out the 70 on their mission. Then he left Galilee, and having cleansed ten lepers came to Jerusalem at the Feast of Tabernacles. &nbsp;John 7:2. Here he taught in public, and answered a lawyer's question with the parable of the Good Samaritan. The healing of the man born blind led to a long discourse, which aroused the rulers, and Jesus retired beyond Jordan. In Peræa, on his way to Jerusalem, he uttered the parables of the lost sheep, the unjust steward, the rich man and Lazarus, and the pharisee and the publican; five precepts concerning divorce: blessed little children; taught the rich young ruler. He raised Lazarus at Bethany. A third time he foretold his death and resurrection, and approaching Jericho healed blind men, called Zacchæus, and gave the parable of the pounds. He arrived at Bethany six days before the passover. At supper, in Simon's house, he is anointed. At the beginning of the last week before the crucifixion Jesus made a public entry into the city, spoke parables and warnings, lamented over Jerusalem, praised the widow's mite, met certain Greeks and predicted his second coming with solemn warnings confirmed by the parables of the ten virgins, the five talents, and the sheep and the goats. At the last or fourth passover with the twelve, Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper, delivered his farewell discourses, and withdrew to Gethsemane. After the agony in the garden he was arrested and in the night brought before Annas, and then Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, and in the morning before Pilate and Herod. Pilate yielded to the Jews, delivered Jesus to be mocked and crucified. He was buried and a watch set upon the tomb. On the morning of the third day the tomb was found empty, and soon he appeared to the women, then to the disciples, who could hardly believe the fact. During 40 days he taught them, and then, near Bethany, ascended to heaven in their sight. </p> <p> Mysterious Person.— The great peculiarity of the Scripture doctrine of the person of Christ is that he is God and man united, two natures forming one personality. "He is not divine alone, nor human alone, but divine-human." He is the Eternal Word, &nbsp;John 1:1-51, the Son of God, and he is also the Son of man. &nbsp;Mark 11:13. This may be difficult for us to comprehend; but if a finite mind could comprehend the whole of Christ's nature, Christ could not be the infinite God he is declared to be. &nbsp;John 1:4. </p> <p> Work and [[Offices]] of Christ.— These are usually presented as threefold. The Bible and [[Evangelical]] creeds describe the [[Mediator]] as a prophet, priest, and king. As prophet he perfectly reveals the will of the Father to man; as priest he is the perfect offering for sin, procuring redemption for all who will accept of it; as king, he is and will become rightful ruler and judge of this world, and be exalted above every name that is named, putting all things under him, receiving the praises of all created intelligences. </p>

<p> '''Je'sus Christ.''' "The life and character of '''Jesus Christ''' ," says Dr. Schaff, "is the Holy of Holies in the history of the world." </p> <p> I. '''Name.''' - The name '''Jesus''' signifies saviour. It is the Greek form of '''Jehoshua''' ('''Joshua''' ). The name '''Christ''' signifies anointed. '''Jesus''' was both priest and king. </p> <p> Among the Jews, priests were anointed, as their inauguration to their office. &nbsp;1 Chronicles 16:22. In the New Testament, the name '''Christ''' is used as equivalent to the Hebrew, '''Messiah.''' (anointed), &nbsp;John 1:41, the name given to the long-promised [[Prophet]] and King whom the Jews had been taught by their prophets to expect. &nbsp;Matthew 11:3; &nbsp;Acts 19:4. The use of this name, as applied to the Lord, has always a reference to the promises of the prophets. </p> <p> The name of '''Jesus''' is the proper name of our Lord, and that of '''Christ''' is added to identify him with the promised '''Messiah''' . Other names are sometimes added to the names '''Jesus Christ''' , thus, "Lord," "a king," "King of Israel," "Emmanuel," "Son of David," "chosen of God." </p> <p> II. '''Birth.''' - '''Jesus Christ''' was born of the [[Virgin]] Mary, God being his father, at Bethlehem of Judea, six miles south of Jerusalem. The date of his birth was most probably in December, B.C. 5, four years before the era from which we count our years. That era was not used till several hundred years after '''Christ''' . The calculations were made by a learned monk, Dionysius Exiguus, in the sixth century, who made an error of four years; so that to get the exact date from the birth of '''Christ''' we must add four years to our usual dates; that is, A.D. 1882 is really 1886 years since the birth of '''Christ''' . </p> <p> It is also more than likely that our usual date for Christmas, December 25, is not far from the real date of '''Christ's''' birth. Since the 25th of December comes when the longest night gives way to the returning sun on his triumphant march, it makes an appropriate anniversary to make the birth of him who appeared in the darkest night of error and sin as the true Light of the world. </p> <p> At the time of '''Christ's''' birth, Augustus Caesar was emperor of Rome, and Herod the Great was king of Judea, but a subject of Rome. God's providence had prepared the world for the coming of '''Christ''' , and this was the fittest time in all its history. All the world was subject to one government, so that the apostles could travel everywhere: the door of every land was open for the gospel. The world was at peace, so that the gospel could have free course. The Greek language was spoken everywhere with their other languages. The Jews were scattered everywhere with synagogues and Bibles. </p> <p> III. '''Early Life.''' - '''Jesus''' , having a manger at Bethlehem for his cradle, received a visit of adoration from the three wise men of the East. At forty days old, he was taken to the Temple at Jerusalem; and returning to Bethlehem, was soon taken to Egypt to escape Herod's massacre of the infants there. After a few months stay there, Herod having died in April, B.C. 4, the family returned to their Nazareth home, where '''Jesus''' lived till he was about thirty years old, subject to his parent, and increasing "in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man." </p> <p> The only incident recorded of his early life is his going up to Jerusalem to attend the '''Passover''' when he was twelve years old, and his conversation with the learned men in the Temple. But we can understand the childhood and youth of '''Jesus''' better when we remember the surrounding influences amid which he grew. The natural scenery was rugged and mountainous, but full of beauty. He breathed the pure air. He lived in a village, not in a city. The Roman dominion was irksome and galling. The people of God were subject to a foreign yoke. The taxes were heavy. Roman soldiers, laws, money, every reminded them of their subjection, when they ought to be free and themselves the rulers of the world. </p> <p> When '''Jesus''' was ten years old, there was a great insurrection, &nbsp;Acts 5:37, in Galilee. He who was to be King of the Jews heard and felt all this. The Jewish hopes of a Redeemer, of throwing off their bondage, of becoming the glorious nation promised in the prophet, were in the very air he breathed. The conversation at home and in the streets was full of them. Within his view, and his boyish excursions, were many remarkable historic places, - rivers, hills, cities, plains, - that would keep in mind the history of his people and God's dealings with them. </p> <p> '''His school training.''' Mr. Deutsch, in the Quarterly Review, says, "Eighty years before '''Christ''' , schools flourished throughout the length and the breadth of the land: education had been made compulsory. While there is not a single term for 'school' to be found before the captivity, there were by that time about a dozen in common usage. Here are a few of the innumerable popular sayings of the period: 'Jerusalem was destroyed because the instruction of the young was neglected.' 'The world is only saved by the breath of the school-children.' 'Even for the rebuilding of the Temple the schools must not be interrupted.' " </p> <p> '''His home training.''' According to Ellicott, the stages of Jewish childhood were marked as follows: "At three, the boy was weaned, and wore, for the first time, the fringed or tasselled garment prescribed by &nbsp;Numbers 15:38-41 and &nbsp;Deuteronomy 22:12. His education began at first under the mother's care. At five, he was to learn the law, at first by extracts written on scrolls of the more important passages, the '''Shema''' or creed of &nbsp;Deuteronomy 2:4, the '''Hallel''' or festival psalms, Psalms 114; Psalms 118; Psalms 136, and by catechetical teaching in school. </p> <p> At twelve, he became more directly responsible for his obedience of the law; and on the day when he attained the age of thirteen, put on for the first time, the phylacteries which were worn at the recital of his daily prayer." In addition to this, '''Jesus''' no doubt learned the carpenter's trade of his reputed father Joseph, and, as Joseph probably died before '''Jesus''' began his public ministry, he may have contributed to the support of his mother. </p> <p> (IV. '''Public Ministry.''' - All the leading events recorded of '''Jesus'''' life are given at the end of this volume in the Chronological [[Chart]] and in the Chronological Table of the life of '''Christ''' ; so that here will be given only a general survey. </p> <p> '''Jesus''' began to enter upon his ministry when he was "about thirty years old;" that is, he was not very far from thirty, older or younger. He is regarded as nearly thirty-one by Andrews (in the tables of chronology referred to above) and by most others. Having been baptized by John early in the winter of 26-27, he spent the larger portion of his year in Judea and about the lower Jordan, till in December he went northward to Galilee through Samaria. The next year and a half, from December, A.D. 27, to October or November, A.D. 29, was spent in Galilee and norther Palestine, chiefly in the vicinity of the Sea of Galilee. </p> <p> In November, 29, '''Jesus''' made his final departure from Galilee, and the rest of his ministry was in Judea and Perea, beyond Jordan, till his crucifixion, April 7, A.D. 30. After three days, he proved his divinity by rising from the dead; and after appearing on eleven different occasions to his disciples during forty days, he finally ascended to heaven, where he is the living, ever present, all-powerful Saviour of his people. </p> <p> '''Jesus Christ''' , being both human and divine, is fitted to be the true Saviour of men. In this, as in every action and character, he is shown to be "the wisdom and power of God unto salvation." As human, he reaches down to our natures, sympathizes with us, shows us that God knows all our feelings and weaknesses and sorrows and sins, brings God near to us, who otherwise could not realize the [[Infinite]] and Eternal as a father and friend. He is divine, in order that he may be an all-powerful, all-loving Saviour, able and willing to defend us from every enemy, to subdue all temptations, to deliver from all sin, and to bring each of his people, and the whole Church, into complete and final victory. '''Jesus Christ''' is the centre of the world's history, as he is the centre of the Bible. - Editor). </p>

<p> One of the glorious names of him which is, and, which was, and which is to come. (&nbsp;Revelation 1:8; Rev 1:11) The name of Jesus, which is originally so called in the Greek tongue, signifies a Saviour. Hence the Hebrews call him, Jehoshuah, or Joshua, or Joshuah, he who shall save; and as Christ means, anointed of JEHOVAH, the Sent, the Sealed of the Father; full of grace and truth; both names together carry this blessed meaning with them, Jesus Christ the Saviour of the world by the anointing of JEHOVAH to all the purposes, of salvation. See Christ. I only detain the reader just to remark on the blessed name, that all that bore it in the Old Testament church became types, more or less, of the Lord Jesus. Joshua the successor of Moses, and Joshua the high priest in the church, after the church was brought back from Babylon. (See &nbsp;Zechariah 3:1) </p>