^ Cf . Swete, on Mk i^^: "'For to this end came I forth' (Mark), is interpreted for us by Luke, ' Because to this end was I sent.' ' Came I forth' does not refer to His departure from Capernaum {v. 35), but to His mission from the Father (Jno 8*2 1320)"; and on Mk lo*'^: " For ^jkdov in reference to our Lord's entrance into the world, cf. x^^ 2^^; it is used also of the Baptist (9iiseq., jno i^) regarded as a divine messenger " — whence we observe that it does not of itself imply preexistence. Meyer, on i^^, notes that this view is held by Euthym- ius Zigabenus, Maldonatus, Grotius, Bengel, Lange and others, — conf. Baumgarten-Crusius ; he himself does not hold it. Cf. Meyer, on Mt 3^1 : "His coming as such is always brought forward with great emphasis by Mark and Luke." Holtzmann on i-^^ thinks the reference is to the departure from Capernaum, while Luke's phrase (4*^) is a transition to the Johannine form of expression (e.g. 8*-).
' Cf. G. S. Streatfeild, The Self -Interpretation of Jesus Christ, 1906, pp. 81-83. Mr. Streatfeild connects these sayings with those in which our Lord refers to His return in glory. " Thus to describe Himself as coming into the world," he remarks, " suggests, if it does no more, a consciousness of personal vocation, a conviction, if not a consciousness, of preexistence." " The word ' come,' " he adds, " is never, so far as the present writer recollects, used of or by the prophets in the sense in which our Lord applies it to Himself. Apparent exceptions are shown to be only apparent by the context. On the other hand, the term is constantly used in the O. T. of God and the Messianic theophany." Perhaps Mr. Streatfeild slightly overstates the matter, but what he says is essentially true. His use of these phrases certainly testifies to our Lord's deep consciousness of being intrusted with a great mission which He had come into the world to fulfil — as the use of them of John the Baptist testifies to his mission: and the pregnancy of the use He makes of them, and the connections in which He uses them, strongly suggest a
Mark's Conception of Our Lord 41
It Is, however, above all In the picture which Jesus
Himself draws for us of the ' Son of Man ' that we
Jesus' see His superhuman nature portrayed.
Functions For the figure thus brought before us Divine jg distinctly a superhuman one; one
which Is not only In the future to be seen sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven (14''") — In clouds with great power and glory (13"'^), even in the glory of His Father with the holy angels (8^^) who do His bidding as the Judge of all the earth, gathering His elect for Him (13^^) while He punishes His enemies (8^^) ; but which In the pres- ent world itself exercises functions which are truly divine, — for who Is Lord of the Sabbath but the God who instituted It in commemoration of His own rest (2^^), and who can forgive sins but God only (2^^' cf. verse 7) ? The assignment to the Son of Man of the function of Judge of the world and the ascription to Him of the right to forgive sins are, In each case, but another way of saying that He Is a divine person; for these are divine acts.'
conviction on His part of preexistence, though they do not in themselves unsupportedly avail to prove it. The language might be employed consistently of a divine mission without preexistence; but it seems to be employed here v?ith deeper implications.
^ On the forgiveness of sins as a divine act, cf. Dalraan, Words, 262 and 314, 315. As against J. Weiss, Dalman notes that it is a fact " that Judaism never from O. T. times to the present day, has ventured to make any such assertion in regard to the Messiah " as that the " Lord hath power to forgive sins." Cf. Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, 83, 84. On the judgment of the world as a divine act, cf. Bousset, Jesus, 203-205. Dr. Stanton, Jeioish and Christian Messiah, 291, says: "The Judge in that last judgment is on Jewish ground nowhere the Messiah. The assignment of this office to Him is the most significant new feature in the Christian doctrine of the Messiah." But this is because Dr. Stanton considers the Similitudes of Enoch post-Christian (cf. pp. 61,
42 The Designations of Our Lord
We have already had occasion to point out the uniqueness and closeness of the relation to God which The Uniqueness IS indicated by the designation ' Son of of God ' as ascribed to Jesus. In the
Jesus' Sonship parable of Mark 12 not only is it em- phasized that God has but one such son (verse 6), but He is as such expressly contrasted with all God's "servants" (verses 2 and 4) and expressly signalized as God's "heir" (verse 7). As we read this parable