(i. ) Fatherhood. — ^Perhaps there has been a ten- dency to minimize too much the part which the conception of God as Father plays in OT (Holtz- mann, Neutestl. Theol. i. 48 ft.). Not only is the relation of God both to Israel as a whole and to the individual Israelite compared to that of a father (Dt 1" 8», Ps 103"), but God is frequently repre- sented as the Father of Israel (Dt 32«, Jer 3*- " 31«) and of Israelites (Is 63" 64', Wis 2'= 14», Sir 23'-*, To 13^). We have also the correlative ex- pressions : Israel is ' God's son,' Ex 4'-'-'- (cf. Wis 18'3, Sir 3712), Hos n>, Jer 3i» SI*", Ps SO^', and individuals in Israel His ' children ' (t)t 14'). Some of these passages are enunciated with full prophetic TrXijpoipopia (Ex 4^-, Hos 11', Is 63'"), and must be numl)ered among the axiomatic utterances of OT religion. We note also, that while the relation of son to father is predicated both of Israel as a whole, and mediately through the nation of indi- vidual Israelites, it is also predicated with esiiecial force of the theocratic king whom, with the sequel of the historj- before us, we regard as a type of the Messiah (Pss 2 and 89).
There was therefore no lack of points of contact and connexion between the teaching of OT and of NT. And yet the doctrine of NT assumes such different proportions as almost to amount to a nev revelation. So far as the idea of the Divmo Fatherhood really entered into the popular con-
GOD
GOD
209
pciousness, it was chiufl y as ,in item in tlie general Bense of privilege. Even tliat had its good side, and this good side was the saving virtue of Juda- ism. But the virtue arid its corruption lay too near together. Over wide tracts of Judaism the former was very largely swallowed up by the latter. A new impulse was needed if tne idea of th(! Fatherhood of God was to retain its highest qualities of warmth and intimacy, and was at the same time not to be the privilege of a chosen few, but was to be brought home to the common con- sciousness of mankind.
No one doubts that Christianity has succeeded in doing this. From the beginning of NT to the end the lesson of God's Fatherhood is presented in such mass and volume as to identify it with the very essence of Christianity in a sense which does not apply to any other religion. And this is a clear case in which all subsequent teaching does but reflect the teaching of the Founder. One of the leading features in that teaching is the (inherited) conception of God as King (the king- <lom of God as representing His penetrating and pcr\asive sovereignty) ; but side by side with this, and in full equalitv with it, is the conception of God as Father. No name of God was more con- stantly on the lips of Christ ; and no other name so dominated the whole thought of God, as He not only cherished it for Himself, but bequeathed it to His disciples. Fatherhood is no longer one attribute among many, but it is a central attribute which gives a colour to all the rest. It is characteristic of Jesus that He repeatedly argues downwards from this attribute as furnis'liing a safe basis for deduction (Mt e-*''^ 7»-" 10*" etc.).
The idea of the Fatherhood of God is presented in the teaching of our Lord upon three planes. (a) <!od is F'atlier of all mankind. His fatherly attributes are displayed even to 'the unthankful and the evil' (Lk (i^, of. Mt r>«). (6) He is in a special sense the Father of believers, disciples of Christ. In the uncertainty which attends the exact circumstances of many of His discourses, it may be often doubtful as to how far the phrase i irarrjp viiCiv extends beyond these. Probably, as a rule its application starts from the inner circle. But it is also probably not conhned to this. It is certainly impossible in view of such sayings as Mk 9" (' he that is not against us is for us') to regard it a.s bounded by any hard-and-fast line. All those to whom Jesus speaks are potential disciples. The two classes run into each other. To both God stands in the relation of leather ; but the fulness of His love is naturally felt by those who have learnt to come to Him as His cliildren. (c) There is, however, yet a third sense in wliieh tlie Fatherhood of God is unique. Jesus does not speak of 'our Father' as embracing both Himself and His disciples, but of 'My Father' and 'your F'ather.' In tliis He takes up the special sense in which (as we have seen) the tenns ' F'atlier' and ' Son ' were applied to the theocratic King. The ministry of Jesus begins with an announcement from heaven : ' Thou art My beloved Son, in Thee I am well pleased' (Mk 1"). And this announce- mi^nt is repeated on another culminating occasion (Mk 9'). It is by virtue of this unique relationship that the revelation of (lod which Jesus gives is also anique (Mt H'-''). It contains further implications *s to the nature of the Godhead. To both these points we shall return.