Thus the humanity of Jesus Christ was real and complete. Ho was made like His brethren in all things (cf. He 2") ; ' in all points tempteil like as we are, yet without sin ' (ih. 4''). On the other hand, there is nothing in Scripture to support the idea that Christ's humanity was liucclir or unreal, or that He failed to undergo a real human experi- ence In all tlie main conditions of human life He was on a level with His fellow-men : a partaker of llesli and blood (ib. 2"); submitting to a lite of hard toil, poverty, sullering, moral conllict with keen and varied temptation, alternations of success and failure, honour and dishonour, favour ami dis- repute. Specially noteworthy is the fact that Christ's life was one of continual prayer (.Mt 14-*, Mk 1» Lk 3^' 6'« 9» 22", Jn U" ete). It U
• Tho Jli-mlnnlo bcllcfi of th* i>orio<l bctw ■ • ^ ouf t.4«nrii liirth (io not conir within tl»o woih- < ' A
l.rii't Burvfy of tholn will be fouml in !/*of», /'
f 7. .Sm •Im .Scliimr IIJ I' » a>; l)nimm..M.i. / • .IfcMioA ; Slaaton, TItt Jtmiih and t>u Chrutian Mru
MfuiaK
460
IXCARNATIOX, THE
IXCAKNATIOX, THE
in 1,-irtue of a general siinilaritj' of conditions that Christ is described as the ' ciiiitain of faith' (He 12-), i.e. He exliibited tliose very virtues which are appropriate to man's creaturely condition : trust, reverence, submission, faitli, obedience. For the same reason He is pointed to as the true pattern of manhood (Jn IS'", 1 Jn 2", 1 P 2-'). He is the great exeninlar of hunuinitv, because the circum- stances of His life and probation were, speaking broadly, similar to those of ordinary men. He was found in outward guise or fashion as a man (I'll 2') J on a level with other men ' in all points' that can fall under human observation, ' yet with- out sin ' (He 4'^ 2 Co 5-', 1 Jn 3').
This brings us to two points in which, according to NT, Jesus Christ was dilierent from other men : (a) He was supernaturally born, (6) He was without sin.
(a) The birth, of Christ is described by Mt and Lk. Tliej' tell us that He was conceived by the Holy Spirit (see p. 405''), without the intervention of a human father (Mt l-'», Lk I'-- ="). By the operation of the 'creator Spirit' the 'Word was made flesh.' It is to be observed tliat this account of the birth is not contradicted, but rather suggested, by the teaching of other NT writers. Thus St. John speaks of Christ as 6 ivuidev ^(>x''Mt>'os (Jn 3^), and St. Paul calls Him ' the second man from lieaven ' (1 Co 15*"), a phrase which evidently describes tlie oriqin of the second Adam in contrast to tluit of the iirst. Further, as has been already observed, NT speaks of Clirist as sinless, holy, sanctified by God (Jn 10*^) ; ' knowing no sin ' (2 Co .5-') ; ' holy, harmless, undeliled, and separated from sinners (He T-") ; ' a lamb without spot and blemish' (1 P 1'"); ' tlie righteous one' (1 Jn 2', cf. Ac S'-" 22"). True, He appeared ' in the likeness of the flesh of sin ' (Ro 8^ cf. Ph 2"), i.e. He took the very flesh which had been the instru- ment of human sin, but in assuming it He purilied it from the sinful taint : * His flesh was, in fact, ' like ' ours, inasmuch as it was flesh ; but it was only ' like,' for it was also sinless. Christ, then, was witliout sin, and NT suggests a close connexion between His sinlessness and His miraculous birth by constantly representing Christ as the Heail or First I'rinci])le of a new race (i-pxi. Col 1'*), ' tlie firstborn among many brethren' (Ro 8'-'), the ' second Adam ' (Ro S''', 1 Co 15"), the ' new man ' (Eph 2"). Thus the tradition of the Church which first meets us in Mt and Lk is corroborated to some extent by antecedent considerations. If NT writers are correct in representing Jesus Christ as a new moral creation, it might be asked whether this new creation can have involved anything short of a new mode of generation. ' Must not the physical generation of the second Adam have been such as to involve at once His community with our nature and His exemption from it?'t If, in fact, Jesus Christ was what NT writers believed Him to be, a pre-existent being, the narrative of the virginal birth would have antecedent credibility. ' The chief ground,' says Prof. Stanton, ' on which thoughtful Christian believers are ready to accept it [the miraculous birth] is that, believing in the personal indissoluble union between God and man in Jesus Christ, the miraculous birth of Jesus seems to them the only fitting accompaniment of this union, and so to speak the natural expression of it in the order of outward facts.' J If it be re- joined that the ' fact of its necessity from a doctrinal point of view would tend to the forma- tion of a legend,' it may with equal justice be urged that the evangelists' account of the birth testifies to the early prevalence of the belief in the Divinity of Christ. The ultimate reason, in fact,