3I8. 16. 86 gJ4 g-40. 47 20^1).
In Eph, one very prominent thought is that of the e.xtension of the life of the incarnate Redeemer, risen and glorified, in the Church. The Church is His body, the complement or fulness of His being (Eph r-^) ; Christ is her Head, infusing into her the grace and virtue of His humanity (Eph I-- 4" 5^) ; present in the manifold operations of His Spirit ; uniting His people in fellowship with Himself. St. Peter teaches characteristically that the Church is tlie true people of God, inheriting by right of spiritual descent the titles of ancient Isr. (I P 2' ; cf. Gal 4-», He 12~) ; while St. John dwells on the mystery of fellowship with God attained in Clirist (1 Jn P), and on the grace of sonship vouchsafed to individual believers (Jn 1'*). In a word, the work and passion of Christ are regarded by the apostles as the source of all spiritual blessing ; as the means of bringing aU Messianic promises to accomplishment.
(5) It remains to notice that all the apostolic sTOters seem to presuppose an authoritative tradi- tion as to the historic events of Christ's career, and a general acceptance in the Church of His Messianic claim. In his sermons (Ac 2, etc.) St. Peter appeals, as we have seen, to the known facts of the Passion and Resurrection ; while St. Paul, in spite of the fact that his starting-point is that of one who had not known Christ after the flesh, but was called to believe in a glorified Saviour, alludes in various
fiassages to recognized incidents of Christ's human ife (see Ro 1' 8', Gal i\ 2 Co 8' 5^1, 1 Co 15^ Pli 2"-, and other passages). There was, in short, an apostolic 'tradition' {irapddoins) or 'traditions' wTiich formed the common groundwork of teaching (cf. Ro G", 1 Co IF, 2 Th 2'» 3'=). The Messianic conception of Christ's person specially distinguishes St. Peter's sermons in Ac, but it is by no means absent from the earlier thought of St. Paul,* and in St. John's teaching occupies a prominent place. In Rev, for instance, the image of Christ is Messianic. He is described in terms suggestive of His human descent from the chosen people * See Sabatier, The Apostie Paul, ch. 2.
(Rev 5" II" 12" 22") ; and His kingly doiniiiinn ia Messianically conceived as a victorious coiillict with enemies (G- 12' ID"-'*), though His lordship and royalty are the fruit of humiliation (se« especially S" ; cf. Jn I-*- **). There is also a strong Messianic element in the Gospel of Jn, e.g. the titles 'Lamb of God,' 'Son of God,' 'King of Israel,' ' He that should come ' (6"), ' sent' (9'), etc.*
Such are the leading points of view under which the apostles describe the higher nature of our Lord. Taken together they combine the various lines of Messianic prediction in a single concep- tion, that of the God-man. Jesus the Messiah of proiihecy is the central object of their thouglit and devotion. Nothing more significantly illustratea this than the use by NT writers of the designation 5ov\os '\y](ToO 'S.pt<rTou ; in this case the name of Christ replaces that of J" in an already familiar OT phrase (SoOXos deoO or Kvplov). Further, we may notice that prayer is addressed to Christ (Ac 7 , 2 Co 12', Jn 9^) ; and that He is the object of universal adoration in heaven (Rev 5") ; tliat He is, in a word, God.
It has been found convenient to survey NT teaching in regard to the person of Jesus Christ as a whole. But it is important to bear in mind the fact that the Christian idea of the God-man was one which would not be readily apprehended in all its bearings by men who, like the twelve apostles, had been educated in Jewish modes of thought, and had perhaps imbibed to a great extent the national spirit of their countrymen. It was not till after the fall of Jerus., and the beginnings at least of the movement by which the message of the gospel was extended to the heathen world, that Christians could become fully con.scious of the significance of the di\'ine fact on which their religion was based — the appearance of the (iod-man on earth, t When we consider that our Lord ccm- iined His own ministerial activity and that of the Twelve to the 'house of Israel' (Mt 10"), we shall not be surprised that there appears in NT a lower, as well as a higher, form of cnristological doctrine ; a form which is, roughly speaking, represented by the teaching of the Synopti-sts, and St. James, and St. Peter, as contrasted with that of St. Paul and St. John. But, as we have pointed out, the distinct aspects under which different NT writers present the figure of Christ cannot fairly be construed as representing radically ditferent types of belief in regard to His person. See SoN OF God.
iii. It may be next inquired what light Scripture throws upon the purposes and results of the Incarna- tion. Tne significance assigned to the event in Scripture presupposes something much more than the mere inspiration, 'adoption,' or exaltation of a man. The I. was no mere presence of God in a man ; no mere mode of mystical indwelling ; no mere moral relationship such as might subsist between friends. It was a real, permanent, indissoluble union of two perfect natures, divine and human ; au assumption of manhood into personal unity ^vith a divine being, so that the Godhead employs the manhood as an organ, and wears it as a vesture ; so that all tlie acts and sufferings of the human nature properly belong to the Godhead. This is the doctrine of the NT ; it is implied in the express statement of .lu 1 '• (6 X4705 o-dpi ^^irro) ; in all references to the personality of the Son of God as single and con- tinuous (e.<7. 1 Co 8«, Eph 4»•'^ Ph 2"-, He P etc.) ; in such ' theopaschite ' language as that of Ac 20-"' ; in the ascription of life-giving properties to the llesh of Christ (Jn 6*^'), or of cleansing efficacy to His blood (He 9''') ; in the mention of His human nature as an object of adoration (Ph 2'"). In fact, speaking generally, the NT regards the I. not as