The position of Satan in the Universe is so exalted, and the power ascrihed to him in the NT so great (cf. esp. Mt 4^, :in 1430), that some have regarded Jesus as a Dualist. But the authority attributed to Satan in the NT, though great, is sub- ordinate. The devils recognize the power of Jesus, and come out at His word (Mk l«-34 311 etc.). If SaUn is 'the strong man,' there is a Stronger, who can bind him and spoil his goods (Mt 1229). At the Temptation the devil acknowledged that his power is a delegated one (e/*ei ^ec/i«iihoT»t, Lk 4<»). His kingdom will surely come to an end ; in fact its fall has already been virtually secured by the Passion and Resurrection of Jesus (Jn 1'231). His final punishment has been determined, and it will be fully adequate to his delinquency (Mt '25'*1).
(2) Original sin. — There is no recorded teaching of Jesus about original sin. He recognized the fall of man (Jn 8"), and the general sinfulness of the human race (Mt 7") ; but how He connected these two facts does not appear. It may, perhaps, be argued from Jn 9'"3, that He would not have ap- proved of any theory of original sin which regarded men as obnoxious to punishment from God merely because of an ancestral taint that they could not help inheriting. See, further, artt. SiN and ETER- NAL Punishment.
C. llAKlilS.
EVIL ONE. — See pieced, art. and Lord's I'KAVEit and Satan.
EYIL SPIRIT. See Demon.
EVOLUTION (CHRIST AND).-The widespread acceptance nf the Evolutionary philosophy, and the endeavours of its leading exponents to include the phenomena of religion within the sweep of its cate- gories, have greatly accentuated the problem of the place of the Inc.ani.atinn in the cosmic order, and of Jcsu, Cliii.l, His l',i.,,n. His work, and His redciiii'l i\ ■• liiiici ioii. in liuiii;ui history.
1. 'Jll,' h.ls'l-: nf ,lisr,l iSlnit.^Xt the OUtsCt Wd
must di.-.Liiiy uisli .sliarjilj betxveen the Materialistic type of the Evolutionary philosophy on the one hand, and the Theistie type on the other. The former may be described as including all efforts to explain the highest phenomena of the
eluding tliose of life, consciousness, and all forms of spiritual activity — in terms of mechanical motion and force. Such a philosophy rules out all recog- nition of the Divine Personality, of the possible iiulei)endence of mind over matter, of the ethical responsibility and free spiritual activity of man, and of his capacity for immortal life. This disposes of tlie problem of the Incarnation as irrelevant, and throws us back on a purely ' naturalistic ' ex- planation of the Person and life of Jesus Christ. The Theistic type of the Evolutionary philosophy, however— -tlie central idea of which is that the goal (if Evolution and not its beginnings provides us with the principle of cosmic interpretation, and tliat spirit and not matter furnishes the key to the riddle of tlie Universe— leaves us free to deal with the Supreme Person and Fact of history with open minds. Theism presents us with a conception of God as immanent in the Universe, but not as im- prisoned within its material or psychical manifes- tations ; as transcendent, living a free, self-deter- mined life in virtue of His own eternal Being, yet not separated from the forces and phenomena of the cosmos, which are manifestations of His creative activity and expanding purpose. It also presents us with a conception of man as a created but free spiritual person, physically a part of nature, but ethically above it, and ca]>alile of coming into conscious personal rcl:ili(iiis with liis Creator.
2. Theistic thcur;/ >;/ Krul iilimi compatible ivith a process of Incarn<itiiiii.^]{ is manifest that the idea of Incarnation is not <t priori incompatible with such a philosophy of God and man. It repre- sents the Universe as God realizing His creative purpose ; impersonally in Nature, personally in Man. Creation awakes in man to the sense of its own origin and the possibility of its own consum- mation in a life of free spiritual communion with God. Incarnation means that this fellowship is actually sought after and objectively consummated by an act of self-realization on the part of God. It implies the special compatibility of the Divine nature and the human personality. ' God |is, as it were, the eternal possibility of being incar- nated, man the permanent capability of incarna- tion.' 'The nature that is in all men akin to Deity becomes in Christ a nature in personal union with the Deity, and the unio personalis, which is peculiar to Him, is the basis of the unio mystica, wl.ich is ])ossible to all ' (Fairbairn, Christ in Mudi-rn Thrnlorj)/, pp. 473, 475; see also Clarke's (hillnir nfC/irlxfiroi Theology, p. 275).
3. Tin- l'n:^n„ and work of Christ in stick a lli'iinj. The liistorical realization of this possi- liility of Incarnation in Jesus of Nazareth raises the further question of His place in a philosophy of history, and in Christian theology. The Chris- tian contention is that in Him the Evolutionary process finds its consummation on the one .side — He was the Ideal Man made actual ; and that a fresh Evolutionary start was made by the fusion of the Divine and human natures in Him on the otiier— lie was the Son of God Incarnate, 'niani- festcMl tn Like away sin' (1 Jn 3'), and to project tlic laee (.11 the lines of its true development and life, whieli had been interrupted and swerved aside by tlio intrusion of .sin into the world. Tliis con- cejition of the Person and work of Christ, while it falls into line %\ith the Evolutionary idea in one direction, appears to fall foul of it in another, because of the claim it iiKikes that there was in the nature of Christ .in incoinni.-iisurable factor, incapable of being cxplamr.! Ii\ 1 he laws of organic life, or by human p.sychulugy, manifesting itself in a life of unique goodness and power, begun by a free special act of God in the Virgin-birth, and consummated by the objective Resurrection of our Lord from the clead.