Shenomena both in His aspect (9'*) and in His con- uct (lO'^) which must have struck people as un- usual, and due to something overpowering within, whicli it would have been natural to call the Spirit ; but in point of fact there is no reference to the Spirit in this period. Perhaps the nearest ai>proach to it is in Mk 10^, where Jesus asks James and John, 'Are ye able to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized ? There is no doubt that Jesus speaks throughout this scene with unusual elevation of tone ; and the hgure of baptism, which He could hardly use without recall- ing the experience at the .Jordan and all that His consecration there involved, lifts us into the region where the thought of the Spirit is near. Still, it is not expressed. The Triumphal Entry, the Cleans- ing of the Temple, and the Blighting of the Fig- tree are all acts implying intensity and ele^'ation of feeling transcending common human limits : often other persons, visited by such impulses with startling suddenness, are said to be ' filled with holy spirit,' but in Jesus they do not seem to have made the same impression on bystanders. They did not apparently stand in relief in His life as they would have done in the life of others ; little in it is specifically assigned to the Spirit, because the spiritual baptism at the beginning impelled and controlled it throughout. It does not really cast any light on Jesus' experience of the Spirit, when in Mk 12=« He quotes Ps 110 by ' David him- self said in the Holy Sjiirit': this merely rejire- sents the Jewisli belief in the Divine inspiration of Scripture, a belief most distinctly preserved in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where 01 g^uotations are introduced by ' as saith the Holy Spirit,' etc. (3' 9' 10'* : cf. 2 P !-•', 2 Ti 3«, Ac l'«). More important is Mk 13", which contains the only promise of the Holy Spirit in the earliest Evangelist. Referring to the persecutions which will conic upon the Apostles after His death, Jesus ^:iy> : ''Wlnii (licy lead you to judgment and di'lix.'i \.iii i;|,, ]„■ ii,,i anxious beforehand what ye sli:ill I'lik. Knt wh.it ever is given to you in that lioui, ili;it >iii:ik ; im it is not you that speak, but the Holy Spirit.' The Spirit is here conceived as a Divine reinforcement in the very crisis of need. If fidelity to the gospel brings men to extremity, they wfll not be left there, but will have experience of superhuman help. It is important to notice that the precise character in which the Spirit which comes to the help of the dis<tiples is here conceived as acting is that of a TrapaKK-qroi or advocatus — an idea of which amiiler use is made in the Gospel and 1st Epistle of John. The term TrapdKXjjrot may be due to the Evangelist, but the conception of the Spirit's func- tion goes back to the Lord. It is not the Holy Spirit which is referred to in Mk 14^* ; and in le'*-^, although mention is made, as is natural in a late passage based on other NT writings, of most of what are usually called spiritual gifts, the Spirit itself is not expressly named. If, then, we try to sum up the oldest Evangelic
representation, we can hardly say more than that the Holy Spirit is the Divine power which from His baptism onward wrought in Jesus, making Him mighty in word and deed — a power the char- acter of which is shown by the teaching and by the sa^dng miracles of Jesus — a power to which the sanctity of God attached, so that it is Divine also in the ethical sense, and to blaspheme it is the last degree of sin— a power in which Jesus enabled His disciples to some extent to share, and which He promised would be with them in the emergencies of their mission — a power, however, which (con- trary to what we might have anticipated) the Evangelist d("'^ imt bring into prominence at any of the criM- m iiii.ii>.' luoinents of Jesus' life. It takes notliiiiu I'-- ili.in that life itself, from be- ginning to inil, ((. show us what the Spirit means. 'If the last Evangelist tells us that the Spirit inter- prets Jesus, the inference from the first is that Jesus also interprets the Spirit, and that only through Him can we know what it means.
7. If we turn from ISIark to the other Evangelic source common to Mt. and Lk., we find little to add to this. Both our First and our Third Evan- i:c!ists hnvo cxervthing which Mk. has, and their v.-iri:iti,.n- {r.,,. Nit 3", Lk 3" as opp. Mk P; Mt IJ", Lk li.'",i.opp. Mk3=8'-; Mt 10-", Lk 12'2 21'= :is (.|.|,. Mk l:;'i) have been noticed already, or are ot nu consei|nence. But when we look at what is peculiar to Mt. and to Lk. respectively, there is more to say. Omitting for the moment the first two chapters in each, we notice these points.
(«) It is a mark of historicity in Mt. that in recording the Sermon on the Jlount he nowhere alludes to the distinction of ' letter ' and ' .spirit ' \\liich occurs .so spontaneously to the modern in- tcrjireter of the words of Jesus. On the other band, in 7-- we have an utterance of Jesus repro- duced in terms which have almost certainly been inrtuenced by po.st-Pentecostal experiences of the Spirit. It was only then that men ' prophesied ' in the name of Jesus, etc., and till they had done .so, such language as this could not have been used. Comparison with ! 'c 13-°'^' justifies us in saying that we have here the word rather than the words of the Lord. But in any case, the idea that the most amazing gifts of the Spirit are worthless apart from common morality — the idea expanded in 1 Co 13— is here traced back to Jesus Himself. It is difficult to understand a Divine power, the action of which, so to speak, elevates and reinforces the nature, without raising the character ; yet this is undeniably what is contemplated both by Jesus and by St. I'aul. Perhaps the underlying truth is t li.-it the moral nature is tlie deepest and the hardest In iMiutr.ifr I'V the Divine power, and may remain uunllr.l.il Ky'il when other elements of our being li:i\<' liirii Mi'l.dued to its service. The unnatural- nrss of sucli :i result is reflected on by Jesus in .Mt 11-"-, where woes are pronounced on the cities which had seen so many of His mighty works, yet had not repented. It is implied that these mighty works, the works of the Spirit in Him, were of such a cliar.'ictcr tliat is, so holy and gi'acious — that thi V (lui^lil In have evoked penitence, and brought a iii'w nini^il life into being. An interesting light is thrown nn tlie Evangelist's own conception of the Spiiit in relation to Jesus, by his ajjplication to our Lord of the prophecy in Is 42'-* ' I will put my .spirit upon him, and he .shall bring forth judgment to the Genriles,' etc. (Mt 12'8-2'). Here not only the ])ower of Jesus, which gives Him assurance of final victory (Mt 12="), but His method and His temper — His meekness, patience, constancy — are ascribed to the Spirit. The presence and power of God are felt in His superhuman renunciation of the ordinary ways anvl tempers of men as much as in the super- human rt sources which He wielded. It is again a