(2) In 2 P P*> the writer, who claims to have been present with Jesus on the Mount of Trans- figuration, says of that experience, ' We were eye- Avitnesses of his majesty ' (AV and RV ; Gr. /j.€yaXei6Tr]s). The word fj.€yaX€i6T7]s is found in only one other passage of the NT, viz. Ac 19^', where it is used to describe the ' magnificence ' (AV and RV) of the great goddess Diana. It is thus an interesting coincidence that the two instances of its use in connexion with Christ belong to the episode of the Transfiguration and the incident of the healing of the lunatic boy which followed immediately after. On the ' holy mount ' the favoured three received a revelation of Christ's inherent /xeyaXe lorrjs (the word eiroTrrai, ' eye- witnesses,', is a technical term denoting those who had been admitted to the highest grade of initiation into the Eleusinian mysteries). And Avhen He came down from the mountain, the /xeyaXeioTT^i of God shone forth through His works in the eyes of all the multitude.
A comparison of the uses of u.eyxXuoTr,; in Lk 9-13, Ac 19^7, and 2 P lis raises a doubt whether 'majesty' is the most adequate rendering of the word in the first and" third passages, and whether 'magnificence' (as in Ac 1927 EV) or 'splendour' would not more correctly reproduce the original idea. This is suggested by the ordinary use of the adj. ^fyaXE'i'os in class.
Greek, and even by the two instances of its employment in the NT (Lk 1-l'J, Ac 211). The evidence of the LXX also points in the same direction ; for while iJ-iyxXiioTv,! is used in Jer 839 to tr. niN.'!''? (AV 'honour,' RV 'glorj-') — a word which is usually rendered bj' SoIk — the terms ordinarily taken to express the idea of greatness or majesty are fj-iyaXuc-unyi and fjt.iya.'koTpirziia. {c.ij. 2 S 723, Ps 145 [LXX 144] 3. 5. 6. 12).
With this idea of Christ's miracles, or of His miraculous being, as an eflfulgence of the Divine splendour or magnificence, compare the statement of Jn 2ii that by the miracle of Cana Jesus ' manifested his glory ' (Ifccupua-i rvy ooixv avroij). Cf. also
the i-ro-rrai Tvj; ixlii/ou fj.iya.Xu(jT/,Toi of 2 P 116 with what is said
in v.i" of the 'glory' (Si|a) which Jesus received upon the mount from God the Father.
(3) In He 1^ 8^ we see Jesus seated ' on the right hand of the Majesty- on high.' The word for ' Majesty' in these two cases is /jLeyaXcjaijvr], a term that does not occur again in the NT except in the doxology at the end of Jude (v.-^). The idea of Christ as seated at God's right hand, Avhicli is so frequent in the NT (Mt 266^ ||, Ac 2^3 7'"f-, Ro 8^, Eph l-**, Col 3^ etc.), was no doubt taken in the first case from Ps llQi (cf. He P with v. '3). It seems always to be used with reference not to His pre-existent dignity, but to the exaltation that followed His incarnation and suffering. Moreover, in the two passages in Hebrews there is no direct ascription of the Divine majesty to Jesus. The idea is that of His exercise of a supremely exalted office as the Great High Priest who is the Mediator between God and men.
2. The quality of majesty in Christ. — Apart from its infrequent use of the word, the NT affords abundant material for a consideration of the majesty of Christ, whether in His estate of humiliation or of exaltation.
(1) With regard to His life on earth, {a) it is evident that there was nothing of the majestic in His outward circumstances. From His birth in a stable to His death on a cross, it was a life of ' no reputation,' His form being that of a servant and not of a king (cf. Ph 2^). And on the one occasion when He assumed a kind of royal state, and suffered the multitudes in the streets and the children in the Temple to hail Him with Hosannas (Mt2P-'"-), His majesty, after all, as the Evan- gelists subsequently perceived, was but the majesty of meekness, for Zion's King came to her gates, as the prophet had said, ' lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foai of an ass ' (Mt2Iiff-, Jn 12'«ff-; cf. Zee 9«).
(b) Was there no majesty, then, in His personal appearance"! The Gospels are completely silent on this point, and in the lack of any trustworthy tradition the Fathers seem to have fallen back chiefly on the prophetic pictures of the Messiah, with the result that a wide diversity of view came to exist, according as one passage or another was taken as the norm. The earlier tendency, inspired without doubt by prevailing ascetic ideals, was to fasten ujjon the words of Deutero-Isaiah Avith reference to the Suffering Servant (53^' ^), and to represent Jesus as utterly devoid of all beauty and dignity of face or form. 'Base of aspect' (aiaxpos TT]i> '6\pLv) is the verdict of Clement of Alexandria (Peed. iii. 1), who was preceded in his estimate by Justin Martyr, and folloAved by Tertullian. There came a reaction by and by, represented in the East by Origen and in the West loy Jerome, Avhen men bethought themselves of such a prophetic Psalm as the 45th, Avith its vision of One ' fairer than the children of men' (v.^) and girded Avith glory and majesty (v.^). Jerome in particular maintained this high vieAv of the majesty of Christ's outward aspect. There Avas 'something starry ' {sideretim quiddnm), he affirmed, in the Saviour's face and eyes [Ep. ad Prindpiam) ; ' the brightness and majesty of His Divinity . . . shed their rays over His human countenance ' (in Matt. i. 8). This Avas the vieAV that ultimately prevailed