Now it is clear that the details thus sketched furnish a very small j^art of the significance of the / Gospel to the editor. The miracles proved Christ's power, or illustrated His attitude towards Phari- saism, or showed Him to be the Messiah of the OT. But to what end was He powerful, and, if the Messiah, where was His Kingdom? We might have expected to find a good deal more emphasis '1 laid on the significance of Christ's death, but such emphasis is strikingly absent. The death is rather regarded as without significance in itself, but as a necessary stage in the revelation of the Messiah. He had come to found a Kingdom, but in accord- ance with the Divine plan had been put to death. Clearly then the Kingdom remained yet to come, and the death was a necessary prelude to glorifica- tion. Tlie insistence on the fact that the death h'ld to take place, because it had been foretold in the Scriptures, suggests tlie inference that to the editor it was a fact which reqiiired explanation, a difficult phase in tlie history of the Messiah rather tlian the central fact which itself explained every- thing else in His life. In two passages only is the death referred to as having any purpose or effect, rather than as being simply a thing which had happened as a necessary transition stage from the earthly life to the heavenly monarchy of the
Messiah. In one of these Christ is represented as saying that He came to give His life as a ransom for many (\vTpov dvri ttoWujv, 20'-^) ; in the other He speaks of His blood as shed for many for the re- mission of sins (26-*). It is easy to see how saj'- ings like these could be made the foundation of a theology which would explain the whole of Christ's life from the significance of His death. But it is equally clear that the editor of the First Gospel has recorded them because they formed part of the tradition whicli had come to him, without seeing in them an exjdanation of the entire earthly life of the Messiah. They are incidental rather than fundamental to his Gospel.
Thus the facts of Christ's life as here recorded would have been meaningless to the editor without the teaching which he records. It is in that that he finds the explanation of Christ's life. The facts alone were oljscure and difficult. Jesus Avas the Davidic Messiali and also the Son of God. He had entered into human history through the Virgin's womb. He iiad evinced His supernatural power in all that He did. But then He had allowed Himself to be put to death, because, as He said, the Scriptures had foretold it ; and rising from the dead, He had gone into heaven again. But how then was He the Messiah, and where was the Kingdom? The main object of the Gospel is to explain this, and the ex|)lanation is given in the great discourses which the editor has formed by massing sayings or groups of sayings.
(2) The Kingdom. — The central subject of Christ's .doctrine had been the near approach of the ' king- dom of the heavens.' With this He began His ministry (41''), and wherever He went He taught this as a good news (v.^). The Kingdom, He taught, was coming, but not in His lifetime. After His ascension He would come as Son of Man ujion the clouds of heaven (\QP-'^^ 19-^243"), would send His angels to gather together the elect (24*' 13^1), and would sit on the throne of His glory (1628 1928 2531). This would happen in the lifetime of the generation to whom He spoke (16^'* 24^^ 10-*), immediately after the great tribulation accom- panying the destruction of Jeruoalem (24^^) ; but God alone knew the exact day and hour (v.*"). Then the twelve Apostles should sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel (19^^). In the meantime He Himself must suffer and die, and be raised from the dead. How else could He come upon the clouds of heaven ? And His dis- ciples were to preach the good news of the coming Kingdom (10" 24^*) among all nations, making dis- ciples by baptism (28'"). The body of disciples thus gained would naturally form a society bound by common aims (16'* 18"). They would be dis- tinct from the existing Jewish polity, because the Jews as a people, the 'sons of the kingdom,' i.e. those who should have inherited it (8'^), would definitely reject the good news (21*2- ■*2. 43 22'). Hence the disciples of the Kingdom would form a new .spiritual Israel (21'** 'a nation ') which would inchide many who came from east and west (8'^).
In view of the needs of tliis new Israel of Christ's disciples, i.e. of the true sons of the Kingdom (13**), who were to await His coming on the clouds of heaven, it is natural that a large part of the teaching recorded in the Gospel should concern the qualifications required in those who hoped to enter the Kingdom when it came. They were still to live in allegiance to the revelation of God made in the OT, which was perraanentlj^ valid. Not a letter was to pass away from it (5^*). Its per- mission of divorce still held good (v.*- 19*^-)- Christ had not abolislied the Mosaic distinctions between clean and unclean meats (see notes on 15-"). His disciples were still to take two or three witnesses (18'^) ; and the Sabbath was still to be held sacred