This will partly explain the large part which sayings referring to the near approach of the Kingdom play in the First Gospel. Some of these occur only in this Gospel, as, e.g., 10-' IS'--"-^" ^-^■■*- *'-'^ 19^ 25'-^^- 3'-*fi. In other cases a saying, the original form of which was found in the Second Gosjiel, has been modified so as to make it express clearly this idea. For example, in ]Mk 9^ occur the words ' until they see the kingdom of God come with power.' Although a reference to the immediately preceding verse would naturally suggest that tliis coming of the ' kingdom of God ' was identical with the coming of the Son of Man with His angels, the words taken by themselves might be interpreted by the reader to refer to the Trans- figuration which follows, or to some later event, such as the Day of Pentecost, or the Fall of Jeru- salem. The editor of the First Gospel has been unwilling to leave them in this ambiguity, and by changing tliem into 'the Son of Man coming in His kingdom,' interprets them unmistakably of the coming in glory with the angels (1(J-'), which he then believed to be about to take jilace during the lifetime of some to whom the words were originally spoken. Again, in ]Mk 14"- occur the words ' you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.' The editor of the First Gospel (Mt 26*") inserts before 'you shall see' the words air' dpTi. This phrase is difficult, because the words should mean ' from this present moment ' (cf. ' Matthew,' I.e.). But since the period between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection must on any interpretation be excluded, it is probable that the words mean 'you shall soon, shortly, see,' etc. That is again an expression of the belief of the editor that the Second Coming was near at hand. A similar case is found in Mt 24-^, where the editor inserts into Mk.'s discourse the word 'immedi- ately,' thus again linking the Second Coming closely with the Fall of Jerusalem.
These facts suggest irresistibly the conclusion that the editor or the tradition which he follows has, by accimiulating sayings of one kind, and by modifying others to some slight extent in order to give them the required meaning, given the im- pression that the Lord taught a nearness of His coming to inaugurate the Kingdom, which goes beyond what He Himself originally intended. He spoke, no doubt, of the coming of the Son of Man in gloiy, using apocalyptic language, which He may or may not have intended to be taken liter- ally. The early JeA\-ish Church has interpreted it quite literally, and read into it that element of immediacy which is presupposed in all apocalyptic writings. He forecast, no doubt, the catastrophe
150
MATTHEW (GOSPEL)
MEALS
to which the shortsighted iDolicy of the Jewisli authorities was hurrying that ill-starred people. The early Church linked together these two classes of utterance, and believed that both would receive their fulfilment at the same period.
If, then, we must allow for some over-emphasis, some foreshortening in the jiresentation of this conception in the First Gospel, we shall naturally ask if there is not evidence that Christ's teaching anticipated, in fact, a longer development of his- tory than that here presupposed. Even within the First Gospel itself many of His sayings suggest a different interpretation from that put upon them by the editor (e.g. the parables of the Mustard Seed, the Drag-net, and see below). And when we pass to the writers who have emancipated them- selves from Jewish theological conceptions, we see that Christ's words were regarded as presupposing a longer development of historical events than that suggested by the First Gospel. This, of course, is true of the later Epistles of St. Paul, of the Fourth Gospel, and of St. Luke. And the verdict of the historian must be tliat the Jewish-Christian inter- pretation of Christ's words upon this point is not likely to be most accurate, because it is Jewish and because it is early. Rather these two factors would, in the nature of tilings, concur to impel the first Jewish Christians to an interpretation of His sayings which is one-sided, and in part over- emphasized, just because it is local and early. The best interpreter of much that Christ taught has been the later development of history.
(3) The scope of the Gospel. — It is known that the later Jewish theologians had no strictly formulated views of the relation of the Gentiles to the future Messianic salvation. In some few passages of their writings, especially in the Sibylline Oracles, it would seem as though they looked forward to the admittance of Gentiles into the Kingdom on equal terms with the Jews, simply on the ground of obedience to God (cf. Sib. Or. iii. 740). But the prevailing tendency was very different. When the Kingdom came, the Gentiles would be annihilated ; or they would be condemned to everlasting punish- ment in Gehenna ; or they would, if they were righteous, participate in the Messianic salvation, Ijut only as proselytes, or as subjects of the Jewish people.
To the early Jewish Christians, who had been trained in such conceptions as these, it was inevit- able that Ciirist's teaching, if it were universal in ultimate scope and intention, implicitly rather than explicitly should seem to point to a national rather than a universal Kingdom. That this was the belief of the first disciples at Jerusalem, the first half of the Acts bears witness. Only the pressure of circumstances could force the Apostles to go back to Christ's words, and to see that they bore within them the seeds of a belief in a universal, spiritual monarchy, which was quite unlimited in scope. It needed a vision to convince St. Peter of this, and Gal 3 sliows how difficult the lesson was for him. In this respect the First Gospel has a twofold outlook. Underlying the surface there may clearly be seen, in the words of Christ which are recorded, expressions which would naturally convey the implication that Christianity was in- tended to influence all mankind. The gospel was to be preaclied to all nations (24"). The disciples Avere to make disciples of all nations {2S^% Many were to come from east and west, and sit down withm the Kingdom (8"). The Kingdom was to be given to another nation, and to be taken from the Jews (21«). But these sayings have all the appearance of words which were interpreted in a limited sense by the editor of the Gospel. If the Kingdom was to come immediately after the fall of Jerusalem, then the preaching to the Gentiles