Closely connected with the title ' Son of David ' are those of 'King of Israel' and 'King of the Jews.' Jesus is spoken of as ' King of the Jews ' by the Magi (Mt 2^, cf. Lk P^- ^S), and the first recorded instance of His being addressed as ' King of Israel ' is the confession of Nathanael, ' Thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel ' (Jn 1*'). All other instances of the use of these titles belong to tlie narrative of the last; week of Christ's ministry. He was hailed as ' King of Israel ' (Jn IS^ cf. Lk lO^S) at His triumphal entry, when He seemed to be on the point of acceding to the popular desire, and when He so far countenanced it by literallj' and in the most public manner fulfilling tiie prophecy of Zechariah (9"), riding into Jerusalem upon a joung ass. the use of which He had claimed on the ground tiint ' the Lord hath need of him ' (Mt 2P || Mk IP II Lk 19^'). The title appears after this in direct connexion with the suti'erings and death of Jesus, wjiose claim to be ' Christ, a King,' was tlie pre-
text used by the chief priests for delivering Him over to Pilate (Lk 23-). Pilate, hearing this charge brought against his prisoner, asked Jesus, ' Art thou the King of the Jews?' (Mk 15- || Lk 23^). Jesus replied in the atiirmative, but explained that the Kingdom which He claimed was spiritual, not temporal (Jn IS''^"^"). After this the titles ' King of Israel' and 'King of the Jews' are 'applied to Jesus by Pilate, the Roman soldiers, and the Jews, with associations of mockery and abuse (Mt 27-"- '■' II Mk 15'«- ■■>■- II Lk 23^' li Jn PJ^- ^^- ^-) ; and with the same associations the title ' King of the Jews ' was afirtxed to the cross (Mt 27^' II Mk 15-® || Lk 2338 II Jn 19^^). The explanation already sug- gested of our Lord's avoidance of the name Christ has special force here. Misunderstood as those titles wei'e, Jesus systematically discouraged their use as being calculated to create a false impression of His actual claims. The trial before I'ilate and Herod and the scene at the Crucifixion themselves illustrate the reason for Christ's refusal to accept the royal honours which the people would have pressed upon Him. In the opinion of Jew and Gentile the royalty of Jesus and His crucifixion as an impostor and malefactor involved a grotesque contradiction. The cry of derision, ' He is the King of Israel, let him come down from the cross ' (Mt 27'- II Mk 1530), was but another form of the popular belief that a suffering Saviour Avas a con- tradiction in terms, that the Christ could not be subject to death (Jn 12^^). See also art. King.
5. Son of God. — This title, as it Avas knoAvn among the Jcavs, had in it a very considerable element of ambiguity. We can understand Avhy this Avas so Avhen Ave reflect upon the fact that in OT Scripture the expression is more than once used of others besides a Divine Being. It is used of angels (Gn 6-- \ Job 1« 2^ SS'^), of kings, and even of the nation of Israel (2 S 7^'*, Ps 82"^, Ex 4--). In the Ncav Test., again, it is applied to Adam (Lk 3^^), Avhere the reference is to the rela- tionship in Avhich bj^ his creation he stands to God ; and Jesus Himself uses the exjjression ' sons of God ' Avith reference to believers, Avhere He says that in heaven ' they ai'e equal unto the angels ; and are the 'children (Gr. nioi, "sons") of God' (Lk 203'=).
The use of the name as a title of the Messiah is traceable to OT prophecies like that of Ps 2^ ' Ihou art my Son ; this day have I begotten thee.' Thus ' Son of God ' came to be synonymous Avith ' Christ.' It is possible that it Avas so used even by Peter in his confession at Ca'sarea Phili[)pi (Mt 1(3"'', cf. Mk S'-'» 'Thou art the Christ,' and Lk 9-« 'the Christ of God,' Avith Jn C'* ' the Hoi}' One of God,' 6 d-yLos Tou deoC), and it Avas certainly understood in that sense, i.e. as strictlj^ Messianic, by the Jews gener- ally in the time of our Lord. To them the Messiah as such Avas Son of God. Thus in Nathanael's confession the latter name occurs in conjunction Avitli the ]\Iessianic title ' King of Israel ' ; and John the Baptist, after relating the incident by Avhich the Spirit of God showed him that Jesus Avas the Christ, concludes Avith the Avords, ' I saAV and bare record that this is the Son of God' (Jn P", cf. V.3-*). It is of rare occurrence in the Sj'noptic Gosjiels. We find it in the Annuncia- tion : 'That holy thing Avhich shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God ' (Lk P^). In the Synoi)tic accounts of tiie Baptism and the Transfiguration Ave learn that on both occasions Jesus Avas hailed as Gods Son by a A'oice from heaven (Mt 3" !l ^Nlk 1" || Lk 3'", cf. .Mt 17^ II Mk 9''' II Lk S^^). Again, the Sj'noptists give various instances in Avhich Jesus Avas called ' Son of God ' by others, as by Satan (:Mt 43- « |1 Lk 43- '■*), by the demons Avhom He cast out of those Avho Avere possessed (Mk 3", Lk 4""), and bj- the occupants of