2. ^^'e assume, then, that Jesus took uj) His ministry deliberately, with a programme, more or less definite, already formed in His mind. Was the Messianic claim an original part of this pro- gramme / We have here the crucial issue on which the whole question of the plan of Jesus may be said to hinge.
That Jesus declared Himself the Messiah is established beyond all doubt by the fact of His trial and crucifixion. The process against Him can adnut of no other explanation than that He had laid open claim to tlie Messianic office. It has been maintained, however, by several modern writers (e.g. A. Reville) that this claim was an after-thought. The first intention of Jesus was, they say, simply to proclaim the Kingdom of God ; anil the assumption of Messiahshi]) was forced \\\)on Him by the failure of His original message. In order to retrieve His declining cause. He con- sented, though against His will, to bring it into line with the national hope, and ai)peared in Jerusalem as the declared ilessiah.
It may indeed be accepted as one of the most certain lesults of the modern study of the Gospels, that in the earlier part of His ministry Jesus was silent regarding His Messianic claim. But the evidence is almost conclusive that He only held it in reserve, and intended from the lirst to make it. (1) The Messianic hope was inseparablj- bound up with the idea of the Kingdom of God. From the moment that He knew Himself called by God to inaugurate the Kingdom, Jesus must have recog- nized His title to tiie office of Messiah. No other form was possible, under Jewish modes of thought, by which He might express to Himself His own relation to the Kingdom. (2) The accounts of His earliest teaching all lay stress on the authority
with which He spoke, reflecting in His manner of utterance the consciousness of a unique personal dignity (Mt 7-^ Mk P"). This sense of authority is especially marked in the Sermon on the Mount, with its repeated 'I say unto you.' It seems evident that even while confining Himself to the role of teacher, Jesus was fully aware that He was much more. As yet He made no open claim to the place of Messiah, but the knowledge that it belonged to Him coloured His wliole action and thouglit. (3) At Csesarea Pliilipiji, when He at last broke the silence. He elicited a spontaneous confession from His disciples. H the incident has been rightly rej^orted (and few passages in the Gospels bear stronger marks of authenticity), we are compelled to infer tliat, wliile concealing His claim, He had only been waiting till the disciples should recognize it of themselves. In His previous intercourse with them He had been leading tliem, step by step, to this final recognition. His choice of tlie title ' Son of Man ' may have been deter- mined by a like motive. The title was ambiguous, and did not necessarily involve the more exijlicit title ; but it served to awaken reflexion, and to pre- pare the wa}' for tlie definite claim to Messiahshii^. We are justihed, tlierefore, in concluding that Jesus intended from the first to declare Himself, and that His silence was part of His deliberate plan. The two ciiief motives that weighed with Him can be gathered, almost with certainty, from the whole tenor of the Gospel narrative. (1) He had resolved on a method of working which would have been impossible if the people had immediately known Him as the Messiah. The Kingdom, as He conceived it, was a spiritual magnitude, and He could fulfil it only by effecting an inward change in the hearts and minds of men. As Messiah, He Avould have been committed at once to action of a conspicuous nature, and could never have pursued His work of teaching, healing, comforting. The story of the Temptation, which probably rests on some authentic communication of Jesus to His disciples, represents Him as choosing between the two methods of activity which were open to Him at the outset. He decided to trust Himself to the purely spiritual forces, and His silence was the necessary consequence of this decision. (2) He desired to rid the Messianic idea of the national and political character with which the popular imagination had lavested it. By assuming the title prematurely He would have awakened false hopes and exposed His mission to a fatal mis- apprehension. It was necessary, fir.st of all, to create a new ideal in the mind of the people by the revelation of His own character and life. When they had learned to replace their worldly concep- tion of the ^Messiah by a truer and more spiritual one. He would be able to declare Himself. It was this that happened at last in the case of His immediate followers. Through their intercourse Avith Jesus they had attained to a higher knowledge of the Divine purposes, and recognized in Him the true Messiah. But 'he charged them that they should tell no man of him' (Mk 8^"). The nation as a whole Avas engrossed with its hope of a political deliverer, and was still incapable of receiving His secret.
_ Thus far we can regard our Lord as acting con- sistently on a plan, formed, most probably, before He commenced His puljlic ministry. He knew Himself to be the Messiah, but had determined to conceal His claim until His teaching and His personal influence should produce a change in the minds of His countrymen. It is difficult, however, to avoid the conclusion that from Csesarea Philippi onward His original plan was set aside. Instead of continuing His chosen Avork until the Avhole people should spontaneously confess Him as His