Though its beginning is unobserved (Lk 17-"), yet He predicted, in the parable of the Seed Growing Secretly (Mk 4-^), its reaching through steady growth its consummation ; in the parable of the Mustard Seed (Mt IS'*'), its universal extension as a visible societj- ; and in that of the Leaven, its gradually acquired power over the hearts of men (Mt 13^). No longer will its bounds be confined to the Chosen Race, for adherents from everj' quarter of the globe will enter it (8"), humanity becoming one flock under one Shepherd (Jn 10'*') ; and towards this great end it will itself work, for it will evangel- ize the worUI before His return (Mt 28'^ 24'-*). And when He comes in tiie clouds, its struggles will cease, and He will gather its members to that heavenly feast which will celebrate His marriage with His bride, and tlien, jiurged from evil, it will enter upon its career of eternal glory (24^' 22"'^* 25'"- 13« 25^).
3. Prcdictiojis i-egarding the material u-orlcL — A renewal of the face of nature enters largely into the prophecies of the OT(Is ll«-9 30^^- 35. 65'', Hos 2"^-, Ezk 34-^- ^), and reappears in wider form in the Epistle to the Romans (8-'), where St. Paul jiredicts the delivery of creation from tlie bondage of cor- ruption ; and in the Apocalypse (21'), where a new heaven and a new earth are foretold (see also 2 P 3'^). Nor can the Church look forward to any less comprehensive issue, believing as she does in the Incarnation which for ever glorifies matter by its union with the Godhead. The comparative silence of Jesus upon this subject is remarkable. He can not be said to have alluded to it except in two passages, neither of which is of certain interpreta- tion. The one is in the Sermon on the Blount, where we read, 'The meek shall inherit the earth ' (Mt 5'). These words may mean no more than that meekness here on earth wins more than self-asser- tion ; but, seeing that the meek do not, as yet at all events, receive their due, the words more probably may be eschatological in reference, and predict their ultimate recognition on a renewed earth. In the other passage Jesus promises His Apostles that ' in the regeneration ' they shall sit upon twelve thrones (19^). But here again there is imcertainty of interpretation ; for, while He calls the culmina- tion of the Kingdom of Grace in the Kingdom of Glory 'the regeneration,' He leaves it uncertain whether that regeneration concerns merely the whole body of the redeemed (cf. Briggs, Mess, of Gospel, pp. 228, 315), or whether it includes, as seems more probable, the physical transformation of nature (cf. Schwartzkopff, "^Proph. of Christ, pp. 219, 232).*
4. Predictions rertardinrj Himself. — "We find in the Gospels frequent predictions by Jesus of His death, and almost invariably in connexion with them allusions to His resurrection. There may be difficulty in deciding as to when He Himself first became conscious of the fatal end to His ministry, but there can be no doubt that as soon as lie realized His death as imminent, He must have realized His resurrection as certain. To suppose Him to have recognized Himself as the true
* Jesus tells us that not only the hnite creation 0I«- 1029 fi2fi)^ but even the veffetable kingdom is under the Father's care (C^W).
Messiah and then to have regarded His death as the end of all, is to suppose the impossible. Living as He lived in uninterrupted communion with the Father, He must have been conscious of the in- destructibility of the Divine life that wai- His, and of the eternal value of His Person and Mork (cf. Schwartzkoprt', Proph. of Christ, pp. 64, 147). And if a dead Messiah was a contradiction in terms to any one liolding Messianic hojies, how much more was it so to the Messiah Himself?
It was not until after the confession of Peter at Cfesarea Philippi (see Mt 16-' ' From that time forth . . . ") that Jesus plainly foretold His death ; but having done so, He repeated the warning three times at short intervals, each time adding more definiteness to the prediction. (1) He outlined the Pas.sion, foretelling the Sanhedrin's rejection of Him, His death, and resurrection (Mk 8^'); (2) after the Transfiguration, where the highest point of His ministry was reached, He repeated the prediction, adding the fact of the betrayal (9^') ; (3) on the journej- to Jerusalem He foretold in very full detail the sufierings that awaited Him (10*^), enumerating in their actual order the stages of contumely through which He was to pass. The betrayal, tiie judicial condemnation, the delivery to the Roman jiower, the mocking and spitting, the killing (Mt 20'^ 'crucifying"), and, finall}', the resurrection, all in turn are mentioned (cf. S^\ete"s St. Mark, I.e.). See, further, art. Ax^'OU^'CE- MEXTs OF Death.
It is assumed by some that Jesus commenced His ministrj' with views as to His work very different from those with which He closed it, the rigour of events leading Him to modify the ideas with which He started (e.g. Weiss. Life 0/ Christ, iii". 60). If this be true, then the delay in our Lord's plain announce- ment of His death until Peter had made his confession may well be due to the fact that He Himself had not before realized it as inevitable. But we should require the strongest proof to cause us to believe in such vacillation or change of purpose on His part. The argument from silence is always precarious, but never more so than in the case of One who di^^tinctly tells us that He restrained His utterances because of His hearers' inability fully to bear the truth (Jn 1612). , We have, therefore, more ground for assuming that His reticence was due to His loving consideration for His disciples, who had already many doubts and difficulties to conquer, rather than to His ignorance of what was before Him. Indeed, in His last discourse He stated that now at length He felt able to speak openly, and would from that nioment (iV ap-zi) tell them plainly what was to come to pass, in order that they might the more readily believe that He was the Christ (Jn IS"*). His reticence and His openness alike are due to His consideration for their weaknesses.