For now it is to be observed that this silence of Jesus on the connexion of His sufferings and death with His saving work is far from absolute ; on the contrary, the intimations of such connexion, when brought together, and read with the help of such a key as Is 53 affords, are neither few nor ambiguous. It is not, indeed, till late in the ministry, after Peter's confession, that Jesus begins to speak plainly of His approaching death, and then of that death as Divinely ordained and foretold, and to be followed by resurrection (Mt IG^i IT^- 22. 23 2018- 19 II, see above). Thenceforth His death had an absorbing place in His thoughts. It was a ' cup ' He had to drink, a ' baptism ' He had to be baptized with. He was 'straitened' till it was accomplished (Mt 2022, Mk IQs^- 3s, Lk 12^0 ; cf . Lk 9^1). At the Transfiguration it was, according to St. Luke, the ' decease (e^oSos) which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem ' which was the subject of His converse with Moses and Elijah (9^1). But the very decision and circumstantiality of these first announcements to His disciples imply that the subject had long been before His own thoughts ; and that, in conformity with what has already been said, this was really the case, we gather from such a passage as Mt 9^^ (' When the bridegroom shall be taken away from them'), but much more clearly from the sayings preserved to us by St. John from the Jud^ean and Capernaum ministries. Here, in the line of the Baptist's opening an- nouncement (1^*), the connexion between Chrisfs death and the salvation of the world is unmistak- ably declared. Thus, in the conversation with Nicodemus, 'As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of ]Man be lifted up,' etc. (3"-"5 ; cf. on the lifting up, 12*^), and in the remarkable discourse at Capernaum, in which Jesus dilates on His flesh as given for the life of the world, and on His blood as shed (we must pre- sume) for the same end (lj5i-5«). In the light of these sayings we must, in consistency, interpret others more general in character {e.rj. lO'^i^ i""*
1224.23).
When we return to the Synoptics, we have again, in the closing period, more than one signifi- cant utterance. There is first the well-known passage preserved in both Mt. and Mk. : ' The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom (Xi^rpo^) for many {avrl ttoXXw^)' (Mt 20-8, Mk 10^5).
It does not rob this passage of its force that it occurs in im- pressing on the disciples the lesson that the true greatness lies in service. Xo one will suppose that Jesus could have used language such as He here employs about the disciples, or about any other than Himself. The incidental occurrence of the say-
480
REDEMPTION
EEDEMPTION
ing may rather suggest that there must have been other teach- ing on the subject, and that Jesus here assumes the saving purpose of His death as known to the disciples.
The significance of the word 'KHrpov is investi- gated in art. Ransom ; it is enough now to say that the word is most naturally taken as the equiv- alent of the Hebrew nsb (allied to is? 'to atone '), used of that which is given in exchange for a life, whether money or another life. The thought in Jesus' mind may well have been that of Is 53. The meaning would then be that His death is the redemption-price by which the many are delivered from the ruin entailed by sin (including both the guilt and the power of sin). There is, again, the passage already cited, Lk 22", directly glancing at Is 53, and declaring it to be fulfilled in Christ's death. There are, finally, the words at the Supper, which, amidst the variations in the four accounts we have of them (Mt 2626-28, Mk 1422-25, Lk 22i9- 20^ 1 Co 1123-25)^ present certain very distinguishable ideas. The bread is Christ's body, the cup is Christ's blood. The body is given or broken and the blood is shed for the disciples (in Mt. and Mk. 'for many'). The very variations support the general meaning put upon the act. If Mt. and Mk. have not the words ' given ' or ' broken ' spoken of the body (Luke, Paul ?), both have ' shed for many ' of the blood. Lk. has both ' given for you' and 'poured out for you,' St. Paul, on the other hand, has ' My body, which is [broken ?] for you,' but not the corresponding ' shed for you.' All agree in the leading feature, that Jesus said : 'This is my blood of the covenant' (Mt., Mk.), or 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood' (Luke, Paul). Mt. adds : ' which is shed for many unto the remission of sins.' Even if it were con- ceded, what there is no necessity for conceding, that this logion is less original than the others [there is probably a reminiscence of Jer 31*], it has at least the value that it shows the sense in which Christ's words were understood in the Apos- tolic age. That Jesus, therefore, in the words at the Supper, represents His death as a sacrifice for the salvation of many, and definitely connects the shedding of His blood with the remission of sins and the making of a New Covenant, is nearly as certain as anything in exegesis can be. The ques- tion that remains is — With what special sacrifice does Jesus regard His death as connected (Pass- over, ratificatory sacrifices at Sinai) ? Probably it is not necessary to decide between different views. Jesus may well have regarded His death as fulfil- ling the truth of all propitiatory sacrifice.