117_21«).
2. Johnnnine and Patristic Christology. — [a) It matters little that after St. Paul tiie Wisdom- doctrine should have been rebaptized by tiie Greek title of Logos, perhaps under the influence of Piiilo, perhaps as a concession to a Greek-speaking Church. Even in the Fourth Gospel the basic conception
remains Hebrew and Pauline. Sanday as a student of Johannine thouglit, Sabatier as a student of Pauline, concur in admitting the identity of doctrine under the diverse terminology.
{b) In the Fourth Gospel tiie standpoint of the Evangelist is purely and simplj' the theological. He depicts the self-manifestation of the Divine Wisdom or Logos as incarnate in Jesus by word and deed. Her 'dwelling among men' (P"-^^; cf. Enoch 42^), rejection antl apotheosis (20'^) is his theme. It is characteristic that here, as in the Wisdom literature in general. Wisdom is made to 'praise herself (Sir 24^). The incarnate Logos preaches Himself ; His seven parables are seven ' I am's,' His seven migiity works manifest His own glory (Jn 2^'). In Jn 7^^ Jesus even quotes again an unknoM'n ' scripture ' which by all analogy is drawn from the Wisdom literature (cf. Sir 24*"*- [applied in vv.^''-29^ ]jy analogy with five rivers, to the five books of the Torah]. Enoch 48^ 49\ and for Rabbinic interpretation in the scribal sense, Emek Hammelech, 196^, on Is 12'*, ' The waters are nothing else than the Torah, and the Avaters of salvation nothing else than the Torah of Messiah,' Weber, Lehre d. Talm. p. 360 f. ; cf. also 1 Co 10* and Oxyrh. Log. ill.).
(c) The Wisdom utterance Mt Ipsff- may be regarded as marking the transition-point between the Synoptic and Johannine representations of Jesus' teaching. Not its doctrine alone, nor its mysticism, paralleling 1 Co 2 (see Mystery), but the very form of its utterance is thus seen to be characteristic ; for the Wisdom of God habitually speaks in the first person. Herein the discourses of the Fourth Gospel are as close to the spirit of the Wisdom litei'ature as its Logos-doctrine is close to the Wisdom-doctrine of St. Paul. In the develoj^ment of Gospel literature the presentation of Jesus' career and teaching as the manifestation of the Divine Wisdom takes a place analogous to that of the Wisdom-doctrine of St. Paul in the development of Christology.
Literature.— On the Wisdom hypostasis see, in addition to the works cited above, Bousset, Religion des Judenthiiins^, p. 394 ff. ; Brandt, Evangelische Geschichte, pp. 537, 561 f., 576 ; J. Drummond, Philo Jud(eus, ii. p. 201 ff. ; Aall, Gesch. d. Logosidee, i. p. 204 f. On Hebrew Wisdom literature : Cheyne, Job and Solomon, or the Wisdom of the OT, 1887. On the literary forms : Norden, Antike Kunstprosa ; Wilke, Die neutest. lihetorik ; Moffatt, Historical Neiv Test.'^ pp. xx, 704. On the influence of the Hokhmah literature on the gospel : F. O. Porter, Messages of the Apocalgi'tic Writers, 1905, p. 19. On the dis- courses of the Third Gospel : Bacon, The Sermon on the Moxmt, 1900, Appendix C. On Mt 233+39, d. F. Strauss, ' Jesu Weheruf iiber .Jerusalem und die ro<pia, toZ Oeou ' in Ztschr. wiss. Theol. vi. (1863), pp. 84-93 ; Louian, Th. Tijdsehr. i. pp. 550-560.
B. W. Bacon. WISDOM OF CHRIST.— 1. Christ, being God and man, possessed naturally two distinct kinds of wisdom — Divine toisdom and human wisdom. The former, as part of the totality of the Divine attri- butes (t6 wXripuj/jLa rrji debr-qTos), He neces.sarily possessed from eternity, and, according to Pauline teaching. He continued to possess it, in spite of His K^pwaLs, or self-emptying (Ph 2^), even after His Incarnation (Col V^ 2^, cf. 23). The continued possession by tiie Incarnate Logos of the fulness of the Divine wisdom is no isolated doctrine, but is necessarily involved in the Logos-Ciiristology of St. Paul and St. John, according to which the P'ather does not create and su.stain the world directly, but mediately tlirough the Logos, who is the Creator (Jn P- i", Eph 3", Col V«, He 1'^), the Life (,Jn 1^), and the Light (v.") of the world, the cause of its rational order, and the principle of its coherence and subsistence (Col 1'''). Cosmical functions of sucli a kind as this, assigned to the Logos in accordance with His essential nature and jiosition in tlie Godhead, cannot be supposed to have been laid aside at tiie Incarnation, and there- fore the limitations of Christ's knowledge, which
¥
830
WISDOM OF CHRIST
WITNESS
the Synoptic Gospels recognize, either must be attributed to His maniiood, or else it must be sup- posed that in the historical Christ were two centres of Divine consciousness — an unlimited one, in wliich He knew all things, and a limited one, in which He condescended to be ignorant of certain things. The latter view, which is based on an ultra-literal interpretation of Mk 13^^, postulates three different kinds of wisdom in Christ — an unlimited Divine wisdom, a limited Divine wisdom, and a human wisdom. This scheme appears to us unnecessarily complicated. The ' ignorance' of Mk 13^^, although ascribed to the Son, can quite naturally, on the l)rinciple oi communicatio idioniatum, be attributed to Christ's human nature {ovk ayvoujv 6 Aoyos, rj \6yos icTiv, fKeyev, Ovk oWa, olde yap, dWa to dvOpdiTTivov SeiKvvs, &Ti rwv dvdpilnrwv IStov iari rb dyvoelv, Athan. c. Arian. iii. 45) ; and consequently there is no need to recognize in Christ more than tioo wisdoms, a human and a Divine (see, further, Kenosis).