atonement, as to its substance. For the forms into which it was cast we must look to the rehgious conceptions^— legal, sacrificial, ethical, and eschato- logical — which constituted their world of theologi- cal ideas, and the background against which was set the teaching of Jesus.
I. Sources.—!. In theSynoptic Gospels.— Briefly summarized these are: (1) The intense and con- sistent ethical interpretation that Jesus gave to the Kingdom He came to establish, and to the conception of the salvation He taught and pro- mised as the signof its establishment in the indi- vidual soul and in the social order. It was no mere change of status ; it was a becoming in ethical and spiritual character sons of God in like- ness and obedience ; it was actual release from the selfishness of the unfilial and unbrotherly life, and access into li\ing communion in holy love with His God and Father.
(2) The Baptism and the Temptation of Jesus, which initiated Him into the course of His pubhc ministry, were events associated in the minds of those who preserved the Sjmoptic tradition with the voice from heaven, ' Thou art my beloved Son ; in thee I am well pleased' (Lk 3--). Apparently the consciousness of Jesus as He realized His vocation, judging from what He afterwards taught His disciples of its inner meaning, was aware of this combination of Ps 2^ with Is 42^^ — the Son of God as King, and the suffering Servant of the Lord. The inference Denney draws, though obviously open to keen criticism from the eschatological school, has a suggestive value : the Messianic con- sciousness of Jesus from the beginning was one with the consciousness of the suffering Servant ; He combined kingship and service in suffering from the first.* This finds support in the accounts of the Temptation, which was supremely a tempta- tion to avoid suffering by choosing the easy way.
(3) AU the SjTioptics assure us that, when Jesus received the first full recognition of Messiahship from His disciples, He instantly met it by the open confession that His suffering and death were a necessity. ' The Son of Man must (del) suffer — 7nust go up to Jerusalem and be killed' (Mk 8^^, Mt 16^^, Lk 9'-^) . Henceforth His constant subject of instruction was concerning His death, which, when 'the Son of Man was risen from the dead,' His disciples were to interpret. The necessity associated with His death was not merely the inevitable sequence of His loyalty to His ideal of righteousness in face of the opposition of His enemies. It was that, but it was more. In the career of one such as Jesus the violent and unjust death to which He was moving could not be separ- ated in thought from the Father's will to which He was so exquisitely sensitive, and which He came perfectly to fulfil. What was in His Father's will was appointed and could not be the mere drift of circumstances into which He was cast and from which the Divine purpose was absent. The necessity was inward, and identical with the wiU of God as expressed in Scripture ; to His disciples it was incomprehensible.
(4) Jesus described His death as for others and as voluntarily endured. Definite terms are selected in which the meaning more than the fact of the death is set forth. 'The Son of Man came ... to minister, and to give his hfe a ransom (Xi^rpov) for many' (MklO^^). Whether we approach the mean- ing of this term (see Raxsom) from Christ's con- ception of His life-work as a whole, or by closer exegetical or historical study of the word itself, it is clear that the giving of His Hfe was to Jesus much more than the normal experience of dying ; it was a djang which was to issue in largeness and freedom of life for mankind — it was probably even
* Death of Chrht, 14 f.
112
ATONEMENT
ATONEIMENT
more than 'on behalf of,' 'in the service of; it was 'instead of (dvTl) men. From what He is to release them, however, is not definitely stated. The objection often made that the term is an indication of Pauline influence on Mark is part of the general problem of Paulinism in the Gospels, too large for discussion here. The saying is in perfect harmony with its setting.
(5) The other selected term is connected with the critically difficult passages recording the in- stitution of the Supper. 'This is my blood of the covenant [possibly the 'new' covenant] which is shed for many unto remission of sins' (Mt 26-^). Here the purpose or ground of the death of Jesus is set forth. It is only just to say that Matthew alone makes the reference to 'remission of sins.' The earliest account of the Supper — St. Paul's (1 Co 11-^'-^) — omits this reference ; he is followed by Mark and Luke. Questions also turn on the sacrificial significance of 'blood of the covenant.' The reference is obviously to the solemn ratifica- tion by blood-sprinkling of the covenant of Sinai (Ex 24^). Whether this was strictly sacrificial blood with expiatory value is debated. Robertson Smith* and Driverf may both be quoted in favour of the view that 'sacrificial blood was universally associated with propitiatory power. 'f Whilst too much should not be built upon a single authority for the precise word of Jesus, the criticism does not touch the value of the citation as an index to the mind of the Apostolic Church.