(v.) But this is not a complete account of the Christological phenomena of these chapters. There are numerous indications that from the very outset the minds of some at least of the disciples were at work on tlie material provided for them by {a) their recollection of wiiat Jesus liad been, said, and done ; (b) the facts of His Crucifixion and Resurrection ; and (c) tiie promises and predictions of the OT, together possibly with some of the language of the apocalypses. The re- sult of this retiexion is seen in the ascription to Jesus as Messiah of certain important titles and functions which indicate more precisely the relation in whicli He stands towards God or the function He discharges towards men. In his speech on the day of Pentecost St. Peter was ready with a quota- tion from Ps 16, and an exegetical interpretation of it which was sufficiently in accord with con- temporary methods of exegesis to commend it to his hearers. Not long after, we find him making the definite general statement that God had ful- filled the things which He foreshowed ' by the mouth of all his prophets that his Christ should sufier ' (3'8 ; cf. also 3^^ 10«). We are justified, therefore, in looking to the writings of the prophets for the sources of phrases and ideas now connected with Jesus as the risen Messiah.
(a) The Servant of God. — That is undoubtedly the source of the striking description, rbv iralda avrov (sc. deov), which occurs twice in St. Peter's second speech (3^^- -^) and twice {rbv dyiov TraWd aov) in the prayer of thanksgiving (4-^- 2"). The rendering familiar to English ears through the AV trans- lates TTttiSa by ' Son ' in the first two passages, by ' child ' in the last two. But according to the view now generally held it is the alternative meaning of Trats which is here intended, viz. ' ser- vant ' ; and we have in the phrase a deliberate echo of the language of Deutero-Isaiah concern- ing the 'Servant of the Lord.' Such a usage, in the first place, is a further indication of the primi- tive character of St. Luke's material. It is found elsewhere only in Clement, the Didache, and the Martyrdom of Polycarp. It is an early Messianic
title for our Lord which is not rei^eated in the later books of the NT (see further A. Harnack, Date of Acts and Synoptic Gospels, Eng. tr., 1911, p. 106 ; History of Dogma, Eng. tr., i. [1894] 185, note 4).
Further, the application of this title to Jesus is very significant, whether it is traced to inde- pendent retiexion on the part of the apostles, or whether it be due to appreciation on their part of the same factor in the consciousness and in the utterances of Jesus. Its eti'ect was to link on to the traditional conception of the ISIessiah a series of ideas of quite a different character, including humility, submission, vicarious sufi'ering and death. The importance of this identification is illustrated by the exposition of Is 53^ given by Philip to the Ethiopian eunuch (8^^ ' beginning from this scrip- ture he preached unto him Jesus') ; and the same interpretation probably underlies St. Paul's state- ment, ' Christ . . . died for our sins according to the scriptures.'
(/3) Prince and Saviour. — The same OT context is probably the source of another striking desig- nation, dpx'nyov /cat ffwTTJpa. ' Him did God exalt unto his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour' (5^' ; cf. 3^^ 'ye slew the Prince of life' ; and He 2'** ' the author 'prince, or captain) of their sal- vation' ; also ]J* Author and finisher' [Westcott, ' leader and con^omniator ']). The variety in the renderings reflects an ambiguity in the word dpxv yos. It describes one who both inaugurates and controls ; and the dpx'riyds ttjs ^utjs at once inaugu- rates and controls the Messianic experience of sal- vation here described as fw^. There is thus a close parallelism between the two phrases ' Prince of life ' and ' Prince and Saviour ' ; and when they are taken together, and weighed with the context in which the first is found, their connexion with the language of Isaiah becomes plain, e.g. Is 60'^ f7cb Ki//)ios 6 (Tw'^ujv ere, and 55^ Idoii fiaprvpiov iv 'idvecnv i5(jiKa avrbv, dpxovra Kal irpoaTacraovTa rots idvecnv. The 'sutterings of the Christ' had been foretold 'by the mouth of all the prophets'; and the same pro- jihecies, to the study of which the apostles had been led by His death, supplied forms for the ex- pression of their faith in Him.
(7) Son of Man. — This title for Jesus occurs once only — in the account of the martyrdom of Stephen (7^®). Stephen ' looked up stedfastly to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God ; and he said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God.' Two things are clear : the name ' Jesus ' and the title ' Son of Man ' are already felt to be interchangeable, and the title belongs to Jesus as the Messiah. There is no other instance of the phrase in the NT outside the Gospels, Rev 1^* being no exception. It provides, as Bartlett says {ad loc), 'a water-mark of the originality of this utterance,' and even the most cautious critics admit that this speech of Stephen reached St. Luke from a very early source. These two facts — the early date to which the phrase must be assigned and its uniqueness outside the Gospels — point to its being a reminiscence of what is attested by the Gospels — our Lord's custom of describing Himself by this title, and describing Himself with a veiled allusion to His Messiahship. But even if the primitive community was itself re- sponsible for this identification, and did not take it over from our Lord Himself, that would not diminish the significance of the phrase for the primitive Cliristology. ' This identification of the historical Jesus with the "Son of Man " of Daniel and Enoch is very significant, because directlj' it is accomplished, the further thought can no longer be resisted, that Jesus of Nazareth is not simply a man, who in the future is to be exalted to heavenly