CHRIST, CHEISTOLOGY
CHEIST, CHEISTOLOGY 183
into the earthly ministry. He liad been ' raised up' by God (3-''; cf. 7^^ 13*'') as it had been pre- dicted by Moses that God would raise up ' a prophet ' (3^-). He had been sent by God as one blessing His people, and by God ' anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power' (lO^**). This last expression probably means ' appointed as Messiah,' the occasion referred to being the Baptism of Jesus. ' Since Is 11'^ the conception of the Messiah in Jewish theology had been indissolubly linked with that of the Spirit. The Messiah is the bearer of the Spirit' (Bruckner, in RGG ii. 1208), so that the anointing with the Spirit is equivalent to in- stallation as jNIessiah.
(2) The Resurrection and the MessiaJiship. — To what was the conviction that Jesus was the Messiah due? It is sometimes easily assumed that it was produced by the Kesurrection. But taken by it- self the Eesurrection Avas not sufficient to create belief that Jesus was the Messiah. It is not as if there had been any antecedent expectation that the Messiah would rise from the dead ; such an expectation was indeed excluded by the absence of any idea that death was an element in the Messiah's experience. There is no reason to suppose that when St. Peter appealed to the verses in Ps 16, he was guided in the interpretation he gave of v.^" by any tradition concerning the Messiah. Xor was there in the fact of resurrection itself any demon- stration that such a rank belonged to the subject of it. It had been reported concerning John the Baptist that he was risen from the dead (Mk 6"), but the only inference drawn was that * therefore do these powers work in him,'
The Resurrection did not create faith in Jesus as Messiah ; it revived it. He had died as One who claimed to be, and by some was believed to be, the Christ. ' We trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel ' (Lk 24-^) ; and the effect of the Resurrection was to vindicate this claim made by Jesus and for Him on behalf of His followers.
The form and contents of that belief began to undergo a rapid change, as we have seen ; but beyond this, the disciples are found taking up a religious attitude to the Risen Master which is not accounted for by their belief that He was the Messiah. They behold Him as set by the right hand of God ; and the vision is the ideal expres.sion of the devotion, allegiance, and hope which move in their hearts towards Christ. To what again is this profoundly significant attitude due — for which there is no sufficient explanation in traditional ideas of the JNIessiah ? The explanation may be sought in two directions.
(3) The historic Jesus. — The attitude is due, firstly, to the impression made on the disciples by the historic Jesus. He had never attempted to demonstrate the claim which He made. But they had tacitly admitted its validity. He had claimed to stand in a universal and at the same time unique relation to men ; He had postulated that tlieir atti- tude to Himself was the determining factor in life both present and future. He had demanded for Himself and for His cause an allegiance which outweighed the claims of any other relationship. And He made known to them in Himself such a character, such a personality, that these claims, stupendous as they were, seemed reasonable, and were, indeed, admitted and acted upon — ' Lord, we have left all and followed thee.' And the very failure on the part of these same men to grasp the inmost significance of His message and His life enhances their witness to the moral pressure they experienced, leading them to submit even where they imperfectly understood. When St. Peter made what is called the great confession, ' Thou art the Christ,' he was doubtless seeking to crys-
tallize the total impression into a categorical form. But the form itself was not adequate. To acknow- ledge Jesus as the Messiah was to assign to Him the highest rank and dignity within the intellect- ual range of the apostles. But the motives which led to the confession, the attitude and personal relation which lay behind it, found only incomplete expression in the recognition of Him as the Messiah. Jesus had done what no one had ever conceived of the Messiah doing. He had touched the inner springs of their life. He had deepened indefinitely their apprehension of essential things, the joy of life as lived by those who have a Father in God, the sorrow that springs from the fact of human alienation from that Father. According to the measure of their capacity He revealed to them the Father, and it was oy leading them to know Him- self. And so, for those who attached themselves to Him, Jesus became Messiah and more. And as the conviction that He was Messiah was revived by the Resurrection from the death-blow which it re- ceived through the Crucifixion, so the experience of ' the more ' was also latent in the consciousness of the disciples, waiting to be quickened by a corresponding event, and developed by a future experience.