There is a further indication here of the way in which the conception of salvation as the highest good belonging to the life to come was giving place to the conception of it as a present experience. With all its antecedent conditions — e.g. justification ( = acquittal), cleansing, redemption from the do- minion of evil — and with all its expected contents —peace with God, tranquil confidence, hope and joy — salvation w^as within men's grasp. Men who had received the Spirit had received it as aTrapxn or dppa^ihv, at once the first-fruits and the guarantee of eternal life ; they knew that they had received the Spirit because tlie fruits of the Spirit were pro- duced in them and among them (cf. 1 Jn 3'*) ; and that these were fruits of the Spirit of Christ, or the Spirit that was Christ, they kneAV, because they corresponded with what they knew of His character and teaching.
The recognition of this element in St. Paul's Christology has certain consequences. — (i.) It throws light on the use so freely made by the Apostle of the phrase iv Xpiffrip. (ii.) It leads to a change in the way of conceiving the Spirit which has recently been described as ' die Christificierung des Geistes.' The Spirit being recognized as enter- ing into personal relations with man, of the same character as those of Christ with man, there is formed a conception of the Spirit which can only be described in terms of personality, (iii.) If as Kijpios Christ exercises the authority of God, and as irvevixa at once enspheres men (cf. Ac 17^) and dwells in them, producing the fruits of the Spirit, the true grounds are provided for regarding Him as Divine.
' It is . . . because He works in us with an energy of love and holiness that is identified with the Spirit of God, and commands our obedience with an absoluteness that is identical with the authority of God, that we are to recognise Christ as truly Divine and to acknowledge the presence in Him of powers of Godhead that constitute Him the object of our faith and worship' (Somerville, op. cit. p. 112).
(7) The Second Adam. — Another line of advance was opened for the Apostle partly through the universalism of his gospel, leading him to find in Adam, the head and founder of humanity which fell, a type of Christ as founder and head of the humanity which He had redeemed. Redeemed humanity was indeed a Kaiv't] ktIiji^ (2 Co 5^^, Gal 6'* ; cf. Col 3^", where the parallel with the creation- narrative in Genesis is distinctly suggested). The new creature is a citizen of a new world (Ph 3-"), belongs no longer to the kingdom of darkness but to the kingdom of God's Son (Col 1^*), and lives under a new covenant, or basis of relationship, between God and man (2 Co 3^). In all these particulars he is seen to be a member of a new race ; and Adam, the founder of the original race, was riwos rod /xiWovTos (Ko 5^^): i.e. Christ as 6 fiiWwv bore the same relation to the new race as Adam to the old.
In two passages St. Paul makes use of this analogy, in both cases assuming its validity, not proving it. According to the first, Adam is typical of Christ in the way in which his fall involves con- sequences affecting the relation to God of his whole posterity. That is to say, in Christ, as Second Adam and Representative Man, humanity makes a new beginning ; it recovers its pristine relation to God, the Divine likeness in which it was first created. And as Adam by his disobedience had entailed on all wlio followed the heritage of sin
and death, so Christ by His perfect fulfilment of the Divine will had secured for ' all ' participation in righteousness and life (Ro 5'^'^^).
In the second passage (1 Co 15^-^^) St. Paul applies the same relation and contrast between Adam and Christ to support his statement that there is not only 'a natural ( = psychical) body' but also a 'spiritual' (=2meumatic) one. It is quite in accordance with his method of using Scripture that the verse of Genesis which he quotes has no reference to o-Q/xa ; and yet we can see its relevancy. 'Eyivero 6 [irpuiros] dvOpuiroi [A5a/t] els ^vxw t^crav, where the bracketed words are added to the text of the LXX and emphasize the direction of the Apostle's thought ; Adam, the first man, was made a psychic person, or a 'natural man.' Then he proceeds (without indicating what is the case, viz. that he is no longer quoting) : ' the last Adam (was made) a spirit, a life-giving soul.' He states, in fact, the same view of Christ as that just con- sidered— 'the Lord is the Spirit' — but leaves un- expressed the inference he would have men draw, viz. that as Adam and all who derive from him had a ' psychic body,' so Christ and all who owe 'life' to Him have a ' pneumatic body.'
It is only then (if at all) that St. Paul recalls the famous interpretation put by Philo upon the double narrative of the creation of man (Gn P^ and 2'') — diTTh dudpuiruv yivrj- 6 /xiv yap iariv oiipdvios &v9po)iros, 6 5^ y-fil'vos. 6 fikv odv ovpdvios are Kar elnbua Qeov yeyo- VLos (pOapTTJs Kal <rvv6\o}S ye(l}8ovs oixrlas dfx^Toxos, 6 dk yrji'vos iK awopdSos vkr]s ^v xoOv K^KXijKev dirdyr] (Legum, allegor. [ed. Mangey, vol. i. p. 49] ; cf. de Opif. Mundi [vol. i. p. 32]). Not a few modern writers are disposed to find the root of St. Paul's ' higher Christology ' in this doctrine of Philo con- cerning ' the heavenly man. ' But this is probably a mistaken view. Along with obviously close corre- spondence in phrasing the passage shows funda- mental divergence from the Philonic conception. Pfleiderer and B. Weiss agree that the passage contains no reference to Philo's doctrine of the ideal man. J. Weiss (Christ, p. 74), after positing that there is ' no evidence of literary dependence, i.e. borrowing from any work of Philo's,' makes a careful comparison of the two concejitions, and concludes that Philo's doctrine shows no trace of what is most characteristic in St. Paul.