B. The historical Jesus. — St. Paul traced the origin of his faith, and ascribed the life he now lived, to the Risen and Exalted Christ, Lord and Spirit. But it is not true to say that he was either ignorant of, or indifferent to, the manifes- tation of Jesus 'in the days of his flesh.' The references which he makes to the ' historical Jesus ' may be few in number, but they are em- phatic and essential to his total conception of Christ's Person and Work. In the first place, he admits and relies on the authority of Jesus as the rule of life. In Ac 20*^ he is heard definitely re- calling ' the words of the Lord Jesus,' as in 1 Co 1123ff. he quotes as authoritative the terms in which Jesus instituted the Last Supper. The dis- cussion on marriage and divorce in 1 Co 7 illus- trates his attitude. On the one hand, in regard to the marriage of ' virgins,' he says frankly that he • has no commandment of the Lord,' just as in reference to married life he has disclaimed any Divine authority (1 Co 7") ; but in regard to divorce he takes a very different tone, because for that question he has the authority of the historical Jesus, whose deliverance on the subject he quotes. In like manner he claims to ' follow Christ,' mean- ing the historical Jesus, as the supreme example (1 Co IP), and urges his converts to do the like (Ph 2^ff-, 1 Th 2l^ Eph 5^).
It is on the human manifestation of Christ that St. Paul's whole gospel is based — ' Christ died for our sins ' ; and it was as Jesus of Nazareth that He died ; it was ' in the flesh ' that He 'condemned sin,' ' in the body of the flesh ' that God ' reconciled men to himself (Col V^). And the fact of His humanity is absolutely essential to the Apostle's theory of salvation. It provides the identification of the Redeemer with the race He would redeem, in all human experience save the consciousness of having sinned. It is wholly a mistake to represent the emphasis which St. Paul puts upon the Risen Christ as excluding interest in, or knoM-Jedge of, the historical Jesus ; ' the heavenly man ' had no meaning for him except for His being the same as ' the man Christ Jesus.'
And he leaves no room for doubt that the Christ of faith was one with the Jesus of the Gospels. He was 'born of a woman' (Gal 4^; cf. Job 14'). The phrase neither includes nor yet does it ex- clude a supernatural factor in the birth of Jesus ; it asserts His true participation in our common humanity. He was 'born under law' (Gal 4*). Whether significance is to be attached to the ab- sence of the article (Lightfoot) or not (Lietzmann), the context shows that it is His identification with the Jewish race that St. Paul is emphasizing. He is represented as a lineal descendant of David (Ro F), and an argument is founded upon His descent from Abraham (Gal 3'«). This descent had special significance, inasmuch as by becoming ' a
minister of circumcision' (or 'of the circumcision ' ; cf. 2 Co 3^) He confirmed the promises made to the forefathers of Israel (Ro 15^; cf. 2 Co 1-"). So that it is one of the distinguishing privileges of Israel that the Messiah belongs to them ' as far as the flesh is concerned ' (Ro 9^). In 2 Co 5^*, where St. Paul repudiates, for the period subsequent to his conversion, any knowledge of ' Christ after the fiesh,' he postulates at least the hypothetical possi- bility of his having known Him so, and probably refers to a claim which others founded upon their personal acquaintance with the historical Jesus.
There remain two passages of special importance for the light they shed on the Apostle's view of the constitution of our Lord's human personality. The first is in Ro 8^ — 6 debs rbv eavroD T16:' 7re/tf as iu ofiOKJbfiaTi crapKbs a/j.apTias ktX. The allusion to a pre-existent state from which God ' sent His own Son ' (see below) is followed by the carefully chosen phrase ' in the likeness of sin's flesh ' (cf. Ph 2'' ' was made in the likeness of men '). It is pos- sible, but it would be mistaken, to read these words as though their purpose Avas to assert that Christ was ' like ' but only ' like ' to men. What the phrase does convey is that the likeness is true and complete as far as it can be, sin being excepted. By the introduction of 6fioitx)fia St. Paul ' wishes to indicate not that Christ was not really man, or that His flesh was not really what in us is crap^ afiaprlas, but that what for ordinary men is their natural condition is for this Person only an assumed condition ' ( Denney, ad lot. ). The rendering of AV (also RV) ' of sinful flesh ' gives a wrong impression and creates unnecessary difficulty. ' Of sin's flesh ' refers to the phj'sical constitution of man not as originally or inherently sinful — which was never St. Paul's view — but as it had come to be, histori- cally and experimentally, an appanage of sin. Christ entered into humanity as it was conditioned by sin, tyrannized and enslaved by it — sin being regarded as an almost personal conqueror and tyrant.