But what is the significance of the title ' Son of God ' ? It was not exactly a new title when used in the NT, though Dn 3-' cannot be quoted for it ('a son of the gods,' RV ; AV Avrongly, ' the Son of God'). It is probable that Ps 2^ was the founda- tion of the Jewish conception of Messiah as Son.* And thei'efore the title ' Son of God ' had probably a different meaning in the mouth of some speakers from that which it had in the mouth of others. Thus wlien the demoniacs called Jesus the Son of God (Mk 3" 5^, Mt 14-^^ Lk 4«), they would mean no more than that He was the promised Messiah, without dogmatizing as to His nature. The mockers at Calvary would use the word in the same sense. ' If thou art the Son of God ' is the same as / If thou art the Christ ' (Mt 27^"). The Centurion, if (as seems probable) his saying as re- ported in Mk 15^", Mt 27'^ is more correct than that given in Lk 23'", where 'a righteous man' is substituted for ' the Son of God,' would have borrowed a Jewish phrase without exactly under- standing its meaning, and thus St. Luke's para- phrase would faithfully represent what was pass- ing in his mind.
But Jesus gave a higher meaning to the title, and this higher meaning is the keynote of the teaching of His disciples. It is true that in Lk 3^^ the Evangelist calls Adam a [son] of God (for ' son ' see y."^), as being created directly by God ; but this is not the meaning in the NT generally. There seems to have been a suspicion in Caiaphas' mind of the iiiglier meaning given to the title by Jesus, when he asked Him whether He was ' the Christ, the Son of God ' (Mt 26"^). There is almost an approach here to the Johannine saying that the Jews souglit to kill Him because He ' called God his own Eatlier, making himself equal with God ' (Jn 5^8). To the disciples the confession that Jesus was the ' Son of God' (W^, Martha) or ' the Holy One of God' (G"" RV, Simon Peter) meant the belief that He partook of the nature of God. This, indeetl, might have meant only that Jesus was a Divinely inspired man. But the teaching
* We are not here concerned with the connexion between the thought of Israel as Son and Messiah as Son.
of Jesus lifts the title to the highest level (Mt 11-^ Jn 5'^"^" 9^5, etc. ; for St. John's own teaching see, e.g., Jn 3^^'*). In this sense there is only one ' Son of God,' who is the Only- begotten, the Beloved (ixovoyev-fji and ayair-qris are both translations of Tn; ; see Only-Begotten). And so in the Epistles the title expresses the Divinity of our Lord, The apostolic message was to preach that Jesus is the Son of God (Ac Q^o, Jn 20^1). While the first Christian teachers proclaimed the true humanity of the Lord [e.g. Ro 1^ : ' concerning his Son who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh'), they also proclaimed His true Godhead (v.* : ' declared to be the Son of God Avith power'). The saying of Justin Martyr [Apol. i. 22) exhibits no advance on apostolic doctrine : ' The Word of God Avas born of God in a peculiar manner ' (t'Si'ws). The Arians distinguished 'Son of God' from 'God,' and de- nied that the ' Son ' could be in the highest sense ' God.' The Clemeiitine Homilies (which used to be thought to be of the 2nd or 3rd cent., but are now usually, in their present form, ascribed to the 4th [JThSt x. (190S-09) 457]) make the same distinction (xvi. 15). St. Peter is made to say : 'Our Lord . . . did not proclaim Himself to be God, but He with reason pro- nounced blessed him who called Him the Son of that God who has arranged the universe.' Simon [Magus] replies that he who comes from God is God ; but St. Peter says that this is not possible ; they did not hear it from Him. ' What is begotten cannot be compared with that which is unbegotten or self- begotten.' Sanday (ZfDB iv. 577b) refers to this passage as an isolated phenomenon ; but now that the book has been with much probability assigned to the later date, we may say that the teaching just quoted was not heard of, as far as the evi- dence goes, till the 4th century.
(b) Jesus is the Lord. — The significance of this title (6 Kiipios) in the Apostolic Age is not at once apparent to the Eui'opean of to-day. The name ' Lord ' seems to him applicable to Jiny leader of religious thought. To the present-day Greek Kiipie is no more than our 'Sir, and 6 K(>pio% is the way in which any gentleman is spoken of, as the French use the word 3Ionsieur. But to the Greek- speaking Christian Jew of the 1st cent., 6 Kvpios had a much deeper signification ; deeper also than the complimentary Aramaic title ' Rabbi ' (lit. ' my great one'). For the Jews habitually used the Avord 'Lord 'as a substitute for 'JaliAveh.' That sacred name, though Avritten, Avas not pronounced. In reading the HebrcAv OT, ' Adonai ' Avas substi- tuted for it. And so the Hellenistic Jcavs, in read- ing their Greek translation of the OT, found 6 Kijpios Avhere the original has 'JaliAveh.' When, then, St. Paul declares that 'no man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit' (1 Co 12^), or bids the Roman Christian 'confess Avith thy mouth Jesus as Lord' (Ro lO^ RV ; cf. Ph 2"), he does not mean merely that Jesus is a great teacher, but he identifies Him with ' the Lord ' of the Greek OT, that is, Avith JaliAveh. St. Peter uses the same identification Avhen he says : ' Sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord' (1 P 3^5 RV ; the AV reading is not supported by the best autliorities) ; here he quotes Is 8'* LXX (Kvpiov avrbv ayida-are), actually substituting rbv Xptardv for avrov. (C. Bigg [ICC, 1901, in loc.'] renders 'sanctify the Lord, that is to say, the Christ,' but this does not afiecf} the present argument.) This identification is frequent in the NT. The title 'the Lord' is used botli of the Father and of the Son. A re- markable passage is Ja S'*'^^, Avhere Ave read in quick succession of 'the Lord of Sabaoth,' 'the coming of the Lord,' 'the Lord is at hand,' 'the prophets spake in the name of the Lord,' ' the Lord shall raise (the sick man) up'; 'the Lord' means here sometimes the Fatlier and sometimes the Son (in 3* RV it is explicitly used of the Father). With this compare the Avay in Avhich in 4}'^ God is said to be the one ' laAvgiver and judge, Avho is able to save and to destroy,' Avhile in 5" Jesus is the judge Avlio ' standetli before the doors.' The passage 1 Co 10" Avould be still more striking if we could be sure