Kyrios Christos, Gottingen, 1913, p. 186 ft'.). It is significant that the relationship expressed by a.yi.a- ^ei.v between God and Jesus is one that may be con- ferred on men by Jesus (cf. Jn 17""^").
In the Book of Acts Jesus is called tov ayiov Kal BiKaioy (3'^), where the epithet is simply an equiva- lent for the Messiah ; and it has the same meaning in 4^ (to;' 3710;' Traldd <tov), where iraWa is to be trans- lated ' servant' in the sense of Is 52** 61^ (see R. J. Knowling, EGT ii. [1900], on Ac 3'^).
Hitherto we have been dealing with instances of the use of S.yios. In Ac 2^ rbv baibv aov follows the LXX translation of Ps 16'°, and is rendered in the AV and RV 'Thy holy one.' 8a-ios is generally used in the LXX to render hdsicl (cf. Dt 33'^, 2 S 22^^, etc.). Hdsld seems to be governed in its primary meaning by that of hesed ( = 'loving-kind- ness'), and to mean ' one who is the object of God's loving-kindness.'
' In its primary sense the word implies no moral praise or merit ; but it came, not unnaturally, to be connected with the idea of chesed as "loving-kindness" between man and man, and to be used of the character which reflected that love of which it was itself the object ; and finally was applied even to God Himself '(A. F. Kirkpatrick.Pso^j/is, Cambridge, 1902, Appendix, note L, p. 835 f.).
Saios is applied to God only in Rev 15^ 16' in the NT. It is again applied to Jesus in He 7^* (dpxtepevs da-ios fi/caKos), where the root distinction between Sa-ios and ^7105 becomes apparent. The writer is speaking of Christ's moral fitness to be our High Priest, and therefore lays stress on the fact that He is hcrios, as exhibiting a perfect filial reverence and devotion to His Father's will. Scrtoj here is the summary, and also indicates the common source of those inward qualities that constituted the ' holy ' character of Jesus. It is interesting to note that oatos is conjoined with diKaios {oa-L&rrjs with diKaioaijvT] in Lk 1'* ; ocrius with SiKalus in 1 Th 2'°) in most of the instances of its use in the NT. This is also frequentl3' the case in classical usage. The central idea in both o<rios and SiKaios is conduct sanctioned by Divine Law ; and So-tos seems to express the Godward, dlKaios the man ward, side of such conduct. It is perple.xing to find that in classical usage ocrios came to mean also ' profane,' but this is accounted for if we remember that a ' profane ' place is one that may be trodden by all without doing violence to the majesty of the god; 'profane' conduct, i.e., is conduct allowed by the god. Of the latter usage there is no trace in the NT. The word used is always ^e';37)Aos. ocrios, therefore, comes to mean ' holy,' approaching much more nearly to our use of the word in English. In all the uses of the word in the NT, even in the semi-technical applications to Messiah quoted from Acts, the reference is to moral conduct, considered as fitness for the service of God (cf. 1 Ti 2*). (For the Greek conception of S<rios see art. ' Holiness [Greek]' in EBE.)
In Ro I'* St. Paul says that Jesus was ' designated (almost=' installed,' opiad^vros) Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness {Kara TTveOfia dyiwcrijvris) by a resurrection of the dead.' ■n-feu/ia aywavv-qt cannot here be merely an equiva- lent of 'Holj^ Spirit' (but see Peine, Nentest. Theologie, pp. 346 f., 452). The expression ' charac- terises Christ ethically, as Kara capKa (v.-') does physically' (Denney, EGT ii. 586). It is along the lines of this clearly implied distinction between ^^vev^^.a, and aap^ that the meaning must be found. There is, however, here no accurate and definite theological distinction between the Divine and the human nature of Jesus. St. Paul is thinking of the complete Pei'sonality of Jesus (as also when lie says previously /card o-dp/ca), and he means the human irveOfia (as the human ffdp^) of Jesus, the former distinsruished by a unique 'holiness' (cf. He 2'^ 41"), This ' holiness,' as always, consists in complete and unswerving consecration to God, and is manifested in all those qualities that constituted the Personality of Jesus. The Resurrection of
HOLmESS, PUEITY
HOLINESS, PUEITY
569
Jesus is the signal acknowledgment by God of the fact. The idea is part of a ^lessianic apologetic against current Jewish notions. The holiness of Jesus is His complete response to the choice of God in sending His Son to be the Saviour of men, and evokes an equivalent response on the part of God in the miracle of the Resurrection. It is the holi- ness of men, as constituting an indestructible re- lationship with God, that is the basis of the flicker- ing hope of immortality in the sense of an endless life with God that we find here and there in the OT. Men have committed themselves to Him, with all that the step involves for conduct, and the promise of the future rests on His faithfulness and power (cf. Ps 73^^ where 'sanctuary' is really 'the holy things of God' or 'the ultimate deeds of God in the full character of His holiness' [G. A. Smith, Modern Criticism and the Preaching of the OT, London, 1901, p. 206]). It is not Avithout signifi- cance, both for the conception of ayiwcrivTi in Ro 1^ as applied to Jesus and for the connexion of the Resurrection of Jesus with human immortality, that St. Paul here uses the phrase, strange in this connexion, i^ avacTaffeuis veKpQv, evidently meaning a resurrection in which others will share.