conceptions of Deity, and the glorifying of a human being to a degree altogether unparalleled; and the latter may well be described as A GREATER THING.

The following are the confessions of St. Peter, as given severally by the Evangelists John and Matthew. * "From that [time] many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God."

"When Jesus came into the coasts of Cesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am? And they said, Some [say that thou art] John the Baptist; some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the Prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

To the second of these acknowledgments our remarks are to be confined. If, as is supposed by some critics, the title "Son of man" is an equivalent of the Messiah, the original question of our Lord, by which this confession was elicited, in substance was, "Whom do men say that I, the Messiah, am?" But if the ultimate reply of St. Peter amounted to no more than an admission of

* John vi. 66-69; Matt. xvi. 13-18. Of the genuineness of the received text, in the former of these passages, there is some doubt. It will not therefore be employed in the following reasoning.

the Messiahship, it was obviously the mere echo of our Redeemer's inquiry, and, however faithful to the fact, certainly merited no peculiar commendation. The appellation "Son of man," however, I am rather disposed to regard as a synonyme for a human being,* and as thus directing especial attention to the humanity of Jesus. This interpretation gives to the acknowledgment of the Apostle a suitable and emphatic antithesis; the divine Sonship in his reply being placed in contrast with the human production suggested in our Lord's interrogatory.

St. Peter does not here content himself with saying, "Thou art the Son of God," but "of the LIVING GOD; of God the Living One. (roυ OεOũ TOυ Sŵvтos.) This expression determines the sense in which he regarded God as the Father, that is, in his eternal being; as the Self-living and Unoriginated. By parity of reasoning, it resolves the mode in which he apprehended Christ as the "Son;" viz., as irrespectively of all economical relations, the participator of the same nature and glory, even the eternal Son of God. †

The doctrine thus expressed, as we learn from the statement of our Lord, is one of those recondite truths ascertained not by human testimony but by divine

* Vide Sect. vi., infra: note (F).

"The gathering together so many articles in the Greek, set before every word, are as so many stars that call us to behold this eminency of his Sonship and generation; for they putting an emphasis on every word in that small sentence, Thou art that Christ, that Son of that God, that living God, the meaning will be this: That Son of the only true God, that living God; which emphasis, THE GOD, and which attribute, THE LIVING GOD, are purposely annexed, to set out the greatness of this so great a Son, and to show that if we suppose the great and true God to have a Son, and but one Son, and him begotten by him as he is the living God, then what manner of Son must this be, and what manner of generation!" -DR. GOODWIN on the Knowledge of God the Father, &c.

revelation alone. "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona : for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but MY FATHER which is in heaven."* To one exposition

only is this remark applicable. For, should it be alleged that the title "Son of God" describes the miraculous conception, we thus confine it to a matter of plain historical testimony. The fact of the Messiahship, far from having been the subject of a divine communication, was stated to Peter by his own brother Andrew.

But

the doctrine of the eternal relation of our Lord to the Father is truly inscrutable, and in order to its apprehension requires the revelation of God. For "no one knoweth who the Son is, but the Father." This interpretation therefore is the only one with which the passage harmonizes.

Accordingly, the truths announced in St. Peter's confession are stated by our Lord to be the fundamental doctrines of the Christian church:—“ Upon this Rock will I build my church."§ Such, at least, I conjecture to be the meaning of the passage; that the Deity and Messiahship of Jesus are the prime and essential articles of catholic verity, upon which must rest all sound theology and all saving faith. The exposition proposed by the Papists renders the figure exceedingly harsh, and is

* The narrative of St. Mark (viii. 27-29) does not extend beyond the confession of the Messiahship, and consequently omits the whole of our Lord's benediction upon Peter.

§"This short but illustrious confession of Peter compriseth eminently the whole truth concerning the person and office of Christ. Of his PERSON, in that, although he was the Son of man, under which appellation he made his inquiry, (Whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am?) yet was he not only so, but the eternal Son of the living God. Of his OFFICE, that he was the Christ, he whom God had anointed to be the Saviour of the church, in the discharge of his kingly, priestly, and prophetical power."-DR. OWEN on the Person of Christ, p. 2.

also otherwise objectionable; while the idea that Christ pointed to his own person when he said " upon THIS rock," is not borne out by any indication in the narrative.

In the history of the resurrection of Lazarus, the title "Son of God" occurs twice; once as used by our Lord himself, and once by Martha.* Being now about to perform a stupendous miracle, and one in which his divine power should be peculiarly manifested, Jesus declared, "This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby." The latter part of this statement is probably exegetical of the former, and the glory of the Son of God is thus represented as identical with the glory of God. The passage is the more worthy of our notice, because our Lord commonly prefers to call himself the Son of man. But where, as generally in the discourses recorded by St. John, he uses the term "Son," or, as in this place, "Son of God," the design is without doubt peculiar and eminent.

Considering that, at this advanced period of our Saviour's ministry, multitudes had been convinced that he was the Christ, it can scarcely be doubted that friends so intimate, and disciples so devoted as the family of Bethany, had long since arrived at this assurance. This appears to be intimated in the address of the sisters: "Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died." Martha goes farther, and adds, "But I know that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give thee." Here is the confession of a power that could stay the progress of mortal disease, and of

*John xi. 4, 27.

+ See Holden's "Scripture Testimonies to the Divinity of Christ," ch. iii., sect. xix., p. 136.

John xi. 21, 22, 32.

confidence that, even in this apparently hopeless stage of their history, the prayer of our Redeemer would prevail on their behalf.

*

But the faith of this admirable woman was to assume a loftier tone, and to become conversant with truth of a more exalted order. She was to behold "THE GLORY of God; not a mere delegated power, like that of the Prophets; not an agency existing by sufferance alone, like that of mighty spiritual intelligences; but the developement, in the person of Jesus, of the irresistible energy of Deity, the display of his eternal Godhead. He therefore declares that the ability which she had considered as graciously to be vouchsafed in answer to prayer, he possessed inherently, and of his own right. He claims her faith in his unrestricted authority over the destinies of men, announcing himself as the fountain and lord of being, to whom death and corruption could offer no resistance, and in whose gift was immortality: "I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in ME, though he were dead, yet shall he live; and whosoever liveth and believeth in ME shall never die. Believest thou this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world." The entire narrative determines the sense of the titles in this confession to that of sovereign divinity.

Upon the whole, the peculiarity of these acknowledgments appears to have been, that they surmounted that doctrine which, to the Jews generally of this period, proved an insuperable obstacle to the reception of the claims of our Lord. And though to us the admission of the divine Sonship of Christ may not seem to demand a special effort of faith; yet considering the prevailing notions upon the subject, and the inveteracy of Jewish

* John xi. 40.

+ Verses 25-27.