29.  On the anointing of Jesus with the Holy Spirit see WeissLX I. 323-336; BeysLJ I. 230f.  For the influence of the Spirit in the later life of Jesus see Mk. i. 12; Mt. iv. 1; Lk. iv. 1; iv. 14, 18, 21; Mk. iii. 29, 30; Mt. xii. 28; Jn. iii. 34; compare Ac. i. 2; x. 38.  Clearly these refer not to the ethical and religious indwelling of the Divine Spirit (comp.  Rom. i. 4), but to the special equipment for official duty.  This is the OT sense, see Ex. xxxi. 2-5; Jud. iii. 10; I. Sam. xi. 6; Isa. xi. 1f.; xlii. 1; lxi. 1; and consult Schultz, Old Test.  Theol. II. 202f.  Jesus seems to have needed a like divine equipment, notwithstanding his divine nature.  See GilbertLJ 121f.

30.  How this Messianic anointing is to be related to the doctrine of Jesus’ essential divine nature cannot be determined with certainty.  It must not be forgotten, however, that it is a datum for Christology, and that it cannot be explained away.  It indicates one of the particulars in which Jesus was made like unto his brethren.  What was involved when the Son of God “emptied himself and was made in the likeness of men” (Phil. ii. 7) we can only vaguely conceive.  Two views of early heretical sects seem rightly to have been rejected.  The Docetic view, held by some Gnostics of the 2d cent., dates the incarnation from the baptism, but distinguishes Christ from the human Jesus, who only served as a vehicle for the manifestation of the Son of God; the Christ descended on Jesus at the baptism, ascending again to heaven from the cross, compare Mt. iii. 16 and xxvii. 50 in the Greek; see Schaff Hist. of Xn Church^2, II. 455f.  The recently discovered Gospel of Peter presents this view, Gosp.  Pet.  Sec. 5.  The Nestorian view represents that the baptism was, in a sense, Jesus’ “birth from above” (Jn. iii. 3, 5); thus the incarnation was first complete at the baptism though the Logos had been associated with Jesus from the beginning.  See Schaff, Hist, of Xn Church^2, III. 717 ff.; Conybeare, History of Xmas, Amer.  Jour.  Theol. 1899, 1-21.

31.  The traditional locality of the temptation is a mountain near Jericho called Quarantana, see AndLOL 155; the tradition seems to date no further back than the crusades.  It is, however, probable that the “wilderness” (Mt. iv. 1, Mk. i. 12, Lk. iv. 1) is the same wilderness mentioned in connection with John’s earlier life and work (Mt. iii. 1, Mk. i. 4), the region W and NW of the Dead Sea, see SmithHGHL 317.  Others (Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, 308; EdersLJM I. 300, 339 notes) hold that the temptation took place in the desert regions SE of the sea of Galilee; this is possibly correct, though the record in the gospels suggests the wilderness of Judea.  On the source of the temptation story see WeissLX I. 339 ff.; BeysLJ I. 234; Bacon, Bib.  Wld. 1900, I. 18-25.

VIII

The First Disciples