IS JESUS GOD ? By Charles J. Burrough, with Preface
by Leighton Pollan. (Skeflington. 2s. 6d.)—This book attempts to reply in simple form to the question posed in the title. After a statement of the traditional answer as contained in the Creed, its justification is sought in the Synoptic Gospels and in the Fourth Gospel. The most interesting section of the book only begins with the fourth chapter, where the author deals with the Messianic Secret. It is only in quite modern times that it has been realized what a problem is contained in our Lord's charge to His disciples to keep His Messiahship secret. Mr. Burrough's explanation is at any rate tenable. If Jesus had allowed the cry of the Messiah to be raised in nationalist Galilee, there was a serious risk that His work would be brought to an abrupt conclusion before He had had time to complete the training of His disciples, and he adopts the theory that Christ's use of the title Son of Man " was governed by the fact that it was not a current Messianic title. Mr. Burrough adduces reasonable arguments to support the theory that, from the tune of the Baptism at any rate, Jesus was conscious that He was in a real and special sense " the Son of God," with a mission to fulfil that would involve His death. He later indicates the grounds for thinking that the Apostles believed Jesus to be the Son of God, and he draws out the importance of the witness of St. Paul. He devotes a chapter to the Virgin Birth, in which he puts the dilemma—either Jesus was born in the manner described in the Gospels, or He was born of a human father, out of wedlock. He weakens his argument by a naive use of the Old Testament ; but he realizes that it is useless to discuss the question of the Virgin
Birth without first reaching agreement in regard to the Incarnation. The book is- sensible, if conservative. But it suffers from a serious clerical defect : the assumption that those who approach the matter from a different angle are either perverse or insincere. The real force of many of the arguments employed is weakened by attempts to prove too much : for example, that the first three Gospels are by the persons to whom they are ascribed. In regard to Mark and Luke, this is credible ; but hardly in regard to the first.
Previous page
