The doctrine of Jesus consisted in the elevation of the son of man, that is, in the recognition on the part of man, that he, man, was the son of God. In his own individuality Jesus personified the man who has recognized the filial relation with God. He asked his disciples whom men said that he was--the son of man? His disciples replied that some took him for John the Baptist, and some for Elijah. Then came the question, "_But whom say ye that I am?_" And Peter answered, "_Thou art the Messiah, the son of the living God._" Jesus responded, "_Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven_;" meaning that Peter understood, not through faith in human explanations, but because, feeling himself to be the son of God, he understood that Jesus was also the son of God. And after having explained to Peter that the true faith is founded upon the perception of the filial relation to God, Jesus charged his other disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Messiah. After this, Jesus told them that although he might suffer many things and be put to death, he, that is his doctrine, would be triumphantly re-established. And these words are interpreted as a prophecy of the resurrection (Matt. xvi. 13-21). Of the thirteen passages[16] which are interpreted as prophecies of Jesus in regard to his own resurrection, two refer to Jonah in the whale's belly, another to the rebuilding of the temple. The others affirm that the son of man shall not be destroyed; but there is not a word about the resurrection of Jesus. In none of these passages is the word "resurrection" found in the original text. Ask any one who is ignorant of theological interpretations, but who knows Greek, to translate them, and he will never agree with the received versions. In the original we find two different words, _[Greek: anistêmi]_ and [Greek: egeirô], which are rendered in the sense of resurrection; one of these words means to "re-establish"; the other means "to awaken, to rise up, to arouse one's self." But neither the one nor the other can ever, in any case, mean to "resuscitate"--to raise from the dead. With regard to these Greek words and the corresponding Hebrew word, _qum_, we have only to examine the scriptural passages where these words are employed, as they are very frequently, to see that in no case is the meaning "to resuscitate" admissible. The word _voskresnovit_, _auferstehn_, _resusciter_--"to resuscitate"--did not exist in the Greek or Hebrew tongues, for the reason that the conception corresponding to this word did not exist. To express the idea of resurrection in Greek or in Hebrew, it is necessary to employ a periphrasis, meaning, "is arisen, has awakened among the dead." Thus, in the Gospel of Matthew (xiv. 2) where reference is made to Herod's belief that John the Baptist had been resuscitated, we read, [Greek: autos êgerthê apo tôn nekrôn], "has awakened among the dead." In the same manner, in Luke (xvi. 31), at the