The modern-historical solution eliminates the eschatological conception of the Kingdom of God from the Passion, reducing it to the notion of an apotheosis, “the coming _again,”_ as it is called. This expression is entirely false. Jesus never spoke of his coming _again_ but only of his _coming_ or of the _advent_ of the Son of Man. We use the expression “coming again” because we connect death and glory by contrast, as though the new situation were conditioned merely upon a victorious transfiguration of Jesus. Our view makes him say: “I shall die, but I shall be glorified through my coming again.” As a matter of fact, however, he said: “I must suffer _and_ the Son of Man shall appear upon the clouds of heaven.” But that for his hearers meant much more than an apotheosis—for with the appearing of the Son of Man dawned the eschatological Kingdom. Jesus therefore sets his death in temporal-causal connection with the eschatological dawning of the Kingdom. The _eschatological_ notion of the Kingdom, not the _modern-ethical_ notion, dominates his idea of the Passion. 6. The Form of the Prediction of the Passion. (Fourth Assumption.) If the modern historical solution be correct [pg 081] in its conception, Jesus must have communicated the thought of the Passion to his Disciples in the form of an ethical _reflection._ If they were to comprehend the approaching catastrophe as the inauguration of the new morality, and were to derive from it incentive to a change of conduct, then he must have familiarised them with the character of this event from the very beginning, as soon as ever he announced it. As a matter of fact, however, he imparted to them the thought of the Passion, not in the form of an _ethical reflection,_ but as a _secret,_ without further explanation. It is dominated by a “must,” the expression for incomprehensible divine necessity. The fact that the Passion-idea was a secret stands opposed to the modern-historical solution. 7. Résumé. 1. The assumption of a fortunate Galilean period which was followed by a time of defeat is historically untenable. 2. Pauline influence cannot have conditioned the form of the early Synoptic sayings about the Passion. 3. Not the ethical but the hyper-ethical, the eschatological, notion of the Kingdom [pg 082] dominates the Passion as Jesus conceived it. 4. The utterances of the Passion-idea did not occur in the form of an ethical reflection but it was a question of an incomprehensible secret which the Disciples had not the least need to understand and in fact did not.