The historical problem presents itself now in this form: In the first period Jesus expressed the thought of the Passion much more frequently than in the second, and he uttered it openly. Every discourse of some length concludes with such an intimation. His own Disciples were familiar with the thought of seeing him humiliated in the Affliction. In spite of this, however, the disclosure at Cæsarea Philippi appeared to the Disciples a new thing, and so it was in fact. For it was no longer a question simply of the suffering which the great herald of the Kingdom must undergo in company with his own in the final Affliction; but now he suffers who is to be the Messiah. This suffering, moreover, does not any longer occur in the general Affliction of the last times, but Jesus suffers alone, and his suffering is now represented as a purely earthly, historical event! He will [pg 226] be delivered to the Council and by it condemned to death! That was the new thing which remained a secret for the Disciples. 3. The “Temptation” and the Divine Omnipotence. A peculiar note of hesitancy appears in the thought of the Passion. At one time death seems an absolute necessity; then again—for example, in Gethsemane—Jesus recognises once more the possibility that the Passion may still be spared him. But as a matter of fact the idea of the Passion subsisted without respect to earthly success or failure. Therefore the hesitancy ought not to be brought into connection with this. As Jesus journeyed towards Jerusalem to die he did not in a corner of his heart indulge the thought that God in his omnipotence might perhaps be able nevertheless to make his way a triumphal march and show himself through him victorious over the Pharisees and the Council. That, according to his feeling, would have been a “human” way of thinking, such as he had reproved in Peter (Mk 8:33). For in the affairs of God’s Kingdom he cannot oppose to one another the opposition of the Scribes and the divine omnipotence; it is a question of a divine drama [pg 227] in which they were mere subordinate actors with a prescribed rôle, like the minions that arrested him at their behest. The hesitancy must therefore have its ground in the divine will itself. It is the specific characteristic of Jesus’ view, that the divine will has indeed, on the one hand, designedly preordained the messianic drama in the well known form; yet, on the other hand again, God remains sovereignly free with respect to his plan. By a messianic programme established once and for all the divine omnipotence behind it is in no wise bound! It knows no determinism at all. Jesus expected of this omnipotence that it could still receive into the estate of blessedness even such as by their behaviour had forfeited membership in the Kingdom. According to the accepted standards it is indeed impossible that the rich can enter into life. But with God all things are possible (Mk 10:27).