vr'2-6/o3 
 
 Srom t^e £i6rairg of 
 
 Q$equeaf^e^ 6g ^im fc 
 t^c feifirarg of 
 
 (prtnceton i^eofogicaf ^entinar^ 
 
SYLLABUS 
 
 MESSL\NIC PASSAGES 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 O. S. STEARNS. 
 
 BOSTON : 
 
 PRESS OF PERCIVAL T. BARTLETT, 
 
 105 SuMMKR Street. 
 
 1884. 
 
SYLLABUS OF THE MESSIANIC PASSAGES 
 
 IN THE 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 MESSIANIC TEXTS. 
 
 EXPLANATION. 
 
 By Messianic Texts is meant such passages in the 
 Old Testament Scriptures as seem, when fairly interpreted, 
 to portray one or more characteristics of the Christ of the 
 New Testament. The Hebrew word lUushiach, " anointed,'''' 
 out of which comes by transliteration the Greek Messias, 
 and the Greek translation of which is Christos, is applied 
 in the Old Testament to kings^ and priests^ who were 
 anointed with holy oil, and thereby dedicated to their 
 official position, and to a king-^ or the Jewish nation* as 
 appointed to some special service, but its application in 
 the Old Testament to the ideal king, priest and prophet, 
 whose antitype is the Christ of the New Testament, is 
 very rare. In Ps. ii. 2, he seems to be so designated. In 
 Dan. ix. 25, he seems to be referred to as " The future 
 One as high priest and king in one person." Possibly 
 there is a reference to Him in 1 Sam. ii. 35. The term 
 was evidently accepted as a technical one, denoting the 
 Messiah, par excellence, long before the Christian era. 
 John i. 41 ; iv. 25. 
 
 In the examination of some of these texts, it will be 
 assumed that the Old Testament Scriptures are a revela- 
 tion from God to man, progressive in its character and 
 redemptive in its purpose. It will also be assumed that 
 the Hebrew text as it now exists is our best source of 
 
 ^ 1 Sam. xxiv. 7, 11 ; 2 Sam. xxiii. 1. ^ Lev. iv. 3, 5, 16. • Isa. xlv. 1. -i Hab. iii. 13. 
 
information on this subject. Versions and Targums will 
 be referred to as subsidiary aids. It will likewise be 
 assumed that many questions raised by historical criti- 
 cism as to the authorship and date of the books of the 
 Old Testament need not be considered, unless they evi- 
 dently impinge upon or nullify the apparent meaning of 
 a given passage. Whatever the age of a book quoted 
 from or whoever was its author, it antedated the Messiah 
 who was to come. 
 
 GENERAL DIVISION OF MESSIANIC TEXTS. 
 
 Delitzsch in his " Messianic Prophecies,"* says : " In 
 the Old Testament the Mediator of salvation is made 
 known : 
 
 (1} As the Seed of the Woman, who is the conqueror 
 of evil in mankind ; 
 
 (2) As the Seed of the Patriarchs, who is the blessing 
 of the nations ; 
 
 (3) As the Seed of David, who is the salvation and 
 glory of Israel. 
 
 In the New Testament, Christ is revealed as the Son 
 of David, who, born in Israel, seeks the lost sheep of the 
 house of Israel; then as the Seed of Abraham, who, 
 through the apostolic preaching, since it breaks through 
 the old barriers, becomes a Blessing to the nations ; and 
 finally, as the Son of Man, who, as the conqueror of evil 
 and of death, sets over against the Adamic race a new 
 one, born of God, and which is comprised under Him as 
 its head." To unfold such a division of Messianic predic- 
 tions, both unique and suggestive, would carry us beyond 
 our present purpose. It would require many volumes to 
 do it justice. Merely as a help to the memory, we may 
 divide the texts to be considered into three classes: those 
 found in the Pentateuch, those found in the Psalms, and 
 those found in the Major and Minor prophets. Of these, 
 however, only the more important ones will claim our 
 attention.! 
 
 * Chap. 6, § 1. 
 
 t For Messianic Literature, see article " Messiah," in Smith's Bib. Diet., Ap- 
 pendix. 
 
PENTATEUCHAL TEXTS. 
 
 The passages in the Pentateuch usually referred to as 
 expressing the Messianic idea are Gen. iii. 14-15 ; ix. 26- 
 27 ; xii. 2-3 ; xlix. 8-10 ; Deut. xviii. 15-19. 
 
 It will be noticed that four of these are in the book 
 of Genesis. The evident purpose of the other books of 
 the Pentateuch, aside from their historical element, is to 
 inculcate and explain the civil, moral and ceremonial 
 laws of a select nation, out of which Messiah is to come ; 
 to develop minutely the Ten Words, or Siuaitic Law, a 
 true apprehension of which would necessitate the redemp- 
 tive work of the Messiah : and to discipline and educate 
 the people into a correct idea of an absolutely holy God, 
 so as to intensify the desire for a Messianic Redeemer. 
 These books, therefore, may be regarded as co-ordinate 
 with the Messianic idea, and so far as the ceremonial 
 polity is concerned, it is typical of that idea. But in 
 Genesis we have a sketch of the early history of the 
 human race, as well as of the origin of the Jewish nation ; 
 and if the Messiah is to be for the well-being of mankind, 
 we naturally expect some hint of that fact. And accord- 
 ingly we tind in Genesis the thought of a Messiah, 
 shadowy indeed, yet more personal iu its movement than 
 in the other books of the Pentateuch. In fact, the first 
 three chapters of Genesis contain the essential elements 
 of all subsequent revelation. 
 
 THE PROTEVANGELIUM. 
 
 This epithet is applied to Gen. iii. 14-15. The passage 
 has been deemed Messianic by Jewish tradition and by 
 the Christian Church, and its essential thought of sin and 
 a remedy has entered into the religions of the world. See 
 Lange and Kalisch, on Grenesis^ in loco. 
 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 The Beginnings of History. F. Lenormant. 
 Origin of Nations. G. Rawlinson. 
 Bib. Sac. vol. 38, art. by W. H. Ward. 
 
 Bib. Sac. vol. 40, art. by Dillmauu, trans, by Prof. G. H. Whit- 
 temore. 
 
6 
 
 Bib. Sac. vol. 18, art. by S. C. Bartlett on " Theories of Messianic 
 Prophecy." 
 
 The Messiah. Art. in Ency., Brit., 9th edition. 
 The Doctrine of Sacred Scripture. G. T. Ladd. 
 
 EXEGESIS. 
 
 Words. The word rendered " bruise," in A. V., is 
 derived from a Hebrew word, which, according to Fuerst, 
 signifies "to pierce," "to wound," "to bruise," "to 
 crush." Gesenius gives as a definition "to pant after," 
 " to lie in wait for." The only parallel passage is Job 
 ix. 17, where it cannot signify " to lie in wait." Ps. 
 cxxxix, 11. is sometimes referred to as containing the 
 word, but critics generally deem the word there an errone- 
 ous reading. Delitzsch says : " It is the stereotyped Tar- 
 gum word for ' to crush.' " The subject of the verb, in 
 the clause, " he shall bruise, etc.," might be collective, but 
 the usage of the word translated ' seed,' with a singular 
 suffix, would indicate the personality of a single person. 
 See Bib. Sac. vol. 38, art. hy R. Uutcheson. The crucial 
 part of the passage is the last clause of vs. 15, which is to 
 be translated thus: "He," i.e.., the seed of the woman, 
 "shall bruise thee as to the head; and thou," z.e., the ser- 
 pent, "shalt bruise him," i.e.., the woman's seed, "as to the 
 heel." So Syr. Sam. version, the Targums of Pseudo- 
 Jonathan, and Jerusalem. The Sept. renders the verb 
 " to bruise " by " to watch for." Paul in Romans xvi. 20, 
 renders it "to bruise." The Roman Catholic interpre- 
 ters, without textual authorit}^ make the subject of the 
 verb feminine, and refer it to the Virgin Mary. 
 
 The surface thought of the verse would be this: 
 there shall be perpetual enmity between the serpent 
 and the woman, and between her seed and his seed ; but 
 the seed of the woman (pronoun emphatic) shall bruise 
 or crush the serpent and his seed on the head, the most 
 vital part, and the serpent and his seed shall bruise or 
 crush her seed on the heel, the less vital part. In a word, 
 the conflict between the two parties will result in a victory 
 for the woman's seed. There seems to be also in the lan- 
 guage the idea of immediate instinctive resistance on the 
 part of the woman's seed, like the spontaneous effort to 
 crush the serpent's head when one is bitten on the heel. 
 
REMARKS. 
 
 Remark 1. The language itself, and by itself, would 
 simply express the divine assertion that, in consequence 
 of the violation of God's law, by our first parents, there 
 should be a mutual hatred between the human race and 
 the serpent race. Such has been essentially the fact 
 in human history, generally accounted for as the result of 
 instinct, education, or tradition. 
 
 Remark 2. But the occasion which called out such a 
 declaration would seem to demand much more than such 
 a trite thought. Man's disobedience, with its sad conse- 
 quences, calls for a ray of hope to the soul rather than to 
 the body. 
 
 Remark 3. Hence the Scriptures assign the tempta- 
 tion to an agent acting through the serpent. This may 
 not be found in explicit passages, because in no passage is 
 the scene of the temptation minutely described or 
 unfolded. But (a) Satan, as the foe of man, with per- 
 sonal attributes, is spoken of in Job i. 6-13 ; Zech. iii. 1-3 ; 
 Matt. iv. (i) Satan is represented as the enemy of God 
 and of Christ, and as the Prince of a Kingdom of dark- 
 ness. John xii. 31 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4. (c) Satan, as the prime 
 cause of evil, is referred to in Rev. xii. 9 ; and, if we add 
 to these passages, 2 Cor. xi. 3, and Rom. xvi. 20, the 
 agency of Satan through the serpent is scripturally con- 
 clusive. 
 
 Remark 4. The passage under consideration may, 
 therefore, be fairly considered Messianic, as unfolded by 
 subsequent revelations, (a) We cannot determine with 
 certainty the exact meaning of the passage as understood 
 by Adam and Eve. It sounded the note of victory, but 
 the medium of the victory is left indefinite. Even a pic- 
 ture, however, is a teacher of fundamental truth. (6) As 
 already said, the pronoun " he," " he shall bruise," etc., 
 may be collective or individual. If collective, the passage 
 when scripturally considered, would be a prophecy of the 
 antagonism and victory of a peculiar race with an antagon- 
 izing race, the family of God and the family of Satan. If 
 individual, which is possible, it would express the antag- 
 onism and victory of the head of a given class as opposed 
 to the head of an opposing class ; or, by the subsequent 
 
development of revelation, Christ and Satan. (<?) The 
 passage may therefore be considered as essentially and 
 generically Messianic. 
 
 OBJECTIONS. 
 
 1. It is objected to the above interpretation that the 
 scene in the garden of Eden, as described in Gen. iii, is 
 mythical. But the language of Scripture elsewhere, espe- 
 cially in its use of similar imagery, implies a literal transac- 
 tion. («) From it as a seed the whole history of man 
 develops from Adam to Christ, as a literal account ; so 
 that, scripturally considered, the genealogy of Christ in 
 Matt. i. might as well be termed mythical. (6) The 
 scene in the garden is frequently referred to in both the 
 Old and New Testaments as an historical event. When 
 the prophets refer to it, the Masoretic text has been care- 
 ful so to point the word as to guard against any mistake 
 as to its local meaning. For the Old Testaments see Gen. 
 xiii. 10 ; Isa. li. 3 ; Eze. xxviii. 13 ; xxxi. 9 ; Joel ii. 3 ; Job 
 xxxi. 33. For the New Testament, see Matt. xix. 2-5 ; 
 2 Cor. xi. 3 ; 1 Tim. ii. 13-14 ; Rom. xvi. 20; Rom. v. 12-18, 
 the last passage tracing minutely the analogy between 
 Adam and Christ, (e) It gives us the only known origin 
 of the human race. This would imply that the narrator 
 intended to speak of a literal transaction. 
 
 2. It is objected to the Messianic application of this 
 passage that the scene in the garden is allegorical. To 
 this it may be replied that there is nothing in the lan- 
 guage itself to imply such an interpretation. No 
 unbiased exegete would so interpret the language by 
 itself. He may indulge that opinion when he attempts to 
 explain the how of the recorded narrative, but such an 
 interpretation is merely the insertion of his opinion. It 
 is not exegesis. Were we sure, however, that the lan- 
 guage was allegorical, it would not annul the essential 
 facts ; for even allegory, to be consistent allegory, must 
 rest on well-authenticated facts. The story of Dives and 
 Lazarus, by some critics is called an allegory. The 
 facts, however, remain the same, be it so or not. As Pro- 
 fessor Conant says in his *■'■ Genesis with Notes'': "In 
 regard to the tempter's mode of communication with Eve, 
 
9 
 
 it matters not whether we suppose the serpent to have 
 appeared visibly, and in actual bodily form, to the eye of 
 Eve, addressing her in audible words, or that the commu- 
 nication was purely mental, the tempter appearing in this 
 form to the mind of Eve." " The reality of the transac- 
 tion, as viewed by our Lord and his apostles, is not 
 affected by interpreting the whole passage as an embodi- 
 ment of great moral truths in sensible imager}', in order 
 to make them more readily intelligible to all degrees of 
 intellectual culture, and to give thera a stronger hold 
 upon the mind." This view would be termed the sym- 
 bolical method of interpretation, against which there are 
 few if any objections. 
 
 NOACHIAN PROPHECY. 
 
 GEN. IX. 25-27. 
 
 The position of this prophecy in the sacred record is 
 very suggestive. The bow of promise, as the symbol of 
 preservation to man's physical life, beautifully associates 
 itself with the word of promise for the preservation of 
 man's spiritual life. This promise is enclosed in a special 
 benediction upon Shem. The term employed in this 
 benediction, Jehovah-Elohim, includes the idea of God as 
 Creator and Governor, and that of special Revealer and 
 special Covenanter. The choice of this term, as the text 
 now stands, for the blessing upon Shem,* which term is 
 omitted in the blessing upon Japhet, and the marked 
 curse pronounced upon Canaan, the son of Ham, shuts in 
 Shem as the head of a people upon whom and through 
 whom the world was to be blessed. It expresses as 
 much as this: that "because Jehovah is the God of 
 Shem, Shem will be the recipient and heir of all the 
 blessings of salvation which God, as Jehovah, bestows 
 u[)()n uumkind." DelitzHch Com. on Genesis. Even Tuch, 
 belonging to a less conservative school of critics, says, 
 referring to the clause, ''And Japhet shall dwell in the 
 
 * See, for a somewhat similar usage, Geu. xiv. 20; Ex. xviii. 10; 2 Sam. rviii. 28. 
 
10 
 
 tents of Shem " : "This declaration goes back to the 
 united act of Hlial piety of both brothers, and is intended 
 to represent the ideal union in which, at a subsequent 
 time, their posterity sliali, as their progenitors now, be 
 united for a higher c^bject. That is here first indicated in 
 a more general way, which is distinctly declared in the 
 subsequent history, cliap. xii. 3, that the salvation of all 
 nations shall proceed from the offspring of Shem, who, in 
 making Zion the common centre of their efforts, shall, 
 without distraction, be united in the fear of the Lord.'' 
 Quoted from Bib. Sac. vol. 8, p. 60. The passage, there- 
 fore, may be accepted as ge.nerically Messianic. 
 
 LITEUATURE. 
 
 Hen.£rstenber.a's Cliristolojry, vols. 1, 2. 
 
 " Eeilin^e ziir Erklariiii,y;- iles alteii Testamentes," 
 
 Lawr. Keiiike, vol. 4, i)p. 3 107. "Vi^ry exhanstive. 
 
 Scliatt's Laiiiie, in luro, tliu liilk'st of the Corns, ou the passage. 
 
 Bil) «ac. vols. 12, 13. aits, by G. P,. Cheever. 
 
 Bib. Sac. vol. 8, uit. by R. D. C. Robbius. 
 
 GENERAL EXEGESIS. 
 
 The text, as it now is, is obscure. If, as critics 
 assert, it is a combination of parts of the Jehovistic and 
 Elohistic documents, by a Redactor (^Dillmanin), his work 
 is certainly not to be praised. Seemingly, a Redactor 
 would have sought to leave his mark of perspicuity upon 
 the patch. That the translators of the several versions 
 and the paraphrasts were compelled to use the text as it 
 now stands is evident, for they vary in tlieir translations 
 and paraphrases just as any tyro in Hebrew would do at 
 the present da}-. Thus in vs. 25, " to his brethren " nat- 
 urally means those of the same race, i.e., that Canaan 
 shall t)e a "servant of servants" to the Hamitic race, or 
 the Hebrew word for "brothers" may have a broader sig 
 niHcation, so as to express the servitude of C. to the 
 Semitic and Japhetic races. In the 26th vs., "And let 
 Canaan be a servant to him," (A. V.) the, pronoun* may 
 be plural or collective, i.e.., " to them," i.e., Shem and 
 Japhet. In vs. 27, the subject of the verb "to dwell," 
 
 * Usnsre assigns to Inmo a collcrtivc or plural meaning; yet see Ps. xi. 7; Job 
 xxii. 11; Isa. xliv. 15; (Jcs. § 1U3 marginal note. 
 
n 
 
 may be Elohiin, or Japhet, giving the idea of a specially 
 repeated favor to Shem, in lieu of the common interpreta- 
 tion that Japhet is to occupy the tents of Shem. An 
 expanded transhition of the passage will make these dif- 
 ferences more ap[)arent. Vs. 25, "-And He said, Cursed ■' 
 be Canaan ; a servant of servants shall he be to his 
 brothers," i.e.^ those of liis own Hamitic race, or those of ^ 
 all the races. Vs. 26, ''And He said. Blessed be Jehovah, 
 the God of Shem ; and let Canaan l)e a servant to him, 
 or them," i.e.^ to Shem, the Semitic race, or to the Semitic 
 and Japhetic races. Vs. 27, "May God enlarge Japhet; 
 and may ^'He,'" or " 7ig," z.e., God or Japhet, "dwell in the 
 tents of Shem ; and let Canaan be a servant to them ; " i.e.^ 
 Japhet and Shem ; or " to Jam" i.e., Siiem. In other words, * 
 guided merely by the text, its possibilities allow the servi- 
 tude of Canaan to be ^mited to the Hamitic race, or 
 enlarged to a servitude CDnnected with the Semitic and 
 Japhetic races. The history of Canaan, so far as is 
 known, verifies this language of Noah essentially accord- 
 ing to either inteipretation. 
 
 THE BLESSING UPON ABEAJVI. 
 
 Gen. xii. 3. 
 
 The chapter which contains this prophecy is a transi- 
 tion chapter from universal history to national history. 
 Previously, in the book of Genesis, we have a sketcli of ■ 
 the origin of the world, the origin of the human raogf th^ 
 origin of hope to the race subsequent to the fall, and tlie 
 selection of one of the- sons of Noah, as the channel of 
 this hope to the postdiluvian woi'ld. Now, from one of 
 the descendants of Shem, the favored son of Noah, a selec- 
 tion is made, through whom "all the families of the earth 
 shall be blessed." Abram, as one of the descendants of 
 Shem, thus becomes the trust in whom rests the hope of 
 the world. The i^tory of redemption is thus nari'owino- 
 itself into the history of an individual. As Kalisch 
 {Com. in loco) says: "This is the Hebrew writer's 
 avowed principle, and henceforth he devotes his narrative 
 exclusively to the destinies of that race." 
 
 V 
 
12 
 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 Bib. Sac. vol. 11, art. by E. P. Barrows. 
 Bib. Sac. vol. 22, art. by Samuel Harris. 
 
 EXEGESIS. 
 
 The last clause of the verse is as universal as the lan- 
 guage can express. All the families of the earth shall be 
 blessed, in connection with or by means of the Abram, 
 who, in the previous verse, is selected as the head of a 
 great nation. " I will make of thee a great nation, and I 
 will bless thee, and I will surely make thy name great." 
 The word translated "• shall be blessed " is Niphal, and 
 by some is considered reflexive, i.e., "shall bless them- 
 selves," ?.e., make him the beau ideal of the greatest 
 blessedness, which in his name they invoke upon them- 
 selves. Ps. Ixxii. 17 ; Isa. Ixv. 1^. But usage, with some 
 exceptions, requires that when a verb in Kal is transitive, 
 and an Hithpael is likewise in use, the Niphal should be 
 construed as passive.* Besides, the word is not to be 
 found in the imperative of Niphal, which would imply its 
 usual passive use. The preposition "in" (in him) is in- 
 strumental, ^.e., by means of him, with the additional idea 
 of unity as a source, i.e., Abram is to be both the medium 
 and the source of this blessedness. In the clause, "All the 
 families of the earth," strictly "all the families of the 
 so^7," perhaps the selection of the word reflects upon the 
 origin of man, and the curse upon the ground. Else- 
 where, Gen. xviii. 18, the more common phrase is found ; 
 i.e., "All the nations of the earth.^'' By "families of the 
 earth " is meant the division of the human race into fami- 
 lies, i.e., the whole human race. Gen. x. 5; xxviii. 14. In 
 Gen. xxii. 18, we have, instead of " in thee," " in thy seec?." 
 So also in xxvi. 14, which repeats the blessing to Isaac, 
 and in xxviii. 14, that upon Jacob. The words trans- 
 lated, " to curse," in the first clause of the verse, are dis- 
 tinct in meaning. In the first instance, the word means 
 the reproaches and blasphemous curses of man ; in the 
 second, the judicial curse of God. — Keil. The verse as 
 thus explained, may be expanded thus : And I will surely 
 bless, i.e., let my benediction rest upon those who bless, 
 
 * Nord. § 141, notes. Ges. § 51, 2, p. 130. Gr. § 80, 2, 2. 
 
13 
 
 or let their benediction rest npon thee and thy seed ; and 
 I will judicially curse those who reproach or blaspheme 
 thee and thy seed ; and in connection with thee as the 
 head of a peculiar race, thon being the human source, all 
 the families of the ground, i.e., the whole human family 
 shall be partakers of my benediction. 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 Remark 1. The prophec}'' teaches the universality of 
 a divine blessing, emanating from Abram. It is as broad 
 and catholic as any kindred assertion of the New Testa- 
 ment. It harmonizes with the Messianic passages in Ps. 
 xxii. 28, and Ixxii. 17, and with its verification as affirmed 
 in Acts iii. 25 ; Gal. iii. 8 9. 
 
 Remark 2. According to the testimony of Christ, 
 Abram received the propliecy as forecasting a Messi- 
 anic era. John viii. 56. Tliis language in John can- 
 not properly refer to any vision of Ciirist in Heaven, 
 because, {a) It was the custom of Christ to reason from 
 Scripture, and out of Scripture, to prove his assertions. 
 (6) The objection of his hearers was to the fact and to the 
 fact alone, (c) The reply of Christ to their cavil is an 
 appeal to the fact. The passage affirms that Abraham saw 
 the day of Christ, .not necessaiil}'' his person, except so far 
 as that person might be concealed in the Jehovah or the 
 Angel of Jehovah, but the day of Christ, the period when 
 his mission should be put into execution. He rejoiced, he 
 exulted in the activity of his faith, with strong, longing 
 spirit, to see the Messianic era, with its blessings. See 
 Ellicot, PJiil. i. 6-10 ; Meyer, and Westcott, on John viii. 5l). 
 
 Revnark 3. According to the Scriptures, Abraham 
 is the head of a race of believers in tlie Messiah, and a 
 type of Christ. Rom. iv. 11 ; Gal. iii. 16. On tlie latter 
 passage. Dr. Hackett says : ^ The Apostle does not refer 
 to any particular passage which contains the words, but 
 avails himself of this brief mode of speaking, as a conven- 
 ient formula for summing up the entire teaching of Scrip- 
 ture on this subject. It is as if he had said, "-Search the 
 Scriptures from Genesis to Malachi, thej' are of one strain ; 
 they make no mention of a plurality of seeds ; the}' speak 
 of a single seed only, the believing race, who are like 
 
14 
 
 Abraham in his faith. Christ here represented his peo- 
 ple as being in Him." The passage, Gen. xii. 3, may 
 therefore be accepted as generieally and sjjiritualli/ Mes- 
 sianic. Abi'aham, according to the Scriptures, was to be 
 the father of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the 
 flesh (Matt. i. 1), and the father of all true believers in 
 Christ. Gal. iii. 16. 
 
 THE BLESSING OF ISAAC UPON JACOB. 
 
 GEN. XXVII. 27-29. 
 
 Of this prophecy as a connecting liidv between that 
 given by God to Abraham, and that given b}^ Jacob to 
 his sons, the exphination of Delitzsch is so clear and com- 
 prehensive, I quote the entire section. 3Iess. Prophs., ch. 
 vii., § 8. 
 
 " It is the promise respecting the benediction of the 
 nations through the seed of the patriarclis, and therefore 
 of the completion of the divine work which the patriarchs 
 bestow as a blessing upon their first-born, since they thus 
 make them bearers of the great promised blessing, and 
 mediums of the preparation for its fulfilment. Isaac is 
 Abraham's first and only son by Sarah, and hence entitled 
 to the reception of this blessing. Jacob snatches away 
 the blessing of the first-born, which belonged to Esau, and 
 even retains it, but only as he atones for the sin connected 
 with the act, and obtains it anew from Jehovah by wrest- 
 liAg in prayer and tears. The blessing of the first-born 
 (Gen. xxvii. 27-29) consists of four parts, in which Jacob 
 is promised : 
 
 (1) The possession of the land of Canaan, under the 
 divine benediction (vs. 27^, 28): "See, the smell of my 
 son is as the smell of a field which Jehovah has blessed ; 
 and God will give thee of the dew of Heaven, and of the 
 fatness of the land, and plenty of corn and must" ; 
 
 (2) The subjection of the nations to such an extent 
 that every limitation is contrary to the words of the text, 
 (vs. 29 a): " Peoples shall servcthee and nations shall bow 
 down to thee : " 
 
15 
 
 (3) The primacy over his brothers, tliat is over those 
 blood-rehitions, whose postejity. were outside tlie line of 
 promise (vs. 29 b): '"Be hn-d over thy biethren, and let 
 thy mother's sons bow down to thee ; " 
 
 (4) So high a positi(m in redemptive history, that 
 blessings and curses are conditioned by the relation which 
 men take to him who has received the blessing (vs. 29 f): 
 "Cursed be tiiey tluit curse thee, and blessed be they that 
 bless thee." Compare Gen. xii. 3, and Num. xxiv. 9, which 
 is referred to the people of Israel. This fourth part shows 
 that it is the same promise, received by Abraham, which 
 Isaac bestows upon Jacob. Its goal is Christ. Tlie prom- 
 ise extends to the nations, and even shortly becomes 
 national, and so Messianic. For Jacob's twelve sons form 
 the transition from the family to the people of promise." 
 
 THE BLESSING OF JACOB UPON JUDAH. 
 
 GEN. XLIX. 8-12. 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 Turner's A Companion to the Boole of Genesis. 
 
 Wiijilit's Tlie 15ook of Genesis in Hebrew. 
 
 'I'ueli's Geni'.'iis. Very Tiill. 
 
 Knobel's Genesis for nionoijraplis. 
 
 Kurtz's Histoiy of tiie Old Covenant, vol. 2. 
 
 Clieyue's Tropliecies of Isaiali. Essay 4. 
 
 BRIEF EXEGESIS. 
 
 An analysis of vss. 8-10 gives three characteristics : 
 
 1. Judah's preeminence over his brothers, and his 
 victory over his enemies. Vs. 8. 
 
 2. Judah as the lion-hearted, courageous son, and to 
 be increasingly so. Vs. 9. 
 
 3. The perpetuity of his preeminence. Vs. 10. 
 Verse 10th is the crucial verse, and the meaning of 
 
 two of its words is doubtful. They are Mlihokek and 
 ShUoh. The former in Dent, xxxiii. 21 ; Isa. xxxiii. 22, 
 and Ps. Ix. 9, seems to mean lawgiver or governor, but 
 
16 
 
 most critics prefer here the translation "'•staff," corres- 
 ponding with sceptre, as the synibol of royalty, the pic- 
 ture being that of a king on his throne leaning on his 
 staff or sceptre, which is between his feet. Num. xxi. 18. 
 See Layard's Ni7ieveh. The form of the word is active 
 and intensive, and its usage implies either an actor or the 
 impersonation of an actor. The view of Gesenius the Sept. 
 and Onkelos, that the phrase in which it stands signifies 
 2i royal descendant^ has much in its favor. The second 
 word may be derived from a Lameth He verb, signifying 
 'to be tranquil,' ' to be at ease,' 'to be restful,' or from an 
 unused Ayin Vav verb, signifying ' to hang from the 
 shoulders as a garment,' 'to rest,' but the difficulty in the 
 use of the word does not lie in its derivation so fai as 
 meaning is concerned. The older critics supposed it was 
 an Aramaic combination of the relative and its anteced- 
 ent, i.e., 'whose it is,' but for such a contraction we have 
 no pentateuchal usage. The supposed correspondence in 
 Gen. vi. 3 is- now ruled out.* And the common reference 
 to Eze. xxi. 32, as a parallel instance of such combination, 
 or as expository of this word, has little authority. That 
 passage, however, is doubtless Messianic. The word is 
 either a personal, descriptive name, or a local name. The 
 verb connected with it ma}^ have this word for its subject, 
 or he, i.e., Judah, may be the subject. The renderings 
 " until he comes to Shiloh," or " until Shiloh comes," are 
 possible, grammatically. The word in A. V., translated 
 " gatherinar," " unto him shall the gathering of the people 
 be," should be translated 'obedience' or 'submission.' 
 Prov. XXX. 17. The tenth verse, which is the chief one 
 now in question, may be translated thus : " The sceptre 
 shall not depart from Judah, nor the staff (of ro3^alty) 
 from between his feet (or royalty itself) until Shiloh come, 
 or until he comes to Shiloh." 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 Remark 1. It is well to consider this very difficult 
 text subjectively, historically, and by way of verification. 
 
 Remark 2. Considered suhjectively, a priori to a 
 believer in a divine revelation, there can be no objection 
 
 See Gr. § 74-a 
 
u 
 
 to its Messianic character, if fairly it can be so interpreted. 
 For (a) Jacob liad been ])reviously the recipient of divine 
 revehitions, some of which referred to him as the progeni- 
 tor of a select people through whom the human nice was 
 to be blessed. Gen. xxviii. 14. (6) Jacob had been made 
 acquainted with the prophecies given to his ancestors on 
 the same subject. Gen. xxxi. 54 ; xxxi. 42 ; xxxii. 10. (c) 
 The selection of Judah, the lion-hearted, liaruionizes with 
 the condition of Jacob's family at this time. Reuben, the 
 first-born, and Simeon and Levi, his successors, had for- 
 feited their claim to the rights of primogeniture, and as a 
 consequence to any typical position as the head of a 
 spiritual race. The glowing blessing upon Joseph (xlix. 
 22-26), according to 1 Chron. v. 1, transferred to him the 
 honors of the birthright, and if to anyone the primacy of 
 leadership (I Chron. v. 2), and the blessing would be the 
 gift to Judah as the fourth son. (d) We naturally 
 expect, according to the law of progress, that, from the 
 selection of a patriarch in whom the general blessing 
 rested, we should pass to an individual of that family, to 
 whom a special personal blessing should be confided. 
 Antecedently, therefore, we may justly look for the Mes- 
 sianic to assume in this passage a personal or tribal char- 
 acter. 
 
 Remark 3. Historically considered, (a) more mono- 
 graphs have been written upon the poem in which this 
 prophecy is found than upon any other in the Old Testa- 
 ment. See Tuch, § 570. (6) The word Shiloh, as referring 
 to a personal Messiah, was the generally accepted view 
 until several centuries after the Christian era. The Sept., 
 the purest part of which is the Pentateuch, date about 
 280 B.C., reads, " Until He come for whom these things 
 are reserved." In the Peshito, Syriac, date between the 
 first and second centuries A.D., we have, " Until He 
 come whose it is." In the Sam. Pent., date uncertain, the 
 verse corresponds with the ' Textus Receptus.' The ver- 
 sion of Onkelos, date probably about 2nd century A.D., 
 {DeutscJis Literary Remains, art. Targums)^ reads, 
 " Until the Messiah come, whose the kingdom is." In 
 the Targum of Jerusalem of the 7th century A.D., we 
 have, ''Until Shiloh come, King Messiah, whose the 
 
IS 
 
 kingdom is." See more in Turner's A Companion to 
 the Book of Genesis, (c) Gesenius in the early edition 
 of his lexicon, and Fuerst in his early concordance, assign 
 personality to the word Sidluh. Tlie later editions give 
 it a local meaning, the Shiloh where the ark was placed 
 as the centre of national worship. The early authorities 
 are therefore essentially agreed in deeming the passage 
 Messianic. 
 
 Remark 4. The heading to the poem, "The end of 
 days," as in the fifteen other passages, seems to be_ an 
 ideal terminus, limited as to its scope by the seer's vision, 
 corresponding to '■'• In the last days " of the New Testa- 
 ment. Here it might be the occupation of Canaan, or 
 that as typical of a grander event. See Kurtz' Hist, of 
 the Old Covenant, vol. 2, p. 31. 
 
 Remark 5. 'J'he word Shiloh, written fully or defec- 
 tively, in every other instance in tlie Old Testament, is 
 used for the town Shiloh. Here, as already stated, it may 
 be the subjeit of the verb '• to come," or a local accusa- 
 tive, "until Shiloh comes," or "until he comes to Shiloh." 
 We have no proof that such a place was known to Jacob, 
 and we have none that such was not the case. The place 
 may have taken its name from its historical origin, as the 
 central place of worship, or it may not. Judah, as the 
 leading tribe, the van of the wUderness army, and perliaps 
 during the Canaanitish wars, came to Shiloh as truly as 
 did the rest, and in al! probability as the leader of the 
 rest. The statement of a writer in the Methodist Quar- 
 terly. 1869, p. 419, that "In the numerous battles 
 recorded in Jcshiia previous to the coming to Shiloh, not 
 a word is said about Jndah's taking the lead," is an argu- 
 ment e silentio, which is to be treated cautiously. His 
 piior position as leader, ])resupposes his subsequent lead- 
 ership, unless his removal from it is historically stated. 
 See Kum. ii. 3 ; x. 14 ; Josh. xv. 1 ; Judges i. 2; xx. 18. 
 
 Remark 6. The facts, therefore, seem to leave the 
 personal ^Ies^ianic signification of this passage, at best, 
 uncertain. But if we take it as tribal and typical, verified 
 in the first instance, as an epoch in Israel, Josh, xviii. 1, 
 when tlie land being subdued, " the tabernacle of the cov- 
 enant was pitched" there, and Judah was the leading 
 
19 
 
 tribe, it takes on a sufficiently Messianic character, to har- 
 monize with Rev. v. 5, and is illustrated by the motto on 
 the well-known standard of Judah, under a lion's whelp: 
 "•Rise u[), Jehovah, and let thine enemies be scattered." 
 
 Remark 7. As to its historical verification, if we 
 criticise the prophecy minutely, and require that royalty 
 in its kingly personality should be pre-^erved in the 
 house of Judah until the appearing of Christ, it can- 
 not easily be sustained. Lawgiving as such, of course, 
 was in the hands of Moses, a Levite, and leadership, in the 
 hands of Joshua, an Ephraiinite, and snbseiiuently in the 
 hands of Samson, a Danite, but from the Davidic e.a roy 
 alty belonged to the tribe of Jndali. Yet not always in a 
 kingly foi'in. In the house of David, the sceptre remained 
 until the Babylonian captivity, the other tribes in their 
 history after the secession being nnder many dynasties. 
 The rulers of the restored peojile, now called Jews, were 
 at first of the house of David. Ezra iii. 2. Subsequently 
 the chief power lay in the hands of priest-princes, of the 
 house of Levi, yet the nation governed was essentially of 
 the house of Judah. So that in reality the sceptre did 
 not depart from Judah, nor roj-alty from his successors, 
 until the usurpation of the iJumean Herod, in whose 
 reign the son of David, the son of Judah, came. We may 
 deem the passage, if Messianic, tribally and thereby tpyi- 
 cally Messianic. 
 
 THE PROPHECY OF BALAAM. 
 
 NUMBERS XXIV. 14-17. 
 
 LITKKATURK. 
 
 Balaam. Monoarraph by Honjjstcnbenr. Kalisch's Commentary 
 on NnnibtTs. Bil). Sac. vol. 3, art. by 1{. 1). C. Uobbins. 
 
 Bil). Sac. vol. 3, True Date of Advent of Christ, art. bv Wicsoler, 
 trans. l)y Cx. K. Day. 'I'lie Star of the Wise Man. by U. C. Treneii. 
 
 Stanley's Jewisii Clinrch, vol. I. Ewalil's Hist, of Israel, vol 2. 
 
 Kurtz' History of the Old (^ovciiant, vol. 2. Messianic Prophe- 
 cies, Franz Dclitzsch, chap, viii., § IJ. 
 
50 
 
 re:makks. 
 
 Remark 1. Our limits in this S3-Ilabus, and the diffi- 
 culty in printing Hebrew words, will prevent any careful 
 exegesis of this much-dis]3uted prophecy. 
 
 Remark 2. A priori, it is no objection to the actual- 
 ity of such a prophecy that the speaker was a bad man. 
 God can use such agencies as he pleases, and there may 
 be even to our eyes wisdom in the selection. Other simi- 
 lar instances in the Scriptures are suggestive. 
 
 Remark 3. The circumstances would warrant such 
 a prophecy ; i.e., God's enemies needed to know His pur- 
 poses concerning His own people. Its position in the his- 
 tory of God's people is an appropriate and natural one. 
 The controversy as to the locality of the prophecy in the 
 history is capable of adjustment to a believer in revelation. 
 There are difficulties connected with this matter, however, 
 which cannot now be considered. 
 
 Remark 4. By the sj'mbol of the Star, and that of 
 the Sceptre, we have the idea of royalty, and by the use of 
 these emblems in the passage, victory over foes. If the 
 passage is Messianic, and the date correct, it is the first 
 passage which presents to us Messiah as King. Delitzsch 
 says (0. T. Hist, of Redemption, § 29), ''That which is 
 promised to Judah as the royal tribe, is hereafter con- 
 nected with the person of a King, through whom Judah 
 ati:ains the dominion of the world, to which, according to 
 Gen. xlix. 10, he was designated after the arrival in Shi- 
 loh." " He is the King of the final period, through whom 
 Israel conquers all the neighboring nations ; and though 
 Israel for a time is threatened by Ashur, the world- 
 empire of the East, and subjugated by Chittira, the world- 
 empire of the West, (I Mace. i. 1 : viii. 5), it victoriously 
 outlasts the nearest and most remote movements of the 
 nations." At any rate, some King is to arise who is to 
 subdue God's enemies : and from the typical usage of Edom 
 and Moab, as the symbols of unchecked hatred to Israel 
 by the later prophets, it is quite evident that this pro- 
 phecy in the main is Messianic, bringing forward His 
 kingly office. Rev. xxii. 16. 
 
 Note. The Targum of Onkelos refers to it as Messi- 
 
anic. In the Christian Era, the appearance of Bar-cochab 
 was welcomed by the Jews as the fulfihnent of this proph- 
 ecy. The Christian Fathers interpreted it as Messianic. 
 
 •THE PROPHET LIKE MOSES. 
 
 DEUT. xviii. 15-19. 
 
 Most conservative critics agree that this passage is 
 Messianic, but they differ as to its exclusive reference to 
 the Messiah. Some maintain tliat the word "prophet" is 
 used collectively^ for the whole body of the prophets ; 
 others that it is used ideally as a typical picture of the 
 true Messiah; and others claim that it refers to Messiah 
 alone, a par excellence. 
 
 REiSLA-RKS. 
 
 Remark 1. The best way to ascertain the meaning 
 of the passage is to look at it analytically, (a) By the 
 context, a sharp contrast is drawn between false prophets 
 and genuine prophets; and Israel is to have a genuine 
 one. Vss. 12-14. (6) The prophet to come was to be 
 like Moses. Vss. 15-18. (c) He was to be a mediating 
 lawgiver between a dread divinity and a trembling peo- 
 ple. Vss. 16-17. Ex. XX. 18-19. (c?) His word was 
 to be imperative and ultimate. Vs. 18. (e) His word was 
 to be so emphatically the expression of the divine mind 
 that Jehovah would take into his own hands the punish- 
 ment merited by a disobedience of it. Vs. 19. 
 
 Remark 2. Still more light may be shed upon the 
 passage by comparing it with a kindred passage in Num. 
 xii. 6, and with other passages in the Pentateuch, (a) 
 Moses is styled God's prophet pre-eminently. Comparing 
 him with other prophets, this distinction is made by assign- 
 ing to him an especial immediateness in the reception of 
 his messages, and by the distinctness or matter-of-factness 
 which is to characterize them. In Num. xii. 6-8, where 
 Jehovah rebukes the jealousy of Aaron and Miriam, ou ac- 
 
22 
 
 count of the official rank of their brother, Jehovah says : 
 Hear now my words : If ye have, or if there be, a prophet 
 among you, I, Jehovah, will make myself known to him ; 
 in a vision, in a dream, I will speak to him. Not so is 
 my servant Moses. He is faithful in all my house. 
 Mouth to mouth will I speak to him, and by an appear- 
 ance, i.e., with open face, and not in riddles or dark 
 speeches ; and the form of Jehovah he beholds clearly. 
 The distinction here drawn between Moses and other 
 prophets lies in the mode of communication and the 
 official position of Moses himself. His message was to be 
 the result of a peculiar, highly-favored intercommunion, 
 an open face-to-face revelation. It was also to be distinct 
 from all mere symbolism and prophetic action, so charac- 
 teristic of other prophets. They received their knowl- 
 edge in an ecstatic state, by visions and dreams. He was 
 also the mediator of the covenant for the whole house of 
 Israel, with reference to whose laws nothing was to be 
 added or subtracted. Others were simply the expositors 
 to parts of Israel of what Moses had already set forth. 
 Heb. iii. 5. (i) Moses' pi-e-eminence is likewise affirmed 
 in Deut. xxxiv. 10. The statement is made by one who 
 added the appendix to Deuteronomy. The author and 
 date are unknown, but the statement may be accepted as 
 authoritative. 
 
 Remark 3. In the New Testament the passage is 
 referred to as having its fulfilment in Christ. Thus (a) 
 Peter refers the language to Christ as affirmed by Moses, 
 expounding thereby the mediatorial office of Christ. He 
 allows, however, to others, as prophets, the province of 
 foretelling the coming of the ^lessiah. Acts iii. 22-24. 
 (6) Stephen does the same, i.e., he has the same purpose 
 evidently in his mind, and would have brought it out, had 
 he been permitted to finish his defense. Acts vii. 37. 
 (c) During the ministry of our Lord, the passage seems 
 to have been currently accepted as Messianic. In John 
 i. 21, where John the Baptist denies that he was the 
 prophet expected, assuring his questioners that he was 
 merely the forerunner of such an one, according to Isa. 
 xl. 3, and Mai. iii. 1, the reference is apparent. In John 
 V. 45 the direct charge of Christ was that the people 
 
23 
 
 would not listen to Him when He announced His Father's 
 word, and their guilt in the matter was emphasized by the 
 fact that Moses would accuse them of their crime inas- 
 much as he had written of Him. In both these cases the 
 passage under consideration must be the one in the minds 
 of the speakers, as it is the only place in the Pentateuch 
 where the idea of Messiah as a prophet is referred to. See 
 also John vi. 14 and vii. 40, and iv. 25. 
 
 Remark 4. How the language of this passage would 
 have been understood by the contemporaries of Moses, it 
 is impossible to say. They would have looked merely for 
 another Moses. As a fact, the Jews never saw one like 
 him in his highest office until the Messiah came. While 
 other prophets hold a subordinate place, and are justly 
 tyi)ical of the Messiah, the one spoken of here was to 
 stand above them in the immediateness of his connexion 
 with Jehovah, and in the infallibility of his utterances as 
 Lawgiver. No prophet subsequent to the time of Moses 
 attained to that honor. Christ as Son over His own 
 house was superior to Moses as a servant in his own 
 house. Heb. iii. 5. He who could say " The words 
 that I speak unto you, I speak not from myself;" (John 
 xiv. 10), " 1 speak the things which 1 have seen with my 
 Father;" (John viii. 38), ''As my Father taught me I 
 speak these things;" (John viii. 28), "He that hath seen 
 Me, hath seen the Father ;" (John xiv. 9), alone illustrates 
 and transcends the prophet like unto Moses. 
 
 MESSIANIC PASSAGES IN THE PSALMS. 
 
 i.rn:KATURE. 
 
 J. Pyc Smitli's Testimony to Messiah. 
 
 Heiig>tc'iil)or';*s Clirisloloiiy. 
 
 KrimiiiiiicliL'i's Siitl'c'iiii'r Saviour. 
 
 Sciiottucn's Ilorac Hubniicae. 
 
 Piiscys Daniel. 
 
 Lt-atlie's Testimony of O. T. to Messiah. 
 
 Kuinivc-'s (lie Messianisclien I'sninicn. 
 
 B.iiir.s Zwoir Mcssianisciien I'sainicn erkliirt. 
 
 Coninicntaiios — Purowne — Deiitzsch — Olshauson — Hagpnbach 
 
 — Murpliy — Ak'xaiulc-r - Jennings and Lowe— Ewald — Hitzig — H. 
 Gruetz — Kay — Four Friends — Lanire (Moll) — Spealier's — Vuihluger 
 
 — Thrupp (lutroUucliou) — C. Phillips. 
 
u 
 
 PRELIMINARY. 
 
 Before turning our attention to such Psalms as seem 
 to be Messianic, a tew bints as to the preservation of the 
 Messianic idea between the period of the Pentateuch and 
 the early Psalms, deserve a brief notice. As a history 
 of the chosen nation, Joshua, Judges, and I and 11 
 Samuel might be expected to give some fore-gleams of 
 the clearer light in the Psalms. They evidently contain 
 history, and are designed for the history of this interven- 
 ing period, whoever were the authors, and whatever the 
 date of their production. They cover a long, dark period, 
 a period when the longings of a pious heart would seek an 
 expression of its hopes, if such hopes were cherished. 
 And, accordnigly, we find something, very scanty indeed, 
 which looks, at least, like the reflexion of a rainbow thrown 
 out from this period of storms. 
 
 In the farewell of Joshua (Josh, xxiii.; xxiv.) we have 
 nothing strictly Messianic, except as it breathes the spirit 
 of Moses, and looks into the future of the nation, as per- 
 haps a typical nation, at any rate as a nation elected to a 
 pure and sacred destiny, provided that it is faithful to its 
 calling. The brief, prophetic address in Judges vi. 8-10, 
 is merely a warning concerning Israel's backslidings. The 
 triumphal song of the prophetess Deborah (Judges v.), so 
 antique in forjn as to bear witness to its assigned age, 
 contains little of the Messianic idea, beyond the paean 
 note of faith's tinal victory. But when we come to the 
 song of Hannah (1 Sam. ii. 1-10), in the days of Eli, the 
 echo of which is Mary's Magnihcat (Luke i. 46-54), her 
 closing words seem to anticipate an Anointed One, 
 through whom Jehovah is to work wonders. Like proph- 
 ecy, generally, she ascends from her personal victory over 
 her enemy, Peninnah, to a general victory over all of 
 Jehovah's foes, by means of this Anointed One. " Jeho- 
 vah will judge the ends of the earth, and will grant power 
 to the King, and will exalt the horn of His Anointed." 
 As is well known, there was no king in Israel at this 
 time, nor for many years subsequently. Even when tlie 
 time came, her son, Samuel, strongly objected to the elec- 
 tion of a king. Was this utterance of hers merely a 
 
woman's weak, nervous longing for some king to appear, 
 who should change the chaotic condition of the nation 
 into order and subdue their enemies, t)r was it an inspired 
 bursting forth of a gleam of hope through the dense dark- 
 
 ness 
 
 ? 
 
 Passing to I Sam. ii. 27-36, we tind an unnamed 
 prophet, proclaiming the rise of-a line of priests, distinct 
 from those of the house of Eli, which is to be j^erpetual. 
 •'And I will raise me up a faithful priest, who shall do 
 according to that which is in my heart and in my mind, 
 and I will build him a faithful (permanent) house, and he 
 shall walk before mine Anointed forever." Eli belonged 
 to the house of Ithamar, of the house of Levi, of the house 
 of Aaron. The woe pronounced upon his sons, when 
 removing them from the priesthood, was not immediately 
 carried out ; for we find Ahijah, the son of Phinehas, the 
 grandson of Eli, in the priest's office (I Sam. xiv. 3), and 
 a brother of Ahijah, Ahimelech, as high priest at Nob. 
 (I Sam. xxi. 2 ; xxii. 9.) Ahimelech's son, Abiathar, was 
 with David as high priest during David's persecution by 
 Saul, and was the last of the sons of Ithamar to be hon- 
 ored with the high priesthood. He joined in conspirac}'- 
 against Solomon, and was deposed by Solomon from his 
 office, verifying in his sad fate the woe pronounced upon 
 the house of Eli. (I Kings ii. 27.) Henceforward, the 
 line of Eleazar, or the Zadokian line, as it is called, 
 retains possession of the priesthood ; and as Delitzsch 
 says (M. P. ch. viii. § 17), "• The promise in I Sam. ii. 35, is 
 primarily realized in all the better Zadokian high priests 
 who stood at the side of the better kings from the house of 
 David. But its ultimate fulfilment is found in the Christ 
 of God, in whom, according to Zech. vi. 13, the ideal 
 king and priest do not stand side by side, but are 
 united." 
 
 Passing to II Sam. vii. and I Chron. xvii., the kingly 
 position of Messiah stands out still more clearly. In his 
 desire to build a house for the worship of Jehovah, David 
 is checked by a revelation from Nathan, the prophet, who 
 assures him that while his pious wish in this regard can- 
 not be granted, it shall be compensated for by a higher 
 honor. This honor is the permanency of the Davidic 
 
26 
 
 dynasty, the perpetuation of a line of kings from his own 
 loins. His dynasty is not to be elective as was that of 
 Saul, but hereditary. The highest personal honor, accord- 
 ing to the ambition of ancient and modern royalty, was 
 thus guaranteed to him. " When thy days shall be ful- 
 filled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, then will I 
 raise up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy 
 bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build 
 me a house to my name, and I will establish the throne of 
 his kingdom/orgver." (H Sam. vii. 12-19.) The Anointed 
 One here is not David, but a descendant of David. The 
 immediate verification would be the reign of Solomon. 
 The term "seed," however, in vs. 12, seems to be general 
 as well as individual, when expounded by vs. 13. "I 
 will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.''^ What 
 follows, in vss. 14-16, cannot well be explained except as 
 indicating the perpetuity of the Davidic dynasty. And 
 the response of David (vss. 18-19) implies, certainly, that 
 he so understood it. Very jejune would be an interpreta- 
 tion which limited the adoration of the royal singer for 
 this great act of divine condescension to allowing him 
 the privilege of having one son to sit upon his throne. 
 
 These hints of something hopeful for the future wel- 
 fare of Israel, though they are but hints, intimate at 
 least that in the Messianic thought we have passed from 
 the Mosaic prophecy concerning Him as a prophet to 
 other offices of his, those of Priest and King. They are 
 but rays of light in the dark past, but they give the key- 
 note by which the singers of Israel in the Psalms, sung 
 their triumphal songs. 
 
 MESSIANIC PSALMS. 
 
 The Messianic Psalms may be divided into two 
 classes : those which speak of the Messiah as King and 
 Conqueror, and those which speak of Him as Sufferer. 
 As Priest, He is referred to in Ps. ex., but no entire 
 Psalm presents Him in that peculiar attitude. It was 
 not necessary, perhaps, inasmuch as the ceremonial law 
 
was not yet abrogated : and its evident design, in thought 
 at least, was to keep the priestly intercessory idea ever 
 active in the minds of the Jewish nation. 
 
 Of those Psalms which picture the Messiah as King 
 and Sufferer, another division may be made, viz., Predic- 
 tive and Typically-Predictive. The number of entire 
 Psalms, however, which may be reckoned as Messianic is 
 very small. It is to these we confine our examination. 
 Single passages, as vouched for by quotation in the New 
 Testament, are quite numerous, but these must now be 
 omitted. 
 
 As King^ Psalms ii. and ex. are Predictive. Psalm 
 ii., however, is founded upon an actual as the basis of an 
 ideal. As King^ Psalms Ixxii., xlv., xx., xxi. are Typical, 
 though containing predictive elements. Of these only 
 Ixxii. and xlv. can be said to be pervaded by the Messi- 
 anic elements. As Sufferer^ Psalms xxii. and Ixix. are 
 generally reckoned, but only xxii. can bear an exclu- 
 sively Messianic interpretation, and this is Typical. Psalm 
 xvi., by the use made of it in the New Testament, may be 
 deemed typically-predictive of Messiah's Resurrection. 
 We will consider the more important of these Psalms 
 as to their Messianic element in the following order : 
 ii., ex., Ixxii., xlv., xxii., xvi. 
 
 PSALM II. 
 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 Bib. Sac. vol. 7, art. by C. E. Stowe. 
 
 That this Psalm is Messianic, portraying the Messiah 
 as King and Conqueror, is evident from the following con- 
 siderations : 
 
 1. Jewish commentators, early and late, so inter- 
 preted it, though they modified their interpretation of it 
 as to its verification in Christ as the Messiah. They can- 
 didly say that the reason for their modification is polemi- 
 cal. See Perowne, Delitzsch, Schottgen. 
 
 2. The New Testament writers ascribe to it a Mes- 
 sianic character. In Acts iv. 24, vs. 27, vss. 1 and 2 
 
•28 
 
 A,re said to have been fulfilled in the conspiracy of the 
 Jewish rulers and of Pilate to put Christ to death. In 
 Acts xiii. 33, Paul adduces vs. 7 as proof of the 
 sonship of the Messiah, as declared, or made manifest, by 
 the resurrection of Christ from the dead. In Hebrews i. 
 5, it is expressly stated that God addressed the language 
 of this verse to His son. See also Hebrews vs. 5. These 
 passages are not quoted by way of accommodation or 
 illustration, but as verification, as having their real fulfil- 
 ment in Christ, and in Christ alone. 
 
 3. The course of thought in the Psalm demands the 
 Messianic sense. The language cannot be justly applied 
 to any other Prince or Ruler without excessive exaggera- 
 tion. The dominion is to be universal, including Gentiles 
 and Jews. The representation in this respect harmonizes 
 with what the prophets teach concerning the Messianic 
 reign. Isa. ii.' 2 ; Micah iv. 1 ; Zech. ix. 10. A verifica- 
 tion in Uzziah, Hezekiah, or Alexander Jannaeus, as crit- 
 ics claim, is preposterous. 
 
 4. The objections to the Messianic interpretation of 
 this Psalm are not valid when tlie facts in the case are 
 candidly considered, (a) It is said that the Psalm refers 
 exclusively to the reign of David. But allowing the 
 Davidic authorship, it is inapplicable to him, because it 
 treats of a king recently appointed, against whom the 
 princes of the world and the heathen nations rebelled ; 
 whereas David when he began to reign was sovereign 
 over only a part of the tribes of Israel, and had made as 
 yet no foreign conquests. If, however, the Psalm is 
 Davidic, the picture might have its background in the last 
 years of his reign, in the Ammonitish wars (2 Sam. x.), and 
 refer to a successor. (2 Sam. vii.) Such a view would give 
 to the Psalm a typically-predictive character, (b) It is said 
 that the Psalm refers exclusively to the reign of Solomon, 
 but no rebellion of any mark occurred during his reign, 
 and the events foreshadowed in the Psalm find no corres- 
 pondence in his recorded history, (c) It is said that the 
 language with reference to the enemies of the Messiah is 
 too severe to be applicable to Christ. But it is no more 
 severe than the language of Christ himself. Matt. xxv. 
 46 : Luke xix. 27 ; Rev. ii. 27 : xix. 15. 
 
^9 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 1. The enemies of Messiah conspire against Him, 
 and refuse to submit to His authority. Vss. 1-8. 
 
 2. Their hostility is vain, because Jehovah has made 
 Him the moral King and Governor of the world, and 
 given Him the power to establish His claim to the title. 
 Vss. 4-9. 
 
 8. Unqualified submission being their only escape 
 from a terrible doom. His enemies are bidden yield to His 
 sceptre. Vss. 10-12. 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 Remark 1. Studying this Psalm as to its Messianic 
 character, special attention must be given to vs. 7. " Let 
 me relate the particulars concerning a decree (Ps. Ixix. 27) : 
 Jehovah has said to me, My Son art Thou : this day have 
 I begotten Thee." 
 
 Remark 2. The subsequent use of this verse, or the 
 thought of the verse, implies a broader meaning than the 
 birth of a merely human monarch. Aside from Dan. 
 vii. 13, and possibly Dan, iii. 25, it is the only passage in 
 the Old Testament to which the divine sonship can be 
 referred as being prophetic. Yet in the New Testament 
 such a sonship is recognized as an expected fact. See 
 Matt. iii. 17 ; John i. 14 ; John i. 49 ; Matt. xxvi. Q'^ ; 
 Rom. i. 3 ; Heb. i. 5, and vs. 5 ; Acts xiii. 33. 
 
 Remark 3. The verse in the Hebrew fits this broad 
 application very suggestively. The scene of the dialogue 
 between Jehovah and His anointed is placed by the 
 Psalmist-Seer in Heaven (vs. 4). In vs. 6 the emphatic 
 pronoun introduces the words of Jehovah, and empha- 
 sizes the position of the speaker, as if he had said : You 
 have had your way, now / will have mine. I will fit my 
 king against your kings. I have established my king 
 upon Zion: not merely Jerusalem, but the heavenly 
 Jerusalem, of which the earthly Jerusalem is merely a 
 type. The position is conferred, not assumed. Then 
 come the words of vs. 7. The speaker, the Anointed 
 One, quotes the language of Jehovah as addressed to Him. 
 In this language the two emphatic words are the pronoun 
 
and the verb ; equivalent to saying : I, on my part, have 
 begotten a Son of my own proper self; z.e., of m7/ own 
 nature. Others are called my sons declaratively, or by 
 adoption, but this one is to be just like me, the Mono- 
 genes. In no other instance in the Old Testament is the 
 verb " to beget " used to denote the begetting of a son by 
 God. Messiah's mother is frequently spoken of, and as 
 the descendant of David He is frequently mentioned, but 
 here, as Moll remarks, " in a determined case some one has 
 l3een placed in this relation by God Himself, and indeed 
 in the history of revelation^ See Pusey's Lectures on 
 Baniel, p. 479. The word " today," or " this day," may 
 signify that at this specific time Jehovah appointed the 
 Anointed One to the royal position, or that at this time 
 he declared or manifested Him as such. The tense of the 
 verb affirms a completed act, either at a moment previ- 
 ously, or at any time previously : (See I Sam. x. 19, and 
 xxvi. 19), equivalent to saying, '' Today it is an unques- 
 tioned and actual fact that I have begotten Thee." So far 
 as the divine thought is concerned, it may be eternal. So 
 far as the manifestation of the fact is concerned, it might 
 be in the theophanies of the Old Testament, or in the 
 incarnation of the New Testament, crowned as the latter 
 was by undeniable proof in His resurrection. 
 
 Remark 4. The verse, therefore, by its connection, 
 and by its peculiarity of language, as well as by the use 
 made of it in the New Testament, may be justly consid- 
 ered prophetically Messianic. 
 
 PSALM ex. 
 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 Bib. Sac. vol. 9, Art. by B. B. Edwards. 
 
 This Psalm resembles the second, and has for its 
 principal thought the same theme, Messiah as Conqueror. 
 The evidence for its Messianic character is two-fold ; the 
 testimony of the older Jewish commentators and the 
 testimony of Christ himself. In the early Jewish litera- 
 ture nearly every verse of the Psalm is commented upon 
 as Messianic, and the authorship as Davidic ; but in the con- 
 
81 
 
 troversies of the Jews with the Christian church, the 
 Rabbis referred the hero of the Psahii to David, Abra- 
 ham, Hezekiah, and Zerubbabel. See Perowne, Jennings 
 and Lowe, Schtittgen, Hengstenberg. The testimony of 
 Clirist is very explicit. He uses the first verse as a proof 
 that Messiah when He comes will be a being so superior 
 to David that David himself^ under divine inspiration, 
 had once declared that He was David's Sovereign. This 
 testimony is given by each of the three synoptists, as 
 though it was so vital a matter no one of them could omit 
 the record of it. In Matt. xxii. 41-46, we read : " The 
 Pharisees being gathered together, Jesus asked them, say- 
 ing, What think you concerning the Messiah? Whose 
 Son is he ? They say to Him, Of David. He saith to 
 them, How therefore does David in Spirit call him lord, 
 saying. The Lord (Jehovah) said to my lord. Sit at my 
 right hand, until I place thine enemies under thy feet." 
 Mark xii. 35-37 records the scene as follows: "And Jesus 
 teaching in the Temple said. How do the scribes say that 
 the Messiah is the Son of David ? David himself says, in 
 the Holy Spirit, The Lord (Jehovah) said to my lord. Sit 
 at my right hand, until I place thy foes under thy feet. 
 David himself says that he is lord, and whence is he his 
 son? And the whole multitude heard him gladly." In 
 Luke XX. 41-44, the narrator says : "And he said to them 
 (Scribes), How do the}'" say that the Messiah is David's 
 son ? For David himself says in the Book of Psalms, The 
 Lord said to my lord, Sit at my right hand, until I place 
 thy foes as the stool of thy feet. David therefore calls 
 him lord, and how is he his son?" Besides the testimony 
 already referred to, it is worthy of note that elsewhere in 
 the New Testament quotations are made from this Psalm, 
 not by way of accommodation, but as proof-texts concern- 
 ing the work and offices of Christ. See Acts ii. 36-36 ; 
 I Cor. XV. 25; Heb. vs. 6; vii. 17, 21. 
 
 Remark 1. From the use which Christ makes of the 
 first verse of this Psalm, there follow two natural infer- 
 ences : first, that David was the author of the Psalm, and 
 secondly, that under a special divine inspiration he 
 affirmed lordship to some one of whom he himself could 
 be but a type. It has been denied, however, that David 
 
3? 
 
 was the author of the Psalm : and it has been affirmed 
 that the expressions "David," "David himself," do not 
 indicate authorship as endorsed by Christ, but that He 
 spoke popularly, according to the current opinion of the 
 times, without any purpose to correct a false view, if such 
 it was. He did not deem it worth His while to go out of 
 his way to guide His hearers as to the little matter of 
 authoi'ship, if indeed He knew the facts in the case. He 
 either saw fit to pass by the question of authorship as a 
 matter of no consequence, or His own knowledge was 
 limited. He j^layed the part of a popular orator if He did 
 know otherwise, or if He did not know, his ignorance was 
 one of the limitations of His divine nature. So essentially, 
 De Wette, Neander, Bleek, Schenkel, Keira, Ewald, 
 Meyer, (a) As to the Davidic authorship of the Psalm, 
 so far as the Hebrew text can guide us, we are dependent 
 upon the superscription, which a little suspiciously con- 
 fines itself in this case to a mere statement of authorship. 
 The location of the Psalm in the fifth Book of the Psklms 
 likewise suggests a difficulty as to the genuineness of the 
 title. Moreover, a superscription in itself is not an infalli- 
 ble guide. If, however, it harmonize with the contents of 
 the Psalm to which it is prefixed, it may be accepted as 
 truthful, whether placed there by the author, which is 
 supposed to be unusual, or by a compiler. In this case 
 the Sept., the Vulg., and other versions agree in assigning 
 the authorship of this Psalm to David : and so far as the 
 contents can aid us, it is as easy to allow Davidic author- 
 ship, as to conjecture an author. It is also a suggestive 
 fact that, excepting Heb. iv. 7, and Acts iv. 25, wherever 
 in the New Testament Davidic authorship is affirmed of 
 a Psalm, the affirmation is confirmed by the superscrip- 
 tions in the Hebrew text. The reference in Heb. iv. 7 is 
 to Psalm xcv., for which there is no title in the Hebrew 
 text. The Sept. refers that Psalm to David. The second 
 Psalm referred to in Acts iv. 25 has no title. It is also 
 worthy of note that in some of these quotations David is 
 spoken of as speaking under the special guidance of the 
 Holy Spirit. In tliis particular the apostles harmonize them- 
 selves with the strong utterance of Christ concerning vs. 1 
 of this Psalm. (6) As to the objection resting either upon 
 
33 
 
 Christ's ignorance or his disposition to ally himself with 
 popular opinion for the sake of overthrowing a quibble, 
 it does not seem to be well sustained. It was a great day 
 in his life. It was near the close of his ministry. It was 
 a time when if ever he was bound to speak honestly and 
 state the exact facts. He was in no mood to catch his 
 enemies by a quibble. He had just compelled them to 
 hold their peace by setting at rest the query as to the 
 tribute-money. He looked at it as a fact, and treated it 
 as a fact. He had just answered the crafty question of 
 the Sadducees, by appealing to Moses aiid endorsing 
 Moses, touching the resurrection of the dead. He dealt 
 there with facts, and treated thein as facts. Now the 
 Pharisees attempt to overthrow him, and he appeals unto 
 David as to the regal dignity of the Messiah. He deals 
 again with facts and employs acknowledged facts. The 
 scene and the intent of the scene are so uni(|ue and con- 
 crete, it is hard to believe that he was merely attempting 
 to catch his enemies in a snare. There is so much 
 manliness in it, one can find no crevice for inserting a wil- 
 ful deception. The argument with his foes turns upon 
 the assertion of David himself as to the regal position of 
 another, superior to the Great King of Israel, whose supe- 
 riority King David had recognized by a divine revelation, 
 and the word n'um in vs. 1, is very suggestive as to 
 Christ's accuracy in this respect. Its position at the 
 beginning of the verse, and its meaning as a proplietic 
 word, are in har)nony with the assertion of Christ, (c) 
 The strongest objection to the Davidic authorsliip lies in 
 the uniqueness of the Psalm historically considered. 
 Other Messianic Psalms furnish us with a" background, 
 I.e., some historical event which gave rise to the Psalm. 
 This one laughs us to scorn. Deny the authorship to 
 David and apply the Psalm to him, as do manv critics. 
 How of him could it be said, " Thou art a priest forever 
 after the order of Melchizedek " ? David once wore the 
 linen ephod, but he never was priest. He raised the 
 priesthood to special eminence, but never assumed the 
 office. And besides, the very argument which the writer 
 to the Hebrews (Heb. vii.) uses to establish the superi- 
 ority of Christ to the Levitical priesthood is founded 
 
34 
 
 upon the abrogation of that priesthood, and the afiirma 
 tion that the priesthood of Melchizedek was the only real 
 type. David never was and never could be a priest after 
 this order except by some hypostatic transmutation from 
 the loins of Melchizedek into the loins of Abraham 
 through the house of Levi, into the house of David. Let 
 David be the author and apply the Psalm to Solomon. 
 Was he either a man of war or a priest? Apply the 
 Psalm to Abraham, or Hezekiah, or Zerubbabel, as do the 
 Jews with the authorship Davidic, and the prophecy 
 becomes ridiculous. The person referred to in the Psalm 
 is to be both prince or joint-sovereign with Jehovah, and 
 a priest after the order of Melchizedek. Li the Asmonean 
 Dynasty we have priesthood donning roj^alty, but not roy- 
 alty donning the priesthood, nor could it claim descent 
 from Melchizedek, If the critics cannot verify the person 
 thus limned by the Psalmist, as being in himself both 
 King and Priest, may it nut be that our Lord was truth- 
 ful and minutely accurate when he confounded the scribes 
 by asserting that the Messiah was both David's seed and 
 David's lord ? The parallel passage for the union of roy- 
 alty and priesthood in the Messiah is Zech. vi. 9-15. 
 Critics, of course, would therefore post-date the Psalm to 
 the time of Zechariali, but that is a horn of the dilemma 
 one can push either way. 
 
 Remark 2. Concerning the Melchizedek of vs. 4, 
 nothing is known beyond what is recorded in Gen. xiv. 
 18-20, and Heb. vii. But from these passages it appears 
 (a) that he was a Canaanitish priest of the Most High 
 God, {h) that Abram acknowledged in him a superiority 
 to himself by welcoming his blessing, ('•'•The less is 
 blessed of the better," Heb. vii. 7), and by giving him the 
 tithes or a portion of the spoils of victory, such as were 
 due to a priest, Gen. xiv. 21; Heb. vii. 6 and 9, (c) 
 that typically, b}' the writer to the Hebrews, he was 
 deemed a type of Christ in four particulars, viz., each was 
 a priest, but not of the house of Aaron : each was a priest 
 whose parentage could not be traced to any human source- 
 no human genealogy in the one case, no divine genealogy 
 in the other (Heb. vii. 3): each was a perpetual priest — 
 in the one case and in the other, neither was to have a 
 
35 
 
 successor (Heb. vii. 3) : the priesthood of each was implied- 
 ly unique, as reaching the needs of both Jews and Gentiles. 
 Melchizedek was not a Jew, though probably of the Semitic 
 race. As Delitzsch says, rather poetically, '' Melchizedek 
 is the setting sun of the primitive revelation, which sheds 
 its last rays upon the patriarchs, from whom the true 
 light of the world is to arise. The sun sets, that when 
 the preparatory time of tlie i)atriarclis, the preparatory 
 time of Israel, has passed away, it may rise again in 
 Jesus Christ, the antitype." See Com. 
 
 Note. "After the manner of," signifies "likeness in 
 official divinity." — Gesenius. 
 
 Remark 3. The phrase, " The Lord at thy right 
 hand," in vs. 5, is somewhat perplexing. The word 
 " Lord," in the" text, is written defectively. It is found so 
 written in the Old Testament according to the Masorites 
 134 times. When written fully it may be used for God, 
 or for angels as representatives of God. When written 
 defectively., it is limited in use to the Deity, par excelle^ice. 
 In this verse, the plirase may signify, that the Joint- 
 Sovereign as the Lord who had been placed at the right 
 hand of Jehovah, was about to do what is subsequently 
 asserted, or it may mean that Jehovah is to do that great 
 work, the Joint-Sovereign being a -mere witness of the 
 events. That is, tlie Prince may be honored with the 
 title of Lord, or the term Lord may be a mere s3nionym 
 for Jehovah. Some rid themselves of this choice by 
 affirming tliat Jeliovah is first addressed, and then the 
 Prince, in vss. 6, 7 ; for they admit that vss. 6, 7 must 
 express the movements of the Prince. Such transitions 
 are no strangers either in tlie Psalms or in the Prophets ; 
 yet the rush of thought to the abrupt close of the Psalm 
 is against such breaks if they can be avoided. The strong- 
 est objection to the view that it is tlie Prince who is thus 
 dignified by the Divine Name, is that the term is nowhere 
 else applied to the Messiah. But since in vs. 1 the 
 Prince is called "my lord," in the singular number, 
 expressing superiority to the Psalmist, and he is honored 
 with a joint-sovereignty in the conquest portrayed, may 
 it not be that the Psalmist, in the flush of his inspi- 
 ration, has applied the real Divine Name to him here ? 
 
36 
 
 We put it as a tentative. In Psalm xlv. 7, the most 
 natural interpretation, seemingly endorsed in Heb. i. 8, 
 uses Elohim as an epithet for the Messiah. See also the 
 same honor, probably, in Isaiah ix. 6. Revelation may 
 have shown the Psalmist that the Prince of the House of 
 David was infinitely greater than David the King. See 
 John V. 17 ; x. 30-38. 
 
 Remark 4. The Psalm may be properly called, as 
 Perowne says, "a prediction, and a prediction of the 
 Christ, as the true King, as the everlasting Priest after 
 the order of Melchizedek." 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 1. The Messiah is represented as sitting at the right 
 hand of Jehovah, and invested with authority to subdue 
 all nations to himself. Vss. 1, 2. 
 
 2. He is represented as collecting his hosts for the 
 combat, who gather to him willingly, numerous and fresh 
 as the drops of the morning dew. Vs. 3. 
 
 3. He is invested by Jehovah with the priestly office, 
 as well as the kingly, an office of priesthood superior to 
 the Aaronic, and is to exercise it forever. Vs. 4. 
 
 4. As associated with Jehovah, he marches from vic- 
 tory to victory, unwearied, until his foes acknowledge his 
 authority. Vss. 5-7. 
 
 Note. In favor of the Davidic authorship of the 
 Psalm are Perowne, Delitzsch, Hengstenberg, Alexander, 
 Jennings and Lowe, "The Four Friends," Murphy, Kay, 
 Moll, Vaihinger, Rosenmiiller, Kurtz, Hiivernick, Tholuck, 
 and others. 
 
 Against the Davidic authorship and referring the hero 
 of the Psalm to David or others, are Thrupp, (to Zerub- 
 babel), Ewald, (to David), De Wette, (to Uzziah), 
 Olshausen, (to Jonathan Maccabeus), Hitzig, (same), 
 Aben Ezra, (to David by an unknown Psalmist), Men- 
 delssohn, (same), and others. 
 
8V 
 
 PSALM LXXII. 
 
 This Psalm describes the future power and glory of 
 Messiah under the type of a prosperous King whose 
 dominion is to be marked by a government pre-eminent 
 for its benevolence. It resembles in general purport 
 Psalm ii., but as it is not quoted in the New Testament, 
 and rests upon an actual ground-work, it illustrates an 
 important exegetical principle which deserves special 
 notice. 
 
 Some of even the more conservative interpreters main- 
 tain that only those Psalms are Messianic which are 
 endorsed as such in the New Testament. But it is cer- 
 tainly unreasonable to suppose that the comparatively 
 few Psalms cited in the New Testament exhaust the Mes- 
 sianic idea of the Psalter. In the New Testament, Christ 
 is represented as the prime subject of the ancient econ- 
 omy : and if only those types and predictions have refer- 
 ence to Him which are specifically applied to Him in the 
 New Testament, it would be difficult to see how the 
 Hebrew Scriptures could bear the character they do, of a 
 predominant reference to the Christian era. We put up 
 all necessary guards, if we claim that the Psalm in ques- 
 tion is clearly such as to indicate in its highest sense an 
 applicability to Christ and His Kingdom, and that the 
 ideas concerning Him and His work extracted from it 
 are in harmony with the general scope of such teachings 
 in the Old Testament as are unquestionably Messianic. 
 
 This Psalm, according to the superscription com- 
 posed by Solomon, sketches his peaceful reign very much 
 as Psalm ii. sketches the turbulent reign of some other 
 monarch. Tradition is quite unanimous in giving it a 
 Messianic character, and its contents indicate very 
 strongly that no human monarch ever has realized or ever 
 can realize its prophetic hopes. The Psalm consists of 
 two parts : the theme of the first part being renewed and 
 more fully unfolded in the second part. The topics are, 
 1. The righteous character of the King. Vss. 1-4. 2. The 
 blessings and glory of His Kingdom as productive of hap- 
 piness, as perpetual, and as universal. Vss. 5-11. 3. His 
 righteous government as displayed in his compassion for 
 
38 
 
 His people. Vss. 12-14. 4. A renewed celebration of his 
 glorious and beneficent reign. Vss. 15-17. 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 Remark 1. No fair interpretation of this Psalm can 
 omit the absolute antagonism between the pure ideal of a 
 divine government and the governments of the nations 
 which bordered upon Judea. 
 
 Remark 2. The style of the Psalm corresponds very 
 closely to that of the Proverbs of Solomon, and thus hints 
 at the same authorship. 
 
 Remark 3. At what time he composed it, if he was 
 the author, is unknown. The reference to Sheba, in vs. 
 10, implies that he had been some time upon his throne. 
 His ardent wishes for so grand a reign were doubtless 
 inspired by what he knew of the prophetic hopes of his 
 father. However Messianic the Psalm may be in its 
 highest sense, it must be interpreted primarily of himself. 
 
 Remark 4. The word in vs. 1, translated ' King,' 
 has no article, and is used generically and poetically. 
 Therefore, properly translated, "the king." Prov. xxxi. 1. 
 By " the king's son " is meant a king of royal ancestiy. 
 So on oriental coins, and such was an oriental custom. 
 
 Remark 5. The universality of his reign is very 
 marked. Vss. 8-11. See Exodus xxiii. 31 ; Micah vii. 12 ; 
 Amos viii. 12 ; Zech. ix. 10. The Semitic, Japhetic, and 
 Hamitic races are to be included in his sway. It is to be 
 a reign as universal as the limits of humanity, and in this 
 fact appears the strongest proof of its real Messianic 
 import. Vs. 17 has its parallel in the promise to Abra- 
 ham and his seed. Gen. xii. 2-3. 
 
 PSALM XLV. 
 
 This Psalm portrays the marriage of a king with a 
 princess, apparently of foreign birth. Many suppose that 
 it celebrates the espousals of Solomon with the daughter 
 of Pharaoh. Others, as Delitzsch, think it refers to the 
 
3[) 
 
 marriage of Joram, the son of Jehoshaphat, with Atha- 
 liah, of Tyriaii origin. Hitzig refers it to Ahab's mar- 
 riage with Jezebel. Hupfeld thinks it refers to the mar- 
 riage of Solomon with some one of the daughters of 
 Hiram of Tyre. The reasons for supposing that the wife 
 of the King Avas a foreigner are the Aramaic word applied 
 to her (vs. 10), and the exhortation for her to forget her 
 own people and her father's home, i.e., to break away 
 from her inherited relationship, both in form and in heart. 
 And the strongest reason for denying that Solomon is the 
 king portrayed is the martial character of the reign which 
 the Psalmist pictures combined with the absence of any 
 reference to Egypt. The author of the Psalm is unknown. 
 Whether the plu'ase in the superscription, " To the sons 
 of Korah," expresses authorship, or is merely a dedication 
 to them to arrange the music -for the Psalm cannot be 
 decided. 
 
 That the Psalm, primarily an epithalamium, carries 
 with it typically a Messianic ideal has been the almost 
 unanimous opinion of tradition. Jew and Christian are 
 agreed. The King is an ideal theocratic King of the 
 house of David (vs. 6), under the guidance of the King 
 OF Kings, and the Psalmist whether or not he understood 
 the full meaning of his language, exalts him to so high a 
 position that the author of the Hebrews overleaps the 
 primary application of the thought of the Psalm and 
 applies them to the Son of Man and the Son of God. 
 The relation of God as the husband of his people is an 
 Old Testament concejjtion as well as the representation 
 of the New Testament. Hosea ii. ; Ezek. xvi. ; Matt, 
 xxii. 1 ; II Cor. xi. 2 ; Rev. xix. 7 ; xxi. 2. Judging by 
 the use made of vs. 7, in Heb. i. 8-9, the ground-work of 
 the Psalm is human, but its scope is divine. If Messi- 
 anic, the Psalm is a picture artistically drawn of Messiah 
 as the royal Bridegroom. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 1. A description of the King., as beautiful in form, 
 as eloquent in speech, as mighty in war, as exalted in 
 nature or position, and as righteous in his government. 
 Vss. 2-9, 
 
40 
 
 2. A description of the bride, her royal appearance, 
 her train of virgins, and her joyful admission into the 
 King's palace. Vss. 10-15. 
 
 3. A description of the fruit of the marriage, as per- 
 petuating the empire and rendering it illustrious. Vss. 
 16, 17. 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 Remark 1. That the Psalm is not a mere epithala- 
 mium is evident from its being found in the Psalter as 
 designed for the services of the Temple. Its position 
 there can in no other way be accounted for. The very 
 full superscription hints also that the compiler intended to 
 call attention to some profound meaning hidden in the 
 song. 
 
 Remark 2. There is some internal evidence which 
 favors the opinion of Delitzsch as to the King primarily 
 referred to. (a) Solomon had a royal father, but not 
 vojdil fathers (vs. 16); Joram, a sort of second Solomon, 
 was of the royal house with many predecessors. (J) 
 Joram was married to Athaliah during the lifetime of his 
 father, and it is natural that such high hopes should cen- 
 tre in his nuptials, (c) Thus is explained the Aramaic 
 word for ' bride,' or queen, " a name that is,'' sa3'^s De- 
 litzsch, " elsewhere Chaldean (Dan. v. 2 sq.), and Persian 
 (Neh. ii. 6), and is more North-Palestinian than Jewish ; 
 for Athaliah sprang from the royal family of Tyre, and 
 was married by Joram out of the royal family of Israel." 
 Joram was a warrior and Solomon was not. But (g) if 
 the poet intended to describe the wished-for reign of 
 Joram, he labored in vain. Instead of being realized in 
 that young prince, his reign is one of the darkest, most 
 profligate and idolatrous in the sacred record. His was a 
 pitiful reign and a pitiful fate. The ardent artistically- 
 woven wish can only find its realization in the Christ of 
 God. 
 
 Remark 3. The natural translation of verse 7 is, 
 " Thy throne, O God, forever and ever ; a sceptre of 
 uprightness is the sceptre of Thy Kingdom." That the 
 word Elohim is the vocative, "0 G-od^'' harmonizes with 
 the versions, the Christian Fathers, Jewish commentators 
 
41 
 
 and many modern commentators. The Sept., Chaldee 
 Paraphrast, Aquila, Synniiachus, Theodoret, and Vulgate 
 so read. So do Kimehi, Mt)ses, and many Jewish Rabbis 
 even in the 12th century A.D. As to modern commen- 
 tators, the conservative school favor the vocative. Many 
 critics, however, read ''Thy Throne of God," i.e., thy 
 divine throne, a throne divinely given thee, as Solomon's 
 throne is called the throne of Jehovah. (I Chron. xxix. 
 23, and I Chron. xxviii. o). The noun with suffix is thus; 
 followed by the genitive of owjiership. Tlie cases usually 
 referred to to establish this usage are appositionaU and do 
 not sustain the desired interpretation here. Others read, 
 '' Thy throne is a throne of God," repeating the word 
 "throne," which is supplying an ellipsis merely for a pur- 
 pose. ^ Others still, " Thy throne is God," as we would 
 say God is a rock. Extremely harsh. A crude imper- 
 sonation. Whatever view be taken, it must be admitted 
 that the mere application of the term Elohim to an ideal 
 king is not oNtself & direct proof of the divinity of that 
 person. To say nothing of its being applied to rulers, 
 kings and judges. Exodus xxi. 6; xxii. 7; Ps. Ixxxii. 6, 
 and to Moses, Exodus vii. 1, and Exodus iv. 16, as repre- 
 sentatives of God, the disembodied spirit of Samuel is 
 called Elohim, I Sam. xxviii. 13. Moreover, in vs. 8, 
 this Elohim has an Elohim above him, " Elohim Thy Elo- 
 him," as if to guard against any misapprehension as to the 
 use of this strong word to the King. If he is Elohim, he 
 is Elohim's Elohim ; a subordination very suggestive of 
 tlie relation of the Father to the Son. See Pusey's Dan- 
 iel, pp. 471-4. 
 
 Remark 4. There only remains, therefore, a choice 
 between the view of the early Fathers, which ascribed 
 actual Godhead to the King, precise and determinative, 
 and the modification of the term Elohim by its usage else- 
 where in a representative sense, reading, ''^Thy th?one, O 
 (xod, is forever and ever : " i.e.. Thou art God's represent- 
 ative King, or reading, " Thy divinely-constituted throne 
 is forever and ever ; '" i.e.. Thy divinely-aijpointed dynasty 
 IS forever and ever. Leviticus xxvi. 42. The thought of 
 the last two is essentially the same. 
 
 Remark o. With the last two views, the language ol" 
 
42 
 
 Heb. i. 8, can be substantially harmonized. This King is 
 a theocratic representative of God, and as such the strong- 
 term Elohim is applied to him. In Heb. i. 8, the writer 
 does not say that this language was primarily addressed 
 to Christ, but that it was spoken of Christ, and was applic- 
 able to Him. The object of the writer to the Hebrews is 
 to show the superiority of the Messiah to the angels, and 
 his argument as drawn out by Ebrard (m loco') is as fol- 
 lows : ''• Three things are declared of the ideal of a theo- 
 cratic King — consequently of the Messiah; (a) he is 
 Elohim; his authority is the authority of God himself; 
 (6) his dominion is endless ; (c ) both are true because 
 he perfectly fulfils the will of God. The perfect theo- 
 cratical King — therefore Christ (which required no 
 proofs for the readers of the Epistle to the Hebrews), 
 stands in this threefold relation above the angels. He is 
 the absolute revelation of God, and therefore himself God ; 
 the angels are only servants. He is King of an imperish- 
 able kingdom; the angels execute only periodical com- 
 mands ; he rules in a moral way as founder of a kingdom 
 of righteousness, and his whole dignity as Messiah is 
 founded directly on his moral and spiritual relation to 
 man ; the angels are only mediators of outward appear- 
 ances of nature, by which a rude, unsusceptible people 
 are to be traine'd for higher things.'' 
 
 Remark 6. The Psalm with all its difficulties may 
 be regarded as sketching typically, Messiah as the Royal 
 Bridegroom. 
 
 PSALM XXII. 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 Hengsteutaerg's Christology, vol. 4, Appendix 44. 
 
 Reinke's Die Messianischeu Psalmeu. 
 
 Bohl's Zwolf Messianischen Psalmeu erkliirt. 
 
 C. Phillips' Com. on Psalms. Dr. McCaul's Old Paths. 
 
 Leslie's Short and easy method with the Jews. 
 
 This Psalm is an ideal portraiture of Messiah as the 
 representative Sufferer. It points by way of appropria- 
 tion or accommodation to the crucifixion. Even Strauss 
 with a sneer calls it "The Programme of the Messianic 
 agony." See '•'•The Old Faith and the New,"" pp. 89, 90. 
 
48 
 
 The quotations iu the New Testament are appropriations 
 of the language to the sufferings of Christ, except per- 
 haps verse 18, when quoted in Jolni xix. 23-24, and are 
 not used as direct proofs that the language of the Psalm 
 is Messianic. It is a full and comprehensive picture of 
 the exhausting sufferings of a righteous man, inflicted 
 upon him by his enemies on account of his piety, the 
 fruits of which in answer to his prayers are paeans of 
 praise to God from the whole earth. The picture is so 
 drawn that it nuw be applied to an individual, to the 
 Jews in captivity, to the Cliurch, or to the Great Repre- 
 sentative Sufferer, the Head of the Church. If the Psalm 
 is David's, according to the superscription, we kjiow of 
 no event in his life in which it could have been actual- 
 ized. It might be his however as a poetical limning of the 
 totality of his sufferings from his enemies. If the Psalm 
 is Jeremiah's, as many suppose, the same difficulties pre- 
 sent themselves. The theory that the Psalmist personi- 
 fied his nation, as Rashi, Kimchi, Noyes, and many others 
 assert, hardly meets the case. The individuality of the 
 sufferer is very marked. Vss. 22, 23 strongly indicate that 
 the sufferer is an individual member of Jehovah's congre- 
 gation. It is Jewish in conception, but the last part of it 
 is as broad in its application as the later chapters of 
 Isaiah, and tlie later prophets. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 The Psalm is divided into three parts. 1. A com- 
 plaint^ founded u})on the consciousness of tlie absence of 
 God as a help. Vss. 2-11. 2. A prayer^ founded upon the 
 extremity of the peril. Vss. 12-22. 3. A praise, founded 
 upon the wonderful results of a favorable answer to the 
 prayer. Vss. 23-32. 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 Remark 1. The superscription is suggestive. " The 
 hind of the dawn " may be the name of a tune or a song 
 to be used in singing this Psalm, or it may have an 
 enigmatical signihcation, •' the hind " being the symbol of 
 innocence, and "• the tlawn " of a happier morning ; i.e., 
 persecuted innocence delivered. Otlier fanciful meanings 
 have been proposed. 
 
44 
 
 Remark 2. For the difficulties in verse 17, see Hup- 
 feld's very full discussion. 
 
 Rewark 3. In a study of this Psalm, Psabn Ixix ; cii ; 
 the Lamentations of Jeremiah, and the 53d chapter of 
 ksaiah should be carefully compared. 
 
 PSALM XVI. 
 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 Biblical Repository, vol. I, ai't. by M. Stuart. 
 
 Tlie joyful tone of this Psalm, and the peculiarly 
 hopeful outlook upon his future destiny suggest the 
 thought that it was composed either after the escape of 
 the Psalmist from some imminent peril or in the immedi- 
 ate prospect of death. That the Psalm is David's is 
 admitted by all critics who allow to him the authorship of 
 any Psalm. The language is rugged and archaic, and the 
 translation of the A. V. very imperfect. 
 
 The use made of the last part of it by Peter in Acts, ii. 
 2i> sq., and by Paul in Acts xiii. 33 sq., has led to three 
 methods of interpreting it. 
 
 One class of interpreters divide the Psabn into two 
 parts, applying the first part to David and the second part 
 to the Messiah. Another class deem the Messiah to be 
 the speaker throughout the Psalm, making the Psalm as 
 purely Messianic as they do Psalm ex. Another class 
 consider David to be the speaker throughout the Psalm, 
 but as in a true and enlarged sense typical of David's 
 Lord. The last view commends itself by its simplicity 
 and its harmony with the interpretation of other similar 
 typical Psalms. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 Subject. The pious man's 'joy of faith' amid the 
 perils of the present life, and in the prospect of death. 
 
 1. This 'joy of faith ' has its source in the fact that 
 Jehovah is the author of his prosperity. Vss. 1, 2. 
 
 2. \n his oneness of heart with Jehovah's people. 
 Vss. 3, 4. 
 
4h 
 
 3. In his experience that hitherto Jehovah has boun- 
 tifully cared for him. Vss. 5, 0. 
 
 4. In his confidence that Jehovah will abundantly 
 provide for his future happiness. Vss. 7-11. 
 
 REMARK. 
 
 It is necessary in order to understand the a])plication 
 of verses 8-11 to Christ, as illustrated in His resurrection, 
 first of all to give an exact translation of them with a 
 running exegesis. 
 
 Translation. 
 
 Vs. 8. I have placed Jehovah before me contin- 
 ually : because He is at my right hand (as Defender and 
 Protector), 1 cannot be overthrown, i.e., either as to my 
 choice of Him as indicated by vs. 7, or in mj present 
 emergency. The Sept. from which the Apostles quote 
 agrees in the verse with the Hebrew text. 
 
 Vs. 9. Therefore my heart was glad, and my glory, 
 (i.e., my dignity, my manhood), a poetical term for the 
 soul as the noblest part of man (Gen. xlix. 6 ; Ps. vii. 5 ; 
 XXX. 12; Ivii. 9, and cviii. 2), has rejoiced: moreover, my 
 flesh (or body) shall dwell (or tent itself awhile) securely. 
 He believes he shall escape the present danger. He will 
 not die, notwithstanding the attack of his enemies, or 
 perhaps the extremities of disease. The Sept. reads, " My 
 tongue has rejoiced,'' using the word as the organ or 
 medium of the joy. Speecii is the special glory of man. 
 For the present and the future his condition is hopeful. 
 
 Vs. 10. (It is so) Because Thou wilt not abandon 
 my soul (i.e., as the seat of life, or ilfe, as a personality) 
 to Hades, and Thou wilt not give up Thy saint to see 
 (i.e., experience) the pit. He is not now to be exposed 
 to the terrors of the grave or to enter the abode of 
 departed spirits. The Sept. reads for " to see the pit," 
 " to see destruction.'' The A. V. has " corruption^"' which 
 is incorrect. The Hebrew word is derived from a verb 
 " to sink down," and has for its usual meaning, " pit," or 
 " grave." There is no play upon the word, as Alexander 
 intimates, to fit the ditiiculties in the argument of the 
 
4fi 
 
 Apostles. It would be a strange place for a dying man, 
 even an inspired one, to play a double entendre ! 
 
 " Thy saint," or " Thy pious one," in the K'thibh is 
 plural, but the K'ri, Sept., and the quotation in the New 
 Testameut, give it as singular. The K'ri is doubtless cor- 
 rect. According to Reinke, the singular is correct for the 
 following reasons : viz., 1. So in Sept., Syriac, Chaldee 
 Paraphrast, Jerome, Paul, Peter. 2. Of 269 Mss., in 7 
 the Ydth is squeezed in. 3. The singular is found in 51 
 Mss which are supposed to be the oldest. 4. The older 
 Rabbins endorse the singular. 
 
 The use of the terms for David's personality, 'soul,' 
 'body,' 'manhood,' 'pious one,' are very suggestive of his 
 absolute faith in Jehovah, as a perfect Protector of his 
 whole man in the time of peril. 
 
 Vs. 11. Shall I die? No! Thou wilt make me 
 know (by a blessed experience, something better), the 
 path of life ; i.e.^ life from God, life in God, life with God 
 — the whole course of the truest life. (Thou wilt make 
 me know) fullness, or a satiation of joy, with thy coun- 
 tenance, i.e., with the manifestation of thyself to me. 
 (Thou wilt make me know) pleasures (every kind) for- 
 ever in thy right hand ; i.e.., those which are at Thy dis- 
 posal, i.e., the gifts of an omnipotent Giver. This last 
 clause is omitted by Peter. 
 
 This meagre translation and exposition, every word 
 of which in the Hebrew, and every clause of which glows 
 with shining thoughts, reduced to bald prose, gives the 
 thought of David as follows : — " In view of the mercies of 
 Jehovah showered upon me in my past life, I feel assured 
 that the same protecting love will continue, and that I 
 shall be saved from the death which now seems to be so 
 imminent. I shall not now at this time enter Hades nor 
 experience the destruction of the grave." — " To see the 
 pit " and " to see destruction " as in Sept., and as used by 
 Peter and Paul, are essentially the same. The Apostles 
 had they used the Hebrew phrase would have expressed 
 the same thought. Ps. xlix. 10; Eccles. ix. 9; John iii. 
 36. The argument of the Apostles turns upon the force 
 of the expression "^o see,"" i.e.., to experience. David in 
 his faith believed that at that time he should not die and 
 
47 
 
 be buried, though he afterwards died and was buried and 
 suffered the destruction of the grave. Christ did not see 
 the destruction of the grave, did not succumb finally even 
 at death to the destructive powers of the grave, and will 
 no more be subject to them. But David did in due time. 
 Comparing Acts xiii. 34 with Acts xiii. 87, it is evident 
 that what Paul means is the abiding in the powers of the 
 grave, rather than the experiencing the powers of the 
 grave, and he illustrates the case of Christ, by the con- 
 trast with the actual fact in the case of David, reaching 
 by illustration what Peter reaches by the prophetic asser- 
 tion of David. What was ti'ue of David, tliat at this time 
 he did not succumb to the powers of the grave, was in the 
 highest sense true of Christ, for Christ was absolutely 
 delivered from such destruction, while David was not. 
 
 As to the prophetic consciousness of this assertion of 
 David, Avhicli is asserted by Peter, see Peter himself. 
 I Peter i. 10-12. As is said by Jennings (Jennings and 
 Lowe), " David bases his hope of escaping death on 
 Jehovah's intervention, and since Jehovah prostrated the 
 powers of death by the agency of Jesus, the Psalm 
 becomes predictive of Jesus." 
 
 MESSIANIC PASSAGES IN THE PROPHETS. 
 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 Prophecy. 
 
 Prophecy viewed iu respect to its Distinctive Nature, etc. P. 
 Fairbairn. 
 
 Structure, Use, and Interpretation of Propliecy. J. Davison. 
 
 Propliets and Kings of O T. F. D. Maurice. 
 
 Ruling Ideas in Early Ages, Lecture I, J. B. Mozley. 
 
 History of Israel, vol. 1. H. Ewald. 
 
 Introduction to O. T. .J. Bleek. 
 
 Smith's Bib. Die. Art. Prophet. 
 
 Alexander's Kitto Encyc, Art. Prophet. 
 
 Imperial Dictionary, Art. Prophets. P. Fairbairn. 
 
 McClintock and Strong's Ency., Art. Prophet. 
 
 The Prophets of Israel and their place in history to the close of 
 the 8th century, B.C. W. Robertson Smith. 
 
48 
 
 Prophets of the O. T., vol. 1. H. Ewald. 
 
 Moses aud the Prophets. W. H. Green. 
 
 The Prophets and Prophecy in Isi*ael. A. Kueiien. 
 
 Prolegomena Zur Geschichte Israels. J. Wellhaiisen. 
 
 Daniel the Prophet. E. B. Pusey. 
 
 The Typology of Scripture. P. Fairbairn. 
 
 COMMENTARIES. 
 
 On Isaiah. Alexander, Delitzsch, Lange, Speaker's, 
 Cheyne, Barnes, Cowles, Birks, Gesenius, Knobel, Hitzig, 
 Umbreit. Essay by Cheyne, in vol. 2, Isaiah and his 
 Commentators. 
 
 On Jeremiah and Lamentations. Speaker's, Lange, 
 Keil, Burroughs, Henderson, Scholz, Hitzig, Graf. 
 
 On Ezekiel. Fairbairn, Lange, Speaker's, Htlvernick, 
 Hengstenberg. 
 
 On Daniel. Lange, Speaker's, Stuart, Keil, Cowles, 
 Havernick. 
 
 On Mitior Prophets. Lange, Speaker's, Keil and 
 Delitzsch, Pusey, Henderson. 
 
 Hosea. WUnsche, Pocock, Umbreit, Hitzig. 
 
 Joel. Wiinsche, Credner, A. Merx. 
 
 Jonah. Kalisch, King, Perowne T. T. 
 
 Zechariah. Wright, Lowe, A. Koehler, W. Pressel, 
 T. Kliefoth. 
 
 Malachi. L. Reinke, A. Koehler, W. Pressel. 
 
 QUOTATIONS FROM OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 Old Testament Synonyms. R. B. Girdlestone. 
 
 Principles of New Testament Quotation. J., Scott. 
 
 Hebraisms in the Greek Testament. W. H. Guille- 
 mard. 
 
 Steward's Mediatorial Sovereignty. Vol 1, Part L 
 Bib. Sacra, vol. 23, art. bv W. Calkins. 
 
 The O. T. iji the New. D. McTurpie. 
 
 The Gospel in the Law. C Taylor. 
 
 Quotations from the O. T. in the New. B. Jowett. 
 (Theol. Essays.) 
 
 HEKMENEUTICS. 
 
 Sacied Hermeneutics. S. Davidson. 
 
 Grundriss der biblischen Hermeneutik. J. D. Lange. 
 
49 
 
 Biblical Hermeneutics. S. M. Terry. 
 
 '• "• EUicott and Harslui. 
 
 *' " Seller. 
 
 Home's Introduction, vol. 2, Part II. (13th edition). 
 Hermeneutics. P. Fairbairn. 
 
 MESSIANIC PROPHECY. 
 
 Christology of the O. T., etc. E. W. Hengstenberg. 
 
 Die Messianischen Weisagungen bei den grosseii nnd 
 kleinen Propheten des Alten Testaments, vols. 1-4. L. 
 Reinke. 
 
 O. T. Prophecy. Stanley Leathes. 
 
 Witness of the O. T. to Christ. Stanley Leathes. 
 
 O. T. History of Redemption. Franz Delitzsch. 
 
 Messianic Pi'ophecies. Franz Delitzsch. 
 
 The Religion of the Cln-ist. S. Leathes. 
 
 The Witness of History to Christ. F. W. Farrar. 
 
 Christ and other Masters. C. Hardwick. 
 
 Messianic Prophecy. Edward Riehni. 
 
 The Jewish Messiah. J. Drummond. 
 
 Theology of the O. T. G. F. Oehler. 
 
 The Ideal Isaiah. The Expositor, 1883, art. by E. 
 H. Plum[)tre. 
 
 Premium Essay on Prophetic Symbols. Winthrop. 
 
 The Symbolical Nundjers of Scripture. White. 
 
 MONOGRAPHS. 
 
 The Servant of Jehovah. W. Urwick. 
 
 Der Knecht Jehovas. Hertzog's Ency., von F. 
 Oehler. 
 
 The Jewish Interpretation on Isa. liii. Ad. Neu- 
 bauer and S. R. Driver. 
 
 LIST OF MESSIANIC 1»ASSAGES IN THE PROPHETS. 
 
 Critics differ as to the number of such passages, and 
 as to the key for a correct selection. The student will 
 find a very full list in the tirst index of Hengstenberg's 
 Christology (vol. 4), together with the corresponding 
 
50 
 
 quot'ations in the New Testament. In a broad sense all 
 prophecy is Messianic ; but as the purpose of this syllabus 
 is to consider only those which pertain to Messiah's per- 
 son and position, many which refer to his kingdom inclu- 
 sive of Jews and Gentiles will be omitted. Of the list 
 subjoined, we shall select but a few, chiefly those which 
 we deem the most important. Nor need we disturb our- 
 selves as to any chronological order, inasmuch as the date 
 of a prophecy does not disturb the fact. Questions of 
 date and authorship will therefore be disregarded. 
 
 LIST. — THE GEEATEK PROPHETS. 
 
 Isaiah, ch. vii. 14-16 ; viii. 23 ; ix. 7 ; xi. 1 ; xii. 6 ; 
 xxviii. 16 ; xlii. 1-9 ; xlix. 1-9 ; 1. 4-11 ; li. 1-16 ; lii. 13 ; 
 liii. 12 ; Iv. 1-5 ; Ixi. 1-3. 
 
 Jeremiah, ch. xxiii. 2-8 ; xxx. 9. 
 
 Ezekiel, ch. xxi. 27 ; xxxiv. 23-31. 
 
 THE MINOK PROPHETS. 
 
 Hosea, iii. 4-5 ; xi. 1. 
 Micah V ; vii. 7-20. 
 
 Zech. ii. 14-17 ; iii. 8-10 ; iv ; vi. 12-15 ; ix. 9-10 ; xi. 
 4-17 ; xii. 1-13. 
 
 Malaehi, iii. 1-6. 
 
 Daniel, ii. 34-35 ; vii. 13-14 ; ix. 24-27. 
 
 MESSIANIC PASSAGES IN ISAIAH. 
 
 Isa. vii. 14-16. 
 
 Alexander's Com. in loco. Very full. 
 
 Hermeneutical Manual, pp. 456-466. P. Fairbairn. 
 
 Die Weissagung von der Jungfrau und vom Imman- 
 uel. L. Reinke. 
 
 The Messianic Interpretation of the Prophecies of 
 Isaiah. R. P. Srnith. Ser. I. 
 
 The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. A. Eder- 
 sheim, vol. 2, Appendices I, II, VII, VIII, IX, XI. 
 
51 
 
 The prophecies of Isaiah give a fuller description of 
 tlie personality and work of the Messiah than those of any 
 other prophet. Hence he is called the Evangelistic 
 Prophet. Our purpose omits any careful historical 
 criticism as to the date and authorship of the prophecies 
 contained in the book which bears his name, as it does 
 not affect materially the simple question, What does this 
 book teach concerning the Messiah? 
 
 The passage, vii. 14-16, when accurately translated 
 reads as follows : — 
 
 Therefore, the Lord himself shall give you a sign: 
 Behold the virgin (or marriageable young woman) has 
 conceived, or is with child,* and is bringing forth a son, 
 and thou (or shef) shalt call his name Immanuel (God 
 with us). Curdled milk shall be eat, (because the land 
 is waste, vs. 22) for his knowing {i.e., until he knows or 
 about the time of his knowing (former Alex., latter Nag.) 
 to reject the evil and to choose the good. (But no longer 
 Alex.) For before he shall know (how) to reject the 
 evil and to choose the good, the land shall be forsaken 
 (desolate) from whose two kings thou art terribly afraid. 
 The two kings are evidently those of Syria and Israel. 
 
 The passage by its setting, by its peculiar structure, 
 by its verbal difficulties, and by the use made of it in 
 Matt. i. 23, as fulfilled in the birth of Christ, is exceed- 
 ingly perplexing. No solution of it by commentators, 
 thus far, is perfectly satisfactory. Perhaps all the diffi- 
 culties connected with it will never be removed. We can 
 do no more than present a probable exegesis with a sum- 
 mary of the views of the various schools of interpreters. 
 Our first task is with the text itself. 
 
 The word translated - virgin ' in A. V. is derived 
 from a word signifying 'to hide,' 'to conceal,' (Tregelles, 
 Pusey), or from a word signifying ' to be ripe,' ' to be 
 mature,' ' marriageable,' (Fuerst, Ges., Cheyne, and 
 others). The Sept., in spite of the difficulty, translates 
 it 'virgin' here, as also Gen. xxiv. 43, though in Ex. ii. 
 8, where the word is in the singular, it translates by 
 ' maiden,* and likewise Prov. xxx. 19. Tlie word is found 
 
 * Gen. xvi. 11. t Ges. p. 184. 
 
0^ 
 
 in the plural in Bs. Ixviii. 26 ; Cant. i. 3, and vi. 8, trans- 
 lated hy Sept. ' maidens.' In all the passages where the 
 Hebrew word in the singular or plural is found in the 
 O. T., the word by its connection implies an unmarried 
 woman, and by implication also a vir^o intaeta, unless one 
 wishes to interpret into it a bad sense. ''A virgin or 
 unmarried woman is designated as distinctly as she could 
 be by a single word." (Alex.) The strict Hebrew word 
 for ' virgin ' is ' b'thuldh: 
 
 The phrase ' has conceived ' or ' is with child,' in the 
 former case the verb, in the latter an adjective, and the 
 phrase ' is bringing forth,' are the prophetic of completed 
 action. If they refer here to some one present, or some 
 one then living, then the woman was already pregnant, 
 and if the scene is a prophetic vision, the fact of an 
 unmarried woman with child is as clearly expressed. So 
 far as prophetic usage will aid us, the expressions would 
 be as pertinent to one who should be pregnant centuries 
 hence as a month ago ; i.e., to those who recognize the 
 possibility of prophecy. The word Immanuel is elsewhere 
 used in the Old Testament but twice, evidently referring 
 in each case to this child. Isa. viii. 8, and viii. 10. In 
 viii. 8, ''Shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel," 
 we have for this child, "an ejaculatory prayer for the 
 deliverer's advent." (Cheyne). But it expresses the 
 additional thought that the land is Immanuel's, his by 
 right. This child is the sovereign of the land. In viii. 
 10 there is a play upon the word, ""With us is Q-od,'' 
 implying that in the name itself there was the greatest 
 comfort to the people. Ps. xlvi. 7, 11. In Isa. ix. 6-7, 
 this same child is evidently referred to, clothed with the 
 attributes of Deity. 
 
 The expression " curdled milk and honey shall he eat 
 until he knows," etc., vs. 22, sq., indicates that up to a cer- 
 tain time such shall be his nourishment, the time being 
 left indefinite ; if of a child soon to be born, within a few 
 years, (^How fulfilled !) or at that time, i.e., when he has 
 reached the age of moral discretion, such shall be his 
 food, as an index of the condition of the land. Though 
 a land flowing with milk and honey, Deut. xxxii. 13-14, 
 would be a land possessing the means of support without 
 
h3 
 
 tillage, it is spoken of in this way prior to the possession 
 of Canaan simply as an index of fertility ; but after the 
 land was occupied by Israel, "the natural emblem of 
 abundance," as Alexander says, " would no longer be 
 milk and honey ^ but cor7i and wine^ ov flesh Q,nd fruits, so 
 that the prospect of subsisting on the tirst two, if it did 
 not suggest tlie idea of personal privation, would suggest 
 that of general desolation, or at least that of interrupted 
 or suspended cultivation." The meaning of privation or 
 desolation is sufficiently obvious by a comparison of the 
 phrase here with the corresponding one in vs. 22. 
 
 The 16th verse is the most difficult of all. The 
 structure of the verse is obscure. The expression ' the 
 land ' may mean the whole of Palestine, the Northern 
 Kingdom alone, or the Southern Kingdom alone. The 
 terminus ad quern seems to be the moral consciousness of 
 this child. And if a literal historical fulfilment is exacted, 
 requiring the desolation of a part of the land or of the 
 whole of it by the Assyrian hordes within this short 
 period, it is simply an impossibility. No straining of his- 
 tory will verify such an explanation. But if the whole 
 prophecy be put into the class of typical or symbolical 
 propliecy, the grave difficulty of this verse may be obvi- 
 ated. Ahaz would not stand the test of the supernatural, 
 and a supernatural event is announced on the part of 
 Jehovah, which would bring into the clearest light the 
 meaning of the original promise to Eve, '"•the seed of the 
 wornanr The burden of prophecy for the ages may now 
 lind its fullest expression in the virgin-born son. But 
 before that great event, the two kingdoms of which Israel 
 was composed, Judah and Ephraim, will become desolate, 
 and those who call good evil and evil good (vs. 20), will 
 have brought the land into such degradation that 
 Jehovah must interfere by His Immanuel, who knows 
 liow to choose between good and evil, and can teach 
 others also. So considered, the prophecy is essentially 
 typical and the language is to be interpreted in that way. 
 
 We do not say that the above interpretation is the 
 correct one, but it commends itself to us for the following 
 reasons. 1. It seems to account in the best way for the 
 sign which Jehovah gave Ahaz. 
 
54 
 
 The prophet, acting under the authority of Jehovah, 
 in order to deter Ahaz from seeking foreign help in the 
 impending troubles, and to assure him that Jehovah him- 
 self was an alhsufticient help, oifers him the boon of seek- 
 ing a supernatural sign in the heavens above or in the 
 earth beneath. He would grant him what he did to 
 Hezekiah subsequently, a supernatural index of his readi- 
 ness to interfere on his behalf. Ahaz, with his own plans 
 arranged in his mind to seek Assyrian aid, very piously, 
 yet very contemptuously, rejects the offer. Whereupon 
 the prophet is ordered to give a sign, seemingly an infalli- 
 ble sign, a sign condemning the impiety of Ahaz and that of 
 the house of David, the sign of the ages, the long-expected, 
 marvellously-endowed Israelite, a miraculously-produced 
 child. That child should be the one for whom the nation 
 had been longing during all its history. It had been the 
 hope of Abraham and the hope of David. And even 
 Micah, a contemporary of Isaiah saw a similar deliverance 
 (Micah V. 3). Isaiah also had spoken in a similar way 
 (Isa. iv. 2). Ahaz knew of such prophecies as well as 
 the nation. And if he wanted an assurance of delivery 
 from his foes, or if the prophet wished to overthrow his 
 scepticism, nothing could be more effective than the 
 announcement that the Messiah would come. Thus the 
 sign as often elsewhere was in the divine assertion. It 
 was to be accepted on the word of Jehovah, and the ful- 
 filment of that word would be its verification. Thus a 
 sign was given to Moses in Horeb, that Jehovah would 
 release Israel from Egypt, by the assertion, " Ye shall 
 serve God upon this mountain." But Moses was com- 
 pelled to take the word of Jehovah as a sufficiency until 
 the event proved its truth, which was a long time subse- 
 quently. So also in Isa. xxxvii. 30 a sign is announced 
 to Hezekiah which could not have been realized until the 
 invading army was overthrown. So also to Gideon, 
 Judges vi. 37-40. Ahaz was told to ask for a supernatural 
 sign, and declined, and God promises a supernatural sign, 
 not by the miraculous birth of a child in the near present, 
 nor by the birth of a child from the natural order of 
 things, from one who at that time was an unmarried 
 woman, as many suppose, but by a promise which Ahaz 
 
00 
 
 could uiideistaiul, and would meet the case, near in time 
 to the prophet's vision, perhaps, but afar off in the divine 
 purpose. From the language of the text, it is not necesr 
 sary, therefore, to place the fnltilment of the prophecy in 
 the time of Ahaz : although if that demand was admitted, 
 whoever the symbolic child might be, he would adum- 
 brate the Greater than he. But as Ahaz was invited to 
 ask for the supernatural, we expect the fact of the super- 
 natural to be brought out, when Jehovah takes the mat- 
 ter into his own hand. 
 
 2. The antithesis of this passage with the previous 
 verses suggests the broad and symbolic meaning. 
 
 Syria and Israel had combined against Judah for her 
 subjugation. It would be virtually the overthrow of a 
 dynasty in which rested the covenant of Jehovah with the 
 house of David. Ahaz cared not a groat for this, but 
 Jehovah did care. And He commissions Isaiah to assure 
 Ahaz that his schemes will miscarry. Ahaz himself shall 
 suffer in his family and in his throne, but for the preser- 
 vation of the kingdom of the house of David, a sign shall 
 be given, a sign in contrast, a sign infallible, that God pur- 
 posed to preserve inviolate His promise to His chosen 
 David. This sign shall be a son, a son of the virgin, not 
 a virgin, a son who should be the predestined heir of 
 David's throne, compared with whom, " the head of Syria 
 which is Damascus, and the head of Damascus which is 
 Rezin ; and the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head 
 of Samaria is the son of Remaliah," these and nothing 
 more, earthly cities and frail men, are vanity : a predic- 
 tion which Matthew takes up and asserts to have been 
 accomplished in the birth of Messiah, inasmuch as these 
 kings and these kingdoms bad long before Messiah's 
 advent ceased to be. 
 
 3. The difficulties connected with other interpreta- 
 tions of the passage seem to be more grave than those 
 in the one suggested. In other words a choice of difficul- 
 ties, for such there are to every explanation of it, favors 
 at least the one proposed, (a) The early Jewish com- 
 mentators affirmed that the child to be born was Heze- 
 kiah. But according to the chronolog}^ of the Scriptures, 
 Hezekiah was at the time of the prophecy from nine to 
 
56 
 
 twelve years old. II Kings xvi. 2, and xviii. 2. See 
 Tlienius, Keil, Ewald, and Bible Cora. Besides how could 
 such a natural birth be a sign of assurance to Ahaz under 
 the circumstances? 
 
 Later Jewish commentators point to a child from the 
 wife of Ahaz or the wife of Isaiah. But is there any evi- 
 dence that at the time of the prophecy either of these 
 women was an unmarried woman ? The same objections 
 meet the modern critics who accept the theory of these 
 Jewish commentators. 
 
 (5) Some suppose (Hitzig, Niig.) that the mother of 
 the child was some woman present at the time of the 
 prophecy to whom Isaiah pointed. If she were already 
 pregnant, illegitimately as Nagelsbach maintains, the 
 theory is a shock to our moral sensibilities, and would be 
 a violation of the law of God in such cases. If he pointed 
 to some one who was now unmarried, but who in the 
 normal way was to be the mother of a child or the child, 
 seemingly the sign would be of little value to Ahaz. If 
 as Cheyne asserts the article with the noun is the article 
 of species, and we may read, an unmarried woman, what 
 wonder-sign can be attached to the assertion? Any 
 unmarried woman, by becoming married may become the 
 mother of this wonderful boy ! Of course ! Nothing 
 novel or strange to Ahaz ! The same difficulty, however, 
 is made less difficult by adhering to the text. Neither 
 view obviates the surface interpretation that Ahaz was 
 met by an assertion involving a supernatural act. 
 
 (c) Another view, which carries with it most honor- 
 able names is that the prophet speaks according to the 
 theory of double sense : i.e.^ that he refers really to two 
 things, two virgin mothers and two infants born, the first 
 mother and child living in the days of Ahaz, the second 
 at the Christian era. Vss. 15, 16 refer to the child born 
 in the days of Ahaz ; vs. 14 to the true Immanuel, the 
 Lord Jesus Christ. The first series of events is supposed 
 to be typical of the second. But this view is contrary to 
 the law of growth in prophecy. That law would require 
 vss. 15 and 16 to precede vs. 14. Especially is this law 
 the law of Isaiah's prophecy. Moreover, how can two 
 virgin mothers be the virgin ? Were there two miraculous 
 
57 
 
 acts? If not, how can one prefigure the other? There 
 niiglit be some immediate event which foreshadowed a 
 sublimer event, but as the text stands, the law of growth 
 is decidedly at variance with this merely typical theory. 
 
 (c?) On the whole, without claiming certainty, the 
 view we have suggested seems to be relieved of many of 
 the objections with which the other theories are encum- 
 bered. If we connect the prophecies of Isaiah in this 
 group, we have the Messiah in his human nature at least, 
 in ch. iv, originating from a virgin in ch. vii, born with all 
 the glory of divine attributes in ch. ix, an indivisible triad 
 of consolatory images in three separate stages preparatoiy 
 to his reign which is described in ch. xi. And into this 
 passage we may read with Christian reverence, " Now all 
 this is come to pass, that it might be fulfilled, which was 
 si)oken by the Lord through the prophet, saying. Behold 
 the virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a son. 
 and they shall call his name Immanuel, which is being 
 interpreted, God w.ith us." Matt. i. 22-23.* 
 
 Isaiah ix. 5-6. 
 
 Translatiini. For a chikl is born to us (e.e., for our 
 benefit), a son is given to us (i.e., by Jehovah), and the 
 government is upon his shoulder (i.e.., as a burden, as Ids 
 robe of office) ; and his name is called, or they call his 
 name (i.e., in the name will be the character specified). Won- 
 der, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince 
 of Peace : for (or witli reference to) the increase of the 
 government (art. in both cases definite), and for peace 
 there is no end, upon the throne of David and upon his 
 kingdom, to establish it (i.e., his kingdom), and to sup- 
 port it, in justice and in righteousness, from henceforth 
 and forever ; the zeal, or jealousy of Jehovah Sabaoth 
 shall do this. 
 
 In the context (vss. 1-4), the prophet has drawn a 
 vivid picture of the rescue of Israel from their foes, and 
 the marvellous change which takes place, as the result. 
 Those most distressed by the Assyrian invasions, Zebu- 
 Ion and Naphtali, they liaving suffered the longest, are t<j 
 
 * Matthew <iuotes from the Sept- 
 
58 
 
 pass quickly from darkness to light, and revel in joyful 
 harvests. This event in prophetic vision has already been 
 realized, the spiritual antitype of which according to 
 Matt. iv. 14-16, was the preaching of Christ to the dark- 
 ened Galileans. The prophet then passes from the effects 
 of this divine interposition to the agents using language of 
 the boldest characterization. If we interpret the verses 
 by clauses, we have (a) His hirth as already having taken 
 place in the prophetic conception. See Driver % Hebrew 
 Tenses, § 81. (J) His government — not merely of Israel 
 and Judah, but by the parallel passage, Micah v. 3-5, of 
 the world, (c) His title, i.e., by Isaiah's usage of the 
 verb translated ' called,' his characteristics. Is. i. 26 ; vii. 
 14 ; Ix. 14 ; Jer. xi. 16. Perhaps there is here an example 
 of the assumption of a new name when one is called to 
 the throne. II Kings xxiii. 14 ; xxiv. 17. The peculiar- 
 ity in this name is its length, or rather its particulars. 
 " It suggests," as Cheyne says, " the extraordinary (Charac- 
 ter of its bearer. It reminds us of -the long honorific 
 names of Egyptian kings, (^. g. in the Treaty of Peace, 
 Records of the Past, vol. iv. 27, where the royal titles of 
 Rameses II. take up six lines.)" But it is a query with 
 critics whether in the name given to this Prince of Peace, 
 we have five separate names, or, as Ewald prefers, " two 
 pairs of compound names united, describing the character 
 of Messiah first from within and then from without." In 
 this way the Wonder-Counsellor corresponds to Everlast- 
 ing Father, as descriptive of the Messiah at home or in 
 his nature, while God the Hero corresponds to Prince of 
 Peace as indicative of his work, in executing his plans. 
 If we interpreted according to this ingenious division, by 
 Wonder-Counsellor is meant, a supernatural counsellor, 
 one whose sagacity transcends human experience. The 
 word for ' Wonder,' in usage, most frequently refers to 
 the supernatural. By ' God the Mighty One ' is meant a 
 Mighty Hero charging against his enemies and defending 
 his friends, clothed in the power of Deity. The word 
 here for God, El, in Isaiah always denotes God as power 
 absolutely. " It is never used hyperbolically or meta- 
 phorically." Cheyne. Isa. x. 21. 'By 'Everlasting 
 Father ' is meant a prince ruling as a Father, and ruling 
 
59 
 
 us long as his rule endures : eternal in the broadest sens6 
 if the subjects of the government needed such a rule. By 
 'Prince of Peace ' is meant a Prince whose victories shall 
 be won and whose government shall be controlled in the 
 interests of truth and rigliteousness. No sword but truth. 
 Ps. Ixxii ; Zech. ix. 10 ; Micah v. 5. 
 
 If we give to the Prince here named, the jive names, 
 we reach substantially the same result, though it is to be 
 admitted that it is not in harmony with the Scriptural 
 (lesignation of names. We then have five predicate 
 accusatives to the verb ' call.' By ' Wonder ' is indicated 
 an extraordinary person, one beyond the range of human 
 events: by 'Counsellor,' a person of supernatural wisdom 
 in adjusting the rights of his people, Isa. xi. 2 : by ' God 
 the Mighty One,' one who is as powerful as God to aid. his 
 people in their conflicts and trials: by 'Everlasting Father,' 
 one with a fatherly heart and that eternally : by ' Prince of 
 Peace,' one whose dominion has for its aim and fruit, 
 peace. By either method we have a unique description 
 baffling all applications to any one other than He who is 
 " King of kings and Lord of lords." Rev. xix. 16. Even 
 Kuenen admits that the strong expression ' God the 
 Mighty One ' is the correct translation, though he would 
 insert the preposition of similarity, and read, ' like God 
 the Mighty One." But there is no such preposition in the 
 text. Nor is such an omission in harmony with the 
 style of Isaiah when enumerating characteristics. That 
 such a bold title might be given to the Messiah according 
 to the Messianic teaching of the O. T., see Gen xxii. 11- 
 12 ; Ex. iii. 2, 4, 6, 14 ; Gen. xxxi. 11, 13 ; Ps. xlv. 6 ; 
 ex. 1. 
 
 {d) The object of His mission. This is the extension 
 and peaceful confirmation of the Davidic kingdom. His 
 throne is the throne of David. He is to be David's son. 
 Mic. V. 3. It is to be a kingdom of peace, i.e., prosper- 
 ous, thrifty on the basis of justice to all. It is to be 
 limitless, locally and temporally. It is to be universal and 
 eternal. Isa. xlix. For kindred passages on the above, 
 see II Sam. vii. 11-16 ; I Kings viii. 25; Psalm ii ; xlv; 
 Ixxii ; Ixxxix ; cxxxii ; Jer. xxiii. 5 ; xxxiii. 15 ; Jer. xxx. 
 9 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 23-24 ; xxxvii. 24 ; Hos. iii. 5. Judaism 
 
60 
 
 with its king is Cliristianity with its Christ. The parallel 
 l^assage in the N. T. for the whole picture is Luke i. 32-33. 
 
 (e) Both for his own sake and also for his people's, 
 Jehovah through this Prince will jealously execute his 
 promises. 
 
 Remark 1. This prophecy was accepted by the ear- 
 lier Rabbins as Messianic, but the later Rabbins apply it 
 to Hezekiah. German critics are very much divided in 
 opinion, some applying it exclusively to Hezekiah, and 
 some allowing it to be ideally Messianic, but referring it 
 primarily to Hezekiah. See Alexander and Reinke. To 
 reach such a result they depend mainly upon what an 
 ordinary Hebrew student would deem a maniacal tor- 
 turing of the language, but their special objections to an 
 exclusive Messianic application are two : (a) because it is 
 not specifically applied to Christ in the N. T., and (6) 
 because the prophet could have had no other than Heze- 
 kiah in his mind. 
 
 Remark 2. As to the first objection it is valid so far 
 as any verbal use of the language by the N. T. writers is 
 concerned. But we have the essential thought in Luke 
 i. 32-33. And were it not quoted even in an essential 
 thought, nothing would be proved against its Messianic 
 character here. The writers of the N. T. used such por- 
 tions of the O. T. as were fitted to their immediate pur- 
 pose. They could not condense the whole of the O. T. 
 into the New. Though a very marvellous prophecy, we 
 know of no occasion in the life of Christ which called for 
 the use of such a passage. " The name Jesus," says 
 Delitzsch, " is the combination of all the O. T. titles, used 
 to designate the Coming One, according to his nature and 
 his work." 
 
 As to the second objection we may reply that inspi- 
 ration, to those who believe in its reality, is not limited to 
 so narrow a verge as these critics assert. Moreover, 
 granting that Hezekiah might have been in the prophet's 
 mind, the language cannot be strained so as to apply to 
 him. without the grossest exaggeration. For (a) the 
 tenses in the verses are factitive or prophetic presents. 
 The child is in the conception of the prophet already 
 endowed with the insignia of royalty. The word for 
 
' child ' is elastic, it is true, being used for one just born, 
 or for one who has reached the age of twent}^ but in the 
 conception of the prophet, the government is already 
 upon his shoulders. This could be true of Christ, but 
 not so true of Hezekiah, at the time of the prophecy. He 
 was not more than twelve years old at the time. (6) 
 Such attributes as are ascribed to this Prince could not 
 be applied fairly, in the reverent style of Scripture, to any 
 mere man. (c) Any torturing of the language, by a play 
 upon the accentuation, so as to render it applicable to 
 Jehovah, as the giver of great supernatural power to 
 Hezekiah, is the mere resort of those who cannot away 
 with the idea that the Messiah was to be superhuman. 
 See Del. in loco, {d} As an historical fact Hezekiah was 
 more of a warrior than a Prince of Peace. He waged war 
 against others ; his kingdom was itself invaded and sub- 
 jected to a foreign i)ower from which he afterward 
 revolted. 
 
 (e) No such perpetuity as is here described can fairly 
 be ascribed to the reign of Hezekiah. His reign was 
 neither peaceful, progressive, nor perpetual. Such per- 
 petuity as is here spoken of, as Alexander says, " cannot 
 be the joint-reign of himself and his successors ; for the 
 line was broken at the Babylonish exile. It cannot be 
 the reign of the Maccabees or Hasmonean princes, for 
 these were not the sons of David but of Levi. The pre- 
 diction, if fulfilled at all, could only be fulfilled in a reign 
 which after it began was never interrupted, and has ever 
 since been growing in extent and power. Is not this the 
 reign of Christ? " 
 
 Isaiah xi. 1-5. 
 
 Translation. 1. And there shall go forth a shoot 
 from the stump of Jesse, and a twig (or branch) from its 
 roots shall bear fruit. 2. And the spirit of Jehovah shall 
 rest upon him, a spirit of wisdom and discernment, a 
 spirit of counsel and strength, a spirit of knowledge and 
 of the fear of Jehovah. 3. And his sense of smelling, 
 (i.e., his pleasurable perception) is in the fear of Jehovah, 
 or as Ewald " his breath is in the fear of Jehovah ; " {i.e.. 
 
62 
 
 reverence for Jehovah is the vital air he breathes) ; and 
 (as a consequence) he shall not judge according to the 
 sight of his eyes, nor decide according to the hearing of 
 his ears. 4. But he shall judge in righteousness the help- 
 less, and decide in equity (or impartiality) for the hum- 
 ble of the earth ; and he shall smite the earth * with the 
 sceptre of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall 
 he put to death the ungodly. 5. And righteousness shall 
 be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his 
 reins. 
 
 The transition from chap. x. to chap. xi. is very sug- 
 gestive. Assyria under the figure of a forest is to fall for- 
 ever. It is the forest of Lebanon with which Assyria is 
 compared, a cedar-forest, which sends out no shoots, and 
 has therefore no power of self-propagation. When it falls 
 its mission is ended. But tliough the house of David and 
 the Jewish State might fall into decay, and become like 
 an oak whose trunk has been cut off, it has life in its roots, 
 and from the roots there will come branches and fruit. 
 The i^rophet gets his hope for his people in the divine 
 selection of a king from the obscure house of Jesse, as 
 unpromising in itself as the twig of a tree-stump, and por- 
 trays the character of a king, of whom David was but a 
 feeble type. As David sprang from the obscure family of 
 Jesse, so the second David shall arise to his throne from 
 great humiliation. Such was the fact according to the 
 genealogies of our Lord as given by Matthew and Luke. 
 Analyzing the whole passage, we have in vs. 1, The 
 obscure origin of this king ; in vs. 2, his divine qualifica- 
 tions for his kingship ; the abiding presence of the spirit 
 of Jehovah, keeping him intellectually, practically, and 
 spiritually en rapport with Jehovah ; (the genitives are 
 the genitive of effect) : in vs. 3 his impartiality in admin- 
 istering his government ; in vs. 4 his righteousness, and 
 benevolence in defending the helpless of his people and 
 overcoming liis enemies and their enemies by his truthful 
 mandates ; Hos. vi. 5 ; Zech. ix. 10 ; Isa. xlix. 2 : in vs. 5, 
 by the emblem of the girdle, he is ready for every emer- 
 gency. Justice and fidelity girding him about he is fully 
 
 * Some change the text, and read " the terrible-" 
 
63 
 
 eciuipped for his work, and is tlie prompt executor of the 
 divine will. 
 
 Remark 1. The emblem of the twig and shoot should 
 be associated with the emblem of the sprout found else- 
 where as a delineation of the Messiah. The words are 
 not the same here as elsewhere, but the idea is the same. 
 See Jer. xxiii. 5, 6, " Behold the days are coming, saith 
 Jehovah, that I will awake unto David, a righteous 
 sprout." "And this will be the name by which they will 
 call him, Jehovah ouii Righteousness. " Also Zecli. 
 iii. 8, "I will bring forth my servant, the Sprout;'"' Zech. 
 vi. 12, " Behold a man whose name is Sprout.'" 
 
 Remark 2. The terms used for the spiritual endow- 
 ment of this king are sometimes divided into pairs, and 
 Delitzsch finds in them (Mes. Prophecies), the seven 
 spirits of Jehovah, resting ' cTiarismatically ' upon him, 
 corresponding to the seven-lighted candlestick. Rev. i. 
 4 ; iv. 5 ; v. 6 ; Ex. xxv. 17 ; Zech. iv. 2. A sharp dis- 
 tinction in the synonyms used will give a beautiful varia- 
 tion in his qualifications, but the tout ensemble is suffi- 
 cient ; empowering him intellectually^ practically^ and 
 spiritually. " He wliom God hath sent, speaketh the 
 words of God ; for he giveth not the spirit by measure." 
 John iii. 34. 
 
 Remark 3. Paul in II Thess. ii. 8, applies the last 
 clause of vs. 4, to the destruction of Anti-Christ or the 
 Lawless One, at the coming of Christ. The quotation is 
 evidently a quotation of accommodation, though the 
 promise in vs. 4, as to the overthrow of the enemies of the 
 king, includes all of every class. 
 
 Remark 4. The application of this passage to any 
 other than the Christ is extremely difficult. It has been 
 referred to Hezekiah, to Zerubbabel, and to the Macca- 
 bees. But Hezekiah sprang from a house whose condi- 
 tion could not be described as a root or twig from a 
 broken-down or severed trunk. Nor did he ever reach 
 even in imagination a reign so paradisaic as this is repre- 
 sented to be in vss. 6-9. The Maccabees were not 
 descendants of the house of Jesse, and the leadership of 
 Zerubbabel produced no such marvellous results. Hence 
 with a peculiar uniformity critics have allowed to this 
 
64 
 
 passage the authority of being Messianic. As Henderson 
 says, " The exposition given of the first verse in the Tar- 
 gum, 'And the king shall come forth from the sons of 
 Jesse, and the Messiah shall grow up from his sons' sons,' 
 has been sustained and defended by Jarchi, Abarbanel, 
 and Kimchi; by the best biblical scholars since the 
 Reformation, especially among the moderns * * * 
 and even Eichhorn, Gesenius, and Hitzig are forced to 
 fall in with such an application, though, as might be 
 expected, they only recognize their ideal Messiah in this 
 chapter." 
 
 OTHER MESSIANIC PASSAGES IN ISAIAH XII-XXXV. 
 
 These are chiefly known to us as such by the use 
 made of them in the N. T. Several of them have a 
 primary and more particular reference to the people of 
 Israel as typical of the church as the body of Christ. At 
 least they harmonize with such passages in the second 
 general division of the book of Isaiah, as they indicate 
 that by the Servant of Jehovah is evidently meant the 
 pious Israel. E. g. Isa. xxv. 6-8 gives a picture of Zion 
 as the source of moral influence for the whole world ; ch. 
 xxviii. 16 compared with Rom. ix. 33 ; x. 11, and I Pet. 
 ii. 6, reveals a sure foundation to the believer ; ch. xxxiii. 
 17, perhaps, Messiah's royalty, though from the connec- 
 tion it can be only as Hezekiah might be deemed Mes- 
 siah's type ; chap. xxxv. gives a glowing contrast between 
 the sufferings of Israel and their redemption. With chap, 
 xxxv., close the Messianic limnings of Isaiah so far as 
 they are found in the first division of his prophecies. 
 Messiah's origin, birth, attributes, reign, and his benevo- 
 lent sway over his people, are thus given with suflicient 
 fulness to prepare us to welcome a fuller representation of 
 his person and triumphs. These we find in 
 
 ISAIAH XL-LXVI. 
 
 These prophecies* are a poem or a series of poems, 
 with little if any logical connection between them. With 
 poetic license, the prophet ever and anon leaves the con- 
 
 * Questions of authorship and date are not here considered. 
 
65 
 
 secutiveness of his thought to enlaige upon that thought 
 which for the moment holds his ecstatic vision. Yet 
 there are three leading tojjics, including such diversions 
 from them as the immediate purpose of the prophet 
 required, which are aids to the memory when one desires 
 to grasp the substantial contents of the whole. These are 
 indicated by the similar close to chapters xlviii ; Ivii ; 
 Ixvi. The theme is " The promised redemption to 
 
 THE PEOPLE OF GOD." 
 
 This is unfolded in the first division, by a comforting 
 comparison between Jehovah and idols, and between the 
 chosen Israel and the heathen, xl.-xlviii. The summary 
 thought is Jehovah's ability to execute His purposes in 
 behalf of Israel, and His love for Israel as prompting Him 
 to execute His purpose. 
 
 In the second division, the theme is unfolded by a 
 comparison between the selected suffering Servant of 
 Jehovah, and his subsequent glor}^ as indicating the 
 medium for the execution of Jehovah's purpose, xlviii.- 
 Ivii. 
 
 In the third division, the theme is unfolded by a com- 
 parison between the destiny, present and future, of those 
 who welcome the Servant of Jehovah, and identify them- 
 selves with Him, and those who reject Him. Iviii.-lxvi. 
 
 Summarily, Redemption promised ; Redemption 
 
 PROVIDED FOR ; REDEMPTION IN ITS RESULTS. 
 
 As the Servant of Jehovah in his person and work is 
 the chief Messianic thought of this portion of prophecy, 
 and as critics are very divergent in their theories concern- 
 ing Him, we will omit the exegesis of any special passage 
 or chapter, and give a brief sketch of those various 
 theories. 
 
 SERVANT OF JEHOVAH. 
 
 1. The Jewish people. In the classic passage 
 (xlii. 1), "• Behold my servant: I will take hold of him : 
 my chosen One whom my soul hath accepted ; " the Sept. 
 inserts '■Jacob ' as explanatory of ' servant,' and ' Israel ' as 
 explanatory of 'chosen One,' indicating thereby the mean- 
 ing of the term ' Servant of Jehovah,' in the opinion of 
 those early translators. This was the view adopted by 
 
66 
 
 the orthodox Jews of the 12th century, with the natural 
 modifications, that the term should be strictly applied 
 to none but to the body of pious Jews. But to this 
 exclusive application even to the piqus Jews, it may be 
 objected, (a) that the phrase ' Servant of Jehovah,' is used 
 by Isaiah in different senses. In xx. 3, it is applied to 
 the prophet himself; in xxii. 20, to Eliakim, son of Hil- 
 kiah; in xli. 8, 9; xliv. 1, 2, 21; xlv. 4; xlviii. 20, to the 
 Jewish people as a body or as the pious Israel, in xlii. 
 1-7 ; xlix. 1-9 ; 1. 5-10 ; lii. 13-53, to a divine Legate of 
 whom either ideally as the head of a chosen people, or 
 typically as the head of a body which includes the peo- 
 ple of God universally, certain attributes are predicated, 
 which cannot be justly applied to the Jews as a body, to 
 the prophets collectively, or to any one of them specially. 
 (J) The description of the ' Servant of Jehovah in xlii. 
 2, 3, does not fit the character of the Jewish people, (c) 
 Usage connects the phrase ' Servant of Jehovah ' with the 
 verb in the singular, while the singular and plural are 
 interchanged when the Jewish people are personified by 
 this term. 
 
 2. Cyrus. This theory cannot harmonize with the 
 facts. It could not be said of him, " He shall not cry, 
 nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street," 
 xlii. 2: nor "that he was brought as a lamb to the 
 slaughter,'" nor " for the transgressions of my people was 
 he smitten." liii. 7. 
 
 3. The Prophet Isaiah. He is so called in xx. 3. 
 The eunuch imagined that it was he and Philip corrected 
 him. Acts viii. 34, 35. It could not be said of him truth- 
 fully, " I have given thee to be the light of the nations, to 
 be my salvation to the ends of the earth," xlix. 6. Nor 
 could the vicarious element in ch. liii. be applied to him 
 or any other prophet. 
 
 4. The Prophets Collectively. But the conversion 
 of the Gentiles is never ascribed to them. The singular 
 is used purposely when this work is assigned to the Ser- 
 vant of Jehovah, (xlii. 6 ; xlix. 6.) While there is no 
 interchange of singular and plurals as would be expected 
 if a prophet as a unit, or prophets as units, of a body were 
 referred to, ch. liii. cannot be explained in harmony with 
 
67 
 
 this view. Besides, Jewish history knows little if any- 
 thing of a prophetic guild as a body ecclesiastic. 
 
 5. The 31essiah par excellenee. This view corres- 
 ponds with the language of Isaiah in certain places, as 
 verified by the New Testament writers. 
 
 (a) The passage xlii. 1-4, is quoted in Matt. xii. 
 17-21, as applicable to Christ. 
 
 (5) A part of vs. 1 is verbally adapted to Christ's 
 Messiahship at the Jordan. Matt. iii. 17. 
 
 (c) The testimony of Simeon, Luke ii. 32, harmon- 
 izes with Isaiah ix. 2 ; xlii. 6 ; xlix. 6 ; Ix. 1. 2. 3. 
 
 (d') The totality of character pertaining to the Ser- 
 vant of Jehovah favors this view. 
 
 6. Messiah as a Complex Person^ a representative of 
 God among the nations. This is the view of Alexander, 
 and some English critics. According to this view, some- 
 times the Servant of Jehovah, and sometimes His people, 
 are brought the more distinctly before us. The analogy 
 between the Servant and his people corresponds to the 
 relation of Christ as the Head and the Church as his 
 Body. When the term is applicable both to the Head 
 and the Body, there is no need of distinguishing between 
 them. When sinful imperfection is implied, the language 
 is applicable to the Body alone. When absolute sinless- 
 ness or Divine power is implied, the language refers to 
 the Head alone, but may be considered as descriptive of 
 the Body as far as the ideal or design is concerned, but 
 not in reference to its actual condition. This theory is 
 ingenious and plausible, it covers most of the cases where 
 the term is used, when expounded separately. It makes 
 too little account of the scope of prophecy. 
 
 7. An ideal title which the prophet has formed, to 
 which he ascribes personality. This view, on the whole, 
 seems to be the preferable one. Aside from the fact that 
 it harmonizes with the language of Isaiah as verified by 
 the New Testament writers, it is just that every inspired 
 writer should be interpreted by himself. One of the 
 marked characteristics of Isaiah is that, as he warms with 
 his theme, he passes out from the literal into the ideal, 
 and from the ideal to the personal. Thus, when the great 
 liberator looms up before his mental horizon, he appears 
 
68 
 
 as a power bursting forth from the east (ch. xli. 2, sq.), 
 to whom nations are given, and by whose sword the 
 nations are beaten into dust. Soon he rises from the 
 north and from the east, as a potter treading his foes in 
 the mire. Then he shows himself in the full panoply of 
 a man, a shepherd, God's anointed, and Cyrus is his name, 
 before whom Jehovah himself goeth to level the rough 
 places, to shiver the two-leaved doors of brass, and open 
 the secret treasures of surrounding peoples, for the sake 
 of his chosen Jacob. 
 
 So in this case the prophet begins with the lower and 
 and rises to the higher theme. He begins with the Jew- 
 ish people in his mind as the heralds of the good news to 
 the Gentiles : he ends with him who is the Truth, the 
 Teacher, the Sufferer for all. Like the Messianic charac- 
 ter of the Old Testament as applied to the New, we may 
 take the typical character of what are termed the later 
 prophecies of Isaiah as inclusive of the chosen people, 
 and exclusive of others. The earlier prophecies belong 
 to the sphere of reproof to the people of Israel as a whole ; 
 the later especially belong to the true Israel as the 
 medium of hope for the redemption of the world. And 
 so in harmony with some of the Psalms, for example Pss. 
 xxii. and Ixxii, the prophet, under the full sway of 
 inspiration, has before him the ideal church of God, with 
 Messiah at its head. Sometimes he speaks from the stand- 
 point of the people, and sometimes from the stand-point 
 of Messiah himself; but redemption is his theme, and the 
 working out of redemption his design. The characteris- 
 tics borrowed from inferior and typical personages have 
 their full expression in the one grand central figure to 
 which they all point, " Who," as Delitzsch says, " is more 
 than a prophet, for ' the isles wait for his law,' more than 
 a priest, for he offers up himself, more than a king, for 
 through his glory he makes kings tremble. Not mere 
 king, mere prophet, mere priest, is the Servant of Jeho- 
 vah, who is none of these exclusively, but is all together, 
 and they are only three emanations of his glory." 
 
 In a word, the term is an ideal which the prophet has 
 gathered around him, to which ultimately he ascribes true 
 personality. The ideal does not reach its climax until 
 
69 
 
 we come to ch. liii., and was never actualized until he, 
 who was the Servant of Jehovah, in the fullness of times, 
 appears and gathers around him the true Israel, the body 
 which is of Christ. 
 
 The salient passages for this view are xlii. 1-7 ; xlix. 
 1-9 ; 1. 4-10 ; lii. 13, to liii. 12. 
 
 MESSIANIC PASSAGES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS. 
 
 These passages are not numerous. Aside from 
 Zechariah, the minor prophets give little additional 
 information as to the person of the Messiah or his work. 
 In Hosea iii. 5 we liave the use of the phrase "David 
 their king," and the phrase " at the end of days," the lat- 
 ter in prophetic language seemingly referring to the Mes- 
 sianic era. By '•'•David their king " is expressed prima- 
 rily a king of the house of David, but typically their true 
 king, Messiah. See Jer. xxx. 9 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 23-24. In 
 Hosea xi. 1, the child Israel in Egypt is used by Matthew 
 as typical of the temporary sojourn of Christ in Egypt. 
 Matt. ii. 14-15. Joel has nothing to say of the Messiah as 
 such, nor does Amos, though the former predicts a pente- 
 costal descent of the spirit (Joel ii. 28-32), and the latter 
 the restoration of the fallen hut of the house of Israel. 
 Amos ix. 11. Obadiah tells us of " the kingdom which 
 shall be Jehovah's," but that is all. Oba. i. 21. Jonah is 
 used as a type of our Lord's abode in the grave by our 
 Lord himself. Matt. xii. 40. Micah foretells tlie birth- 
 place of Christ, his divine nature, the promulgation of 
 his mission from Mount Zion and its results, and the uni- 
 versality of His kingdom as an echo of Isaiah. Micah v ; 
 Matt. ii. 6 ; Micah iv. 1-8. Nahum's prophecy as against 
 Nineveh cannot be expected to enlighten us as to the 
 Messiah. Habbakuk embraces his people in his arms as a 
 mother her weeping child and sings his quieting lullaby, 
 but adds no new Messianic thought. Zephaniah is the 
 dies tree of the O. T., yet it contains a rainbow of hope. 
 Ch. iii. 14-15. Haggai seems to view the Second Temple, 
 though far inferior to the first, as the seat of a purer wor- 
 ship, and assumes the identity of the Second Temple and 
 the Church of the Messianic era. Hag. ii. 1-9. But 
 
70 
 
 when we come to Zechariah, though he speaks in symbols, 
 we have the ripening of the Messianic idea into its real 
 redemptive grandeur. 
 
 MESSIANIC PASSAGES IN ZECHARIAH. 
 
 While the Angel of Jehovah, who is the Messiah, has 
 filled important offices in the previous symbolisms, it is 
 not until we come to ch. iii. 8, sq., that He is specifically 
 characterized. There He is described as a lowly servant, 
 under the term 
 
 ' BRANCH.' " Hear, I pray, O Joshua the High Priest, 
 
 Thou and thy colleagues who sit before thee. 
 For men of wonder (or omens) are they. 
 For behold, my servant Branch." 
 
 Happily the symbol Branch is accepted by Jewish exposi- 
 tors and modern commentators as referring to the Mes- 
 siah. The phrase, ' My servant,' is familiar to all stu- 
 dents of Isaiah. The lowly origin of this Servant is indi- 
 cated by the word Branch. It is akin with the rod which 
 was to spring from the trunk of the tree Jesse, and the 
 shoot which was to spring from its roots. (Is. xi. 1.) It 
 was to be beautiful and glorious to the escaped of Israel. 
 (Is. iv. 2.) It was to be a righteous king, executing right- 
 eousness and judgment in the earth, — named by Jeremiah, 
 Jehovah our Righteousness. (Jer. xxiii. 5.) But here, 
 by the connection, the lowly Servant is to be an atoning 
 High Priest. Hear, O Joshua, the High Priest, and your 
 colleagues who are typical signs of things to come. For, 
 lo ! I am bringing forth in my own time, my Servant 
 Branch : and more : lo ! The stone which I have placed 
 before Joshua, upon one stone are seven eyes. Lo ! again, 
 I am graving its graving, and as the result I will remove 
 the iniquity of this land in one day, or at once., and once 
 for all. So runs the paraphrase. 
 
 Whether the stone, concerning which there has been 
 so much wrangling discussion, refers to the people of 
 God as the foundation-stone from which to construct the 
 Temple of God, or to the Messiah himself, as the Chief 
 Corner Stone, any sound exegesis must admit that the 
 resultant of this appointment of the Branch is a specific 
 
n 
 
 atoning work. The background of the vision is the High 
 Priest, antagonized by the Adversary, whose hostility is 
 annulled by the pardon of the High Priest for all cere- 
 monial defilement, symbolized by the removal of his filthy 
 garments, and the substitution of the white sacerdotal 
 attire preparatory for the work of the great day of atone- 
 ment. He is thus assigned to his appropriate station as 
 THE RESTORER OF TRUE WORSHIP ; when with a Lo ! call- 
 ing attention to a new fact, the lowly servant, Branch, 
 appears in the vision as the full realization of the 
 O. T. High Priesthood. And as, according to the Tal- 
 mud, the great day of atonement being ended, the High 
 Priest was escorted home, and gave a magnificent feast to 
 his friends, while youths and maidens made the gardens 
 and vineyards jocund with the song and the dance, so 
 this vision of the Greater High Priest closes with the 
 same emblematic scene, when, sin pardoned, access to the 
 throne of God secured, because the Deliverer in the 
 plenitude of his grace had come, each true Israelite is 
 represented as inviting his friends to partake of festal 
 cheer under his own vine and fig tree. 
 
 The next Messianic passage is found in ch. vi. 9-15. 
 It is not a vision. The visions are ended. It is a broad 
 day-light symbolical action. It may be termed " The 
 crowning of the Branch as Priest and King." The pur- 
 pose of this royal priesthood is to build a spiritual temple 
 to Jehovah, and the agencies employed are Gentiles and 
 Jews. Few critics deny its Messianic import. A run- 
 ning commentary will bring out its main thought. And 
 the word of Jehovah came unto me, i.e., after the previ- 
 ous night-visions — the next morning or soon after, the 
 formula itself introducing a new topic, — Take from the 
 exiles, i.e., those who have just returned from the exiles 
 still in Babylon, to wit, from Cheldai, from Tobiah and 
 from Jediah, and go thou on that day, go into the house 
 of Josiah the son of Zephaniah, whither they, i.e., the 
 three above-named, have come from Babylon. We know 
 nothing especially of these men ; but Josiah was the host, 
 and these men were his guests, and the guests had evi- 
 dently come with choice gifts to aid in the restoration of 
 Jerusalem. And take silver and gold, i.e., from these men 
 
72 
 
 and make crowns^ — possibly plural of dignity, but more 
 naturally a composite crown representing the royal posi- 
 tion of the crowned one — and set them upon the head of 
 Joshua the son of Josedeck, the high priest. Not Joshua 
 and Zerubbabel, as some would have it, but upon Joshua 
 alone. And speak unto Am, i.e., Joshua, a man who knew 
 well enough that the high priest never wore a crown, and 
 never sat on a throne. His posture was a standing pos- 
 ture, as an interceder for the people, and he, therefore, 
 must have been aware that this new calling was typical 
 rather than real. This fact is so evident in history 
 that Judas Maccabeus, though priest and warrior and 
 conqueror, refused until his very last days the proffered 
 honor of a crown. Speak unto him, saying, Lo ! You 
 represent a man whose well-known name is Branch, — and 
 he shall shoot up from his place (Ex. x. 23), i.e., not as 
 an exotic, but out of his own land and nation, the native 
 stock of whom are the heirs of the promises. And He, 
 not 1/ou nor Zeruhhahel, shall build, not a temple, such as 
 you are erecting, but the true temple of Jehovah. I wish, 
 he says, to make the distinction clear. I emphasize the 
 pronoun, He himself shall build the temple of Jehovah in 
 expectancy, and He himself, not you, shall take up for 
 himself, and bear for himself royal majesty and glory, and 
 shall sit upon His throne with the dignity of a king, and 
 rule with the authority of a Monarch. More than that. 
 He shall be also a priest, when on his throne, and the 
 counsel which procures peace shall be between them both, 
 i.e., the priest and the hing. Sovereignty and intercession 
 shall secure reconciliation between God and all His exiUd 
 ones. 
 
 These two offices were never to be executed by 
 Joshua. There would be nothing remarkable in appoint- 
 ing him as High Priest. The priesthood was to continue 
 as long as the nation. But an atoning king is the first 
 step towards the ultimate spiritual kingdom which is to 
 fill the whole earth. And no wonder that as Haggai saw 
 the glory of Jehovah in the house of Jehovah, he por- 
 trays the desirable things of all nations entering into its 
 structure, Zechariah winds up this prophecy with the 
 
73 
 
 bold statement, "And they that are far off" — the Gentile 
 world — " shall come and build in the Temple of Jehovah." 
 
 The next passage requiring examination is contained 
 in cha]). ix. 9-10. As it is in the disputed portion of these 
 prophecies, and as it describes the Messiah as a humili- 
 ated King, it has been subjected to sharp criticism. Jew 
 and rationalistic Gentiles have joined hands in admitting 
 the prophetic and Messianic elements in the prophecies 
 thus far considered, but they refuse to go farther. They 
 propose any number of discordant theories. The earlier 
 Jewish authorities interpreted the passage as Messianic, 
 and Jarchi denies that it is possible to interpret it of any 
 other than the Messiah. But in the 12th century, other 
 opinions held sway. Believing that Messiah was yet to 
 come, they quibbled ; some asserting that if the Jews were 
 worthy^ he would come in the clouds of heaven, if 
 unworthy^ as poor and riding on an ass. Others resorted 
 to a double Messiah, Messiah ben-David, and Messiah ben- 
 Joseph. The ass was the trouble. They found them- 
 selves perpetually tantalized with the ass. Lightfoot 
 records the story that King Sapor, a Persian monarch of 
 B.C. 240, hauglitily addressed a Jewish Rabbi with the 
 taunt, " You say that your Messiah will come upon an 
 ass. I will send him a noble horse." To which the 
 Rabbi replied, " You have not a horse with a hundred 
 colors like his ass." On which reply Lightfoot remarks, 
 " In the deepest humilit}^ of the Messiah, they dream of 
 pride even in His ass."* By modern critics the prophecy 
 has been referred to Nehemiah, who never was a king ; 
 to Judas Maccabeus with as little show of reason ; to 
 Zerubbabel, never a king ; to Simon Maccabeus, John 
 Hyrcanus, Uzziah and Hezekiah, with no possible histori- 
 cal illustrations to sustain them. Their best tht?ory is the 
 Messiah to come. 
 
 But the prophecy as verified in our Lord, purposely 
 or not, seems sufficiently clear. " Rejoice exceedingly, 
 Daughter of Zion, shout, Daughter of Jerusalem," — the 
 summons to a fresh prophecy — "Behold thy king cometh 
 for thy good." '■'- Just :" no guile found in his mouth: 
 " saved : " not bringing salvation, but preserved in his mis- 
 
 *Lightfoot's Works, vol. 11, chap. 31. 
 
74 
 
 sion, so that even the bands of death cannot hold him : 
 " afflicted : " not meek, but a soul-sufferer as the word gen 
 erally signifies elsewhere ; "and riding upon an ass, to wit 
 the colt of an ass : '' an emblem of humiliation rather than 
 of kingly exaltation. He is a sovereign unlike other sove- 
 reigns. He is an afflicted sovereign. Royal personages 
 may have used such an animal prior to the days of Solo- 
 mon. But the forbidden horse was used for state occa- 
 sions subsequently. (Jer. xvii. 25.) In the prophet's 
 time, and in the time of Christ, the horse was the pride of 
 kings. But this one, without pomp, without splendor, is 
 totally unlike the expected Messiah, and his coronation- 
 day was to crown him as the crowned sufferer. Even the 
 unridden young ass seems to emphasize this fact. To ride 
 not upon a horse, not upon a trained ass, but upon an 
 untrained colt, so accurately verified, betokens lowliness 
 and humiliation. And possibly we may go as far as 
 Kohler, who says, " That inasmuch as all animals devoted 
 to the service of Jehovah were not to be used in the ser- 
 vice of man, the selected animal in this case indicates the 
 separateness of the sufering Messiah to the sacred service 
 of Jehovah." Such a one is he who comes to slay his 
 enemies by the breath of his mouth. 
 
 Passing ch. xi., the obscurest of all, where seemingly 
 under the guise of a symbolical action, the prophet 
 impersonating not Messiah, but Jehovah as the Good 
 Shepherd, who is rejected, as was Christ by the traitor- 
 ship of Judas, we come to the noted prophecy in chap, 
 xii. 10-12, "And 1 will pour upon the house of David the 
 spirit of grace and supplication ; and they shall look unto 
 me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn over 
 him, as one who is bitter (in grief) over the first-born." 
 The crucial phrase in this passage is, "And they shall 
 look unto me, whom they have pierced." This is the 
 exact rendering of the original text so far as it has been 
 ascertained by a careful collation of the existing Mss. 
 All the versions sustain it, except the Sept., which, 
 according to its usual treatment of an anthropomorphic 
 passage, softens the word ' pierced ' into ' insulted.' The 
 verb " to pierce " is never elsewhere used with any other 
 meaning. The person pierced, according to the connec- 
 
75 
 
 tion, is not the prophet, nor the Angel of Jehovah, but 
 Jehovah himself, who is the speaker throughout the sec- 
 tion. John in quoting it, as verified, in part at least, by 
 the centurion's spear, uses the language of the Hebrew 
 text, instead of that of the Sept., with the exception of 
 the substitution of the pronoun him for me, which may be 
 merely expository. He seems to be almost nervously 
 eager, by the assurance of personally witnessing the 
 scene, to convince his readers that then and there the 
 utterance of Zechariah was fulfilled. And this eagerness 
 is not perhaps to be wondered at, for candor compels the 
 admission that unless the word Jehovah is a synonym for 
 the Messiah, for which as yet we have found no sufficient 
 evidence, it is the revealing, covenant-keeping God, and 
 not the intervening Servant of Jehovah, who is here said 
 to be pierced. What idea tliat assertion w^ould convey to 
 Zechariah, or to his hearers and readers, it is impossible 
 to determine. A prophec}' may contain much more than 
 its surface-impression upon the prophet or the people 
 whom he addresses, but it must contain some idea of 
 value to, and capable of appreciation by both prophet and 
 })eople. A pierced prophet of Jehovah, or a pierced 
 Angel of Jehovah might have been understood by the 
 men of O. T. times, but a })ierced God was a thought from 
 which they would have recoiled. And the marvel is, that 
 the stern, religious Jew allowed the " unto me " to remain 
 in the text. The K'ri, it is true, in some Mss., reads 
 " unto him ; " but they are a late authority. The Chris- 
 tian who is convinced of the divine nature of Christ niay 
 admit that Jehovah and the Servant of Jehovah are one, 
 and thus escape the difficulty, but, regarded from the 
 stand-point of the prophet, it is not at all surprising that 
 Jew and Gentile have sought to escape the thought of a 
 pierced Grod. Even Calvin chose the parap4irase of the 
 Sept., and says, " The piercing must be accepted as a 
 metaphorical expression for a perpetual irritation," and 
 denies its verification in the crucifixion of Christ. And 
 the whole school of rationalists, echoed by the Jews, 
 shouts, " Good for old Calvin.'" Their thunder is small 
 thunder, however, for in his commentary on the passage 
 in John, he urges his interpretation as a proof tliat Christ 
 
76 
 
 was God. Of course, the difficulty may be removed by 
 changing the text, or by putting something into the text. 
 Some change the verb and read "leap up unto me, and 
 mourn,''' but we have no parallel example. Others read, 
 " They have pierced the heroes and martyrs, and mourn 
 on account of their persecution." But there is no 
 authority for such a paraphrase. Others read, " They 
 shall look up to me with respect to each one whom they 
 have pierced," i.e., Jew mourning for the Jew whom he 
 has martyred, an expression too incongruous to require 
 refutation. No solution offered by these critics is satis- 
 factory, and until more light shines upon the expression, 
 it is a pierced Jehovah to whom the prophet refers. That 
 it is Messianic in thought is evident from the connection 
 between this prophecy and the previous one. The rejected 
 shepherd who was then the prophet or Jehovah, is here 
 the pierced Jehovah. Wunsche in a monograph on "TAe 
 Sufferings of Messiah,^'' a work which deserves translation 
 for polemical purposes, cites two passages as evidence that 
 the theory of two Messiahs appeared shortly after the 
 Christian era, founded upon this passage, and became the 
 teaching of the early synagogue. The Jerusalem-Gemara 
 (A.D. 230-290) referring to this text, says, that there were 
 among the Rabbins two opinions ; one says, that which 
 they (the people) mourn is the Messiah ; and the other, 
 that which they mourn is evil desire, (original sin). In 
 the Babylonian Gemara (A.D. 350-500), the question is 
 put, " What is the cause of this mourning ? In this the 
 Rabbins differ. The one said, It was for Messiah ben- 
 Joseph who was slain ; and the other said. It was for evil 
 desire (original sin), which is to be slain ; for it is writ- 
 ten, 'And they shall look unto him whom they have 
 pierced.' "By a fair and quite complete classification of 
 the non-controversial writings of the Jews, Wunsche 
 shows that the idea of a suffering, atoning Messiah was 
 the ordinary teaching of the early synagogue. And, as 
 Wright saj's, " It is natural enough that the modern 
 sj^nagogue should have changed its views on these points, 
 but it is not fair that attempts should be made to silence 
 or misrepresent on such points the testimony of the older 
 
17 
 
 Jewish authorities," — a criticism worthy of regard by 
 Drumraond, the author of The Jewish Messiah. 
 
 The last passage to be noticed is ch. xiii. 7 : "Awake 
 O sword against my Shepherd, and against a strong man, 
 my fellow, saith Jehovah of Hosts. Smite the shepherd, 
 and the sheep shall be scattered. And I will stretch out 
 my hand for the benefit of ray little ones." Like all the 
 others it is a dramatic burst from an obscure connection. 
 We are startled by it and put to the strain to ascertain its 
 meaning. Here the prophet seems to go back upon him- 
 self. He had slain the Messiah. Was not that enough ? 
 Ho! He turns us to the slayer, — Jehovah of Hosts. And 
 this constitutes the climax of all he has to say. There is 
 a divine agency in the death of the Good Shepherd, per- 
 haps explaining more clearly the term Good Shepherd in 
 the previous chapters, and the fruit of this agency is the 
 scattering of the sheep, and the rescue of the chosen little 
 flock. 
 
 There is strictly no difficulty in the words them- 
 selves to do away with the evangelical interpretation of 
 this passage. A fair comparison of it with cognate pas* 
 sages, especially Isaiah (ch. liii.), and the quotation of it 
 by our Lord, emphasizes its meaning as expressed by 
 Peter, " This man, delivered up according to the estab- 
 lished counsel and fore-knowledge of God, ye slew, cruci- 
 fying him by the hands of lawless ones." 
 
 The thread we have thus tried to follow carefully and 
 candidly, traces for us a Messiah as a lowly servant., a 
 Messiah as Priest-King, a Messiah as an afflicted humili- 
 ated Monarch., a Messiah betrayed and rejected, a Messiah 
 slain, a Messiah slain under the agency of Jehovah himself. 
 
 THE ANGEL OF JEHOVAH. 
 
 Malachi, the last of the prophets, speaking for Jeho- 
 vah, says, " Behold I am sending my messenger, and he 
 will prepare a way before me ; and suddenly (unexpect- 
 edly), will come unto His Temple, the Lord whom ye are 
 seeking ; even the Angel of the Covenant, whom ye are 
 delighting in ; behold he has come, (or is coming,) saith 
 Jehovah of Hosts." Mai. iii. 1. 
 
t8 
 
 This Angel of the Covenant, to whom the divine 
 epithet, ' the Lord,' is applied in the previous clause, is 
 evidently the same person who is elsewhere called 'the 
 Angel of God,' 'the Angel of Jehovah,' "the Mediator 
 between God and man in all God's communications and 
 dealings with men : " i.e., in the O. T. In Isa. Ixiii. 9, 
 He is called " The Angel of his Presence," or face., where 
 there is an allusion to Exodus xxxiii. 14-15. 
 
 Collating this passage with Mai. iv. 5-6, and the use 
 made of them by the writers of the N. T., the Angel of 
 the Covenant corresponds to Christ, and the Elijah who 
 was to make a way ready for Him, is John the Baptist. 
 Matt. xi. 10-15 ; Mark i. 2-8 ; Luke, vii. 27-29. 
 
 Note. 1. By ' the Angel of the Covenant ' is evidently 
 meant the old covenant, corresponding to the Angel of 
 Jehovah elsewhere referred to in the O. T. He does not 
 appear in the N. T., a silence significant of the apparent 
 fact that the Angel of Jehovah in the O. T., is no other 
 than the Christ of the N. T. 
 
 Note 2. My friend. Professor C. Goodspeed, in a very 
 able article (Bib. Sac. vol. 36), after an examination of 
 the passages in which the phrase, 'Angel of Jehovah,' and 
 'Angel of God ' is employed, summarizes his conclusion as 
 to the divinity of this person as follows: — 1. "He fre- 
 quently applies to himself the name Elohim and Jehovah, 
 and declares that the name, ' I am that I am ' was to be 
 his name to all generations. 2. Whenever he speaks to 
 men he speaks with absolute and independent authority, 
 assuming to himself prerogatives inconsistent with the 
 pretensions of any other than a divine person. 
 
 3. He exacts from men divine honor, worship, and 
 sacrifice. 4. Scripture writgrs designate him by the 
 divine names Elohim and Jehovah." His closing sen- 
 tence is worth}^ of reverent consideration. " If our con- 
 clusion is correct, and Christ and the Angel of Jehovah 
 are one, then, we repeat, the incarnation of Deity, the 
 preexistence of our Lord, the Divinity of Christ, and the 
 doctrine of the Trinity — carrying with them, as they do, 
 the whole superstructure of apostolic teaching — are not 
 exclusively of New Testament growth, but strike their 
 roots down through all inspired teaching to the beginning 
 
79 
 
 of the world, thus binding all revelation together in a 
 complete unity, in a progressive and harmonious whole." 
 Passages for consultation on the Angel of Jehovah 
 are Gen. xvi. 7-14 ; xviii. 1 sq.; xxii. 11 sq.; xxxi. 11 sq.; 
 xxxii. 1, and Hos. xii. 4 sq. ; Ex. iii. 2 sq. ; xiv. 19 and 24 ; 
 xxiii. 20-23 : xxxiii. 14 ; Num. xxii. 35 ; xxiii. 6 ; Josh, 
 iii. 13-15 ; Judges ii. 1 ; vi. 11 sq. ; xiii. 3 sq. ; I. Kings 
 xix. 4-15 ; Zech. iii. 1 ; xii. 8. 
 
 MESSIANIC PASSAGES IN DANIEL. 
 
 These are chs. ii. 34-35 ; vii. 13-14 ; ix. 24-27. They 
 require a fuller exegesis than our limits allow. See for 
 literature, Lange's (Zoekler) Introduction to the Prophet 
 DanieU § 12. Also Old Testament Prophecy, by Stanley 
 Leathes in reply to Kuenen. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 The object of this Syllabus is simply to place in the 
 hands of the student the material, with cursory sugges- 
 tions, by which he may work out for himself the Messi- 
 anic idea as it appears in the writings of the Old Testa- 
 ment. To me, the one word DELIVERER expresses it, 
 when the several passages are grouped and condensed 
 into their true significance. Mediation is the red vital line 
 running through Old Testament prophecy, connecting the 
 Protevangelium with the Sufferer on Calvary. The 
 Angel of the Israelites, the King of the Psalmists, the 
 Teacher of the Prophets, the Priest-King of Zechariah, 
 find their central purpose in Isaiah Fifty three, and its 
 sublime realization is in the seventeenth chapter of John. 
 " The one believing will not make haste ; " or " give way." 
 Cheyne. Isa. xxviii. 16. " Prove all things : hold fast 
 that which is good^'' I Thess. v. 21. 
 
DATE DUE