2. The OT position.—The prophets Amos, Hosea, and Joel give clear expression to Messianic hopes for Israel and Judah, but say nothing of a personal Messiah. What they predict is the revived glory of the Davidic house (Am 9Uf-) and the return of the children of Israel (Hos 35). Nor does Zeph- aniah, in depicting the happy future that shall follow the Divine judgment on Israel and the nations (3°), introduce at all the figure of Messiah. Jeremiah announces the coming of a king of David’s line, but seems to think of a succession of them (17 224 33-17); and Obadiah (v.2) speaks of a plurality of saviours on Mount Zion. The same thought appears to be implied in Ezk 437 455. and elsewhere this prophet idealizes the reign of David, referring to him as the ‘ shepherd’ of Israel and ‘their prince for ever.’ In Isaiah, Micah, and Zechariah we meet with a great advance in the development of Messianic expectation. These prophets do not confine the blessing to their own nation, and clearly bring forward the person of a particular descendant of David (Is 71-16 9%, Mic 5*7-, Zec 9° 149), The terms in which this king is described perfectly fit the character of the Messiah as that came to be recognized in Jewish theology.
3. The Messianic idea in the A pocrypha.—W hile confidently predicting better times for Israel, the Apocrypha afford but few materials for the con- struction of the doctrine of the Messiah. Baruch, Tobit, and Sirach may be noticed first as falling within the period between the cessation of pro- phecy and the commencement of the Maccabee revival. Baruch comforts Jerusalem and the Jewish nation by the assurance of the destruction of their enemies, and of the return of their pro- sperity as a united people ‘gathered together by the word of the Holy One’ (47%), There is no Mediator known to Baruch as accomplishing all this. Many of the Fathers pointed to another passage (3°) as a prophecy of the Incarnation ; but the words ‘afterward did she (AV ‘he’) ap- pear upon earth, and was conversant with men’ are more properly regarded as a personification of Wisdom, Tobit’s point of view is somewhat dif- ferent. He predicts the same happiness for Israel,
DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE
and a return to Jerusalem, there to re-establish with great pomp the worship of the Lord God. But he speaks of no vengeance to be wreaked on their enemies, over whom they are rather to ob- tain a glorious triumph in the ‘shape of their con- version to Judaism (13% 4-16), Ben Sira knows no more of a personal Messiah than either Baruch or Tobit. The idea of a glorious future is present to his mind, although he expresses himself on the subject with great sobriety. He recalls the pro- mises made by God to Abraham and to David (447 45% 47"), and looks for the return of the scattered Jews, for the punishment of their op- pressors (361%), and for the breaking of ‘the sceptres of the unrighteous’ (35'8), In spite of a dim Messianic expectation in 44-50 that is in no special way connected with an individual Messiah, his real interest is in the perpetuity of the Israel- itish people. ‘The days of Israel,’ he says, ‘are innumerable’ (3725), and ‘ their glory shall not be blotted out’ (441), The only other passage we need refer to is one which is generally thought to be of later origin on account of the great contrast it bears to the prevailing doctrine of the book, viz. 48", This passage, which recalls the closing lines of the prophecy of Malachi, speaks of Elijah re- turning at the inauguration of the Messianic king- dom, and that in such a way as to seem to imply that the author had hopes of living to see it all. But the Gr. text is obscure, and it is certainly not safe to conclude that he speaks of a future life.
‘From the little and in part doubtful evidence that remains to us, it would seem that in the period between the Captivity and the rise of the Maccabees the Messianic hope resolved itself into vague anticipations of a glorious and happy future, in which the presence of God would be more mani. fest, but of which a Messiah would form no essen- tial feature’ (Drummond, Jewish Messiah, p. 199). This is exactly the position of those modern Jews who say the Messiah is not a person, but an epoch.
In. 1 Mae. three passages have been singled out for discussion in this connexion :—(1) ‘ David for being merciful inherited the throne of a kingdom for ever and ever’ (257), These words are put into the lips of Mattathias, and it is possible that the writer, without ascribing this expectation to the priest of Modin, contemplated the restoration of the Davidic kingdom through the appearance of the Messiah. (2) ‘They pulled down the (dese- crated) altar, and laid up the stones in the moun- tain of the house in a convenient place, until there should come a prophet to give an answer concern- ing them’ (446), There is here certainly no specific reference to the Messiah. (3) ‘The Jews and priests were well pleased that Simon should be their leader and high priest for ever, until there should arise a faithful prophet’ (1441), Although the absence of the article makes it difficult to identify the ‘prophet’ in question with the Mes- siah, ‘the allusion may still fairly be regarded as Messianic in the general sense that the expected. ‘faithful prophet” first appeared in Christ’ (Camb. Bible, ad loc.). In 2 Mac. there is only one passage of Messianic import—‘In God have we hope, that he will quickly have merey upon us, and gather us together out of all the earth into the holy place’ (2"5), The use of ‘ quickly’ seems to imply the expectation of the near approach of the Messianic kingdom. There is nothing in Judith beyond the mention of ‘the Day of Judgment,’ when the Lord Almighty will take vengeance on the enemies of Israel (i627),