Lengthy as this extract may be, it will at least show the infinite differences between the Rabbinic expectation of the Messiah, and the picture of him presented in the New Testament. Surely the Messianic idea, as realised in Christ, could not have been derived from the views current in those times! __________________________________________________________________
[6427] Indeed, this Parashah in Bedr. R. contains other similar parallelisms between Gen. xvii. and Messianic times.
[6428] As to these three measures of sufferings, and the share falling to the age of the Messiah sea also the Midrash on Ps. ii. 7.
[6429] The Midrash gives two very curious explanations of his name.
[6430] On the twofold Messiah, or rather the device of the Jews on this subject, see in the text of the chapter. I cannot but suspect that the words Son of Joseph' in the Talmud are a later and clumsy emendation, since what follows evidently applies to the Son of David.
[6431] The idea of an organic connection between Israel and the Messiah seems also to underlie this passage.
[6432] See the passage in Sanh. 96 b &c. given at the close of this Appendix.
[6433] Signor Castelli remarks in his learned treatise (Il Messia, p. 164) that redemption is always ascribed to God, and not to the Messiah. But the distinction is of no importance, seeing that this is indeed the work of God, but carried out by the Messiah, while, on the other hand, Rabbinic writings frequently refer Israel's deliverance to the agency of the Messiah.
[6434] From the above review of Old Testament passages, all reference to sacrifices has been omitted, because, although the Synagogue held the doctrine of the vicariousness and atoning character of these sacrifices, no mention occurs of the Messiah in connection with them.
[6435] The Vienna edition of the Talmud has several lacunæ on this page (98 a) __________________________________________________________________