Apologeticae sive Theologiae Fundamentalis, Tomus I: Demonstratio Christiana

Having set forth and vindicated the theory of revelation, the question now arises whether divine revelation truly exists.

No one indeed is unaware that all religions whatsoever trace their origin to God or to gods. Since, however, there is one God and one truth, only one among all religions can be divinely revealed.

1. Non-biblical and biblical religions. If we touch but lightly upon the individual religions, we shall at once clearly discover that none of them can be divine except that of the Old and New Testament. For all non-biblical religions whatsoever, the Mohammedan religion alone excepted, either do not know the very existence of the one God or at least do not certainly acknowledge it, to say nothing of the other glaring errors, theoretical and practical alike, with which all ethnic systems are pervaded. But even the Mohammedan religion champions doctrines unworthy of God and of men, e. g. fatalism, hatred of "infidels," a voluptuous paradise. In the biblical religion, on the other hand, no one has ever been able to detect even the slightest falsity or immorality. Hence, even by negative criteria alone, all non-biblical religions are proved not to be divinely revealed.

The unique biblical religion of the Old and New Testament must therefore be examined. Unique, I say. For the religion of both covenants coalesces into one, begun and prepared before Christ, fulfilled and completed through Christ. In time, however, in character, in importance, and in author, these two parts of the true revelation differ most widely. Hence in itself the revelation of the Old Testament and that of the New would have to be investigated in a twofold treatise.

2. The biblical religion of the Old Testament. Nevertheless it seems preferable to investigate the existence of the Christian revelation alone, without first studying the pre-Christian one. For to prove the divine origin of the latter by traversing the whole Old Testament would be a very long, excessively arduous, and by no means necessary undertaking.

Very long. For although the whole pre-Christian revelation is contained in the same books of the Old Testament, nevertheless it was communicated gradually over a long course of time through many legates of God and is distinguished into the primitive, patriarchal, Mosaic, and prophetic revelation. Each one would have to be gathered separately from its respective books and weighed on the balance of the criteria.

This study, however, appears not only very long but also excessively arduous. To be sure, God furnished all the revelations of the Old Testament with those criteria which would suffice to convince the men of those ages, for the most part uncultured and devoted to religion. The highest criteria were all the less required inasmuch as at almost every period legate succeeded legate of God, confirming and augmenting the living and continuous revelation.

Modern critics, however, are convinced only by the most evident criteria, with which, nevertheless, the Old Testament does not everywhere shine.

For it is by no means adorned with the highest internal criteria, since its very doctrine was not final and absolute, but imperfect and to be perfected more and more. Nor is it everywhere distinguished by external criteria. For its miracles for the most part either are not available or were not wrought for the purpose of proving revelation. Moreover, almost all its prophecies look to Christ and were fulfilled only in Christ, hence in the New Testament.

But if to prove the revelation of the Old Testament from the Old Testament for moderns is very long and excessively arduous, neither is it necessary. For the divinity of the pre-Christian revelation is established very briefly and very easily from the divinity of the Christian religion, which is to be demonstrated forthwith. For the whole New Testament proclaims with one voice that the pre-Christian religion no less than the Christian was divinely revealed; if therefore the latter was truly revealed, the former too must have been revealed. Moreover, the most weighty question concerning the Messiah, which fills the whole ancient covenant, can be treated deliberately in the Christian apologetic and in it alone, since the Messianic prophecies were fulfilled only in Jesus Christ. Thus that saying comes true: "The New Testament lies hidden in the Old; the Old is made manifest in the New."

3. Method and sources for proving the Christian revelation. The question of the existence of revelation is purely historical. Hence it must be treated by the historical way or method and proved by historical documents. This certainly does not prevent philosophical conclusions from being drawn from a fact long since historically established; e. g. from the fact of the raising of Lazarus one may conclude by reasoning to the supernatural cause of this effect. For the inference "from effect to cause" holds, even in historical matters.

To the historical method, on the other hand, it would be contrary to weaken or supplement historical documents and facts by arguments from a preconceived philosophy; e. g. to deny the historically proved fact of the raising of Lazarus because miracles displease an unbelieving philosophy. For "against a fact no argument prevails." Indeed, every argumentation and reasoning is proved false if it runs counter to facts established beyond doubt. And yet, alas, almost all modern criticism is bent on rejecting the individual facts of revelation and revelation itself for the very reason that they do not correspond to the preconceived ideas of unbelievers!

The principal sources from which the historical documents concerning the Christian religion are drawn are the sacred books of the Old and New Testament, especially the Gospels. These books we certainly do not use as divine or inspired, but as human-historical. For that they are inspired is concluded from revelation; hence he would fall into a vicious circle who should attempt to prove revelation from the inspired character of the sacred books. That they are, however, marked by a historical character and deserve historical credence is shown by biblical introduction. This discipline, namely, demonstrates at length the authenticity, integrity, and veracity of the individual books of the Old and New Testament.¹ It is nevertheless fitting that the apologist also sometimes briefly defend the authority of the principal texts of sacred Scripture, so that the cavils of adversaries may be more fully confounded.

There is, moreover, a twofold order of arguments by which the divine origin of the Christian religion is established. The former pertains to the religion immediately; the latter looks immediately to the author of the religion, but mediately to the Christian religion.

4. Criteria drawn from the Christian religion itself. The Christian religion itself discloses its divine origin by internal and external criteria, namely by its doctrine and its history. Christian doctrine not only perfectly accords with the truths of natural religion, but adds such lofty dogmas, such outstanding moral precepts, such efficacious motives and means of holiness, that no religious theory devised by human ingenuity can be compared with it. Although it surpasses the human intellect, it is nevertheless perfectly adapted to the intellect, will, and other faculties of man, and corresponds most aptly to the needs of the heart and of human society. This sublimity of Christian doctrine is expounded at length in dogmatic theology.

Christian history shines with the external criteria of true revelation: with the wonderful propagation, conservation, and efficacy of the gospel and the Church. The Christian religion was propagated with the greatest rapidity by means which, considered in themselves, were wholly unequal to such a propagation; it has been conserved down to our own times, although it was not only deprived of the help of the secular arm but assailed by the vices, powers, and sciences of the unbelieving world; an altogether divine efficacy shone forth in the conversion of the morals of all peoples and in the fortitude of the martyrs, who at every time underwent torments and death itself for the religion of Christ and the faith of the Church.² All these things, each and every one, are accurately narrated in the history of the Church.

These criteria drawn from the doctrine and history of the Christian religion establish the divine origin of this religion not merely with probable, but with moral certainty. Absolute certainty, however, is afforded by the author of the Christian religion.

5. Criteria taken from the author of the Christian religion.³ Jesus Christ testified that He is the Messiah divinely sent to reveal and found a religion; nay more, that He is the true God Himself, the author and end of all religion. And He proved this testimony concerning His messianity and divinity to be true by invincible arguments, namely by His personal character, by miracles, by prophecies, by His resurrection from the dead. Thus He destroyed every doubt concerning the divine origin of the religion preached and denominated by Him. This being so, the Christian demonstration must consist in this: that with the greatest care it set forth the testimonies of Jesus Christ concerning His messianity and divinity as well as the arguments of Jesus Christ for His messianity and divinity. To devote one's labor to this apology for Jesus Christ is all the more worthwhile because both friends and enemies of the faith proclaim with one mind that Jesus Christ is the beginning, the center, and the end of the Christian religion.

The rationalists acknowledge Jesus of Nazareth as an altogether eminent man, who by his character and religious genius taught men excellent things; nevertheless they deny him every messianic legation or mission. Indeed they contend that Jesus did not even regard and present himself as the Messiah sent by God, or at any rate did not present himself as the Messiah sent to found a divine religion.

Hence there arises a twofold question, concerning the fact and the meaning of the messianic testimony of Jesus. First, then, it is asked whether Jesus truly bore witness that he was the Messiah; secondly, it is asked in what sense Jesus bore witness of himself that he was the Messiah.

That Jesus of Nazareth professed himself to be the messianic legate of God is proved by the tenor of the Gospels, by the consensus of Christians, by the concession of unbelievers

1. The tenor of the Gospels. Nothing is more manifest than the testimony that Jesus gives on almost every page of the Gospels concerning his messianic consciousness and vocation. Both his words and his deeds inculcate this one thing, that he is the messianic legate sent by God. Once this testimony is removed, the whole Gospel history vanishes. Unless, therefore, we favor an absolute biblical scepticism, rejecting all sound criticism, we must concede the fact of Jesus' messianic profession.¹

2. The consensus of Christians. The whole primitive Church professed Jesus to be the Messiah. Peter on the day of Pentecost urges in Jerusalem: "Let all the house of Israel, therefore, know most certainly, that God has made him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus, whom you crucified."² Paul preaches at Damascus: "That this is the Messiah";³ at Thessalonica he cries out: "That this is Jesus the Messiah, whom I announce to you";⁴ at Corinth he insists, "testifying to the Jews that Jesus is the Messiah";⁵ at Ephesus "he mightily refuted the Jews in public, showing by the Scriptures that Jesus is the Messiah".⁶ All the apostles "ceased not, every day, in the temple and from house to house, teaching and preaching Jesus as the Messiah"⁷. But this unanimous faith and this constant preaching of the disciples could in no way be explained, unless the Master himself had professed himself to be the Messiah.

3. The concession of unbelievers. Overcome by this testimony of the Gospels and of the disciples, the rationalists themselves, a few of the more radical excepted, admit that Jesus' messianic profession is the most certain of all facts, one that no person of serious mind would deny.⁸ They contend only this, that Jesus did not from the beginning of his preaching hold and present himself as the Messiah, but that gradually, during his public life and above all in the last days of his life, he persuaded himself that he was the messianic legate of God. To this opinion adhere those who maintain that Jesus did not receive his messianic vocation from God, but acquired it by a natural psychological development. Hence it is of great moment to prove that the messianic preaching of Jesus took its beginning already at the very outset of his public life, its growth in the progress of his public life, and its completion at the close of his public life.

By no means is it to be expected that Jesus, from the very outset of his public life, revealed his messianic consciousness and teaching in a perfect and complete manner. For this was prevented both by the wisdom of divine pedagogy and by the folly of the disciples and of the Jews. Nevertheless, as soon as Jesus begins his public life, his messianic manifestation also begins: by accepting the messianic testimony rendered to him by others and by himself presenting himself as the messianic Son of Man.

1. By accepting the messianic testimony rendered to him by others, namely by the precursor, by God, by the disciples, and by the demons.

John the Baptist announced by word and baptism that the kingdom of heaven, i. e. the messianic kingdom,¹ and the Messiah were drawing near, whose precursor he declared himself unworthy to be.² To the envoys of the Sanhedrin, however, who suspected that John himself was the Messiah, he replied: "Because I am not the Messiah. But in the midst of you there has stood one whom you do not know."³ A little later "John saw Jesus coming toward him and said: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sin of the world".⁴ When Jesus was baptized, the Spirit of God descended upon him and the voice of the Father testified from heaven: "This is my Son, in whom I am well pleased."⁵ All agree that by the descent of the Holy Spirit the messianic anointing of Jesus is signified; likewise, that the title "Son of God" signifies the Messiah, although it is not restricted to such a signification. In fact, Jesus understood this event concerning his anointing and messianic mission.⁶

In the same sense the tempting demon likewise acknowledges the messianity of Jesus, repeatedly calling him Son of God and challenging him to perform the miraculous works foretold of the Messiah.⁷ Soon many demons join the tempter, openly confessing Jesus as the Messiah: "Because they knew him to be the Messiah ... the anointed of God ... the holy one of God ... the Son of God ... the Son of the Most High".⁸

The first disciples likewise greet Jesus as the Messiah. Andrew announces to Simon: "We have found the Messiah, which is interpreted Christ."⁹ Philip warns Nathanael: "We have found Jesus, of whom Moses wrote in the law, and the prophets."¹⁰ Nathanael, scarcely having found Jesus, acclaims him: "Rabbi, you are the Son of God, you are the King of Israel."¹¹

All these messianic testimonies rendered to him Jesus accepts; indeed, he joyfully approves and confirms them.¹² He only forbids that the demons make his messianity public,¹³ both because he did not wish to be recognized with the help of demons, and because he first wished to correct the messianic concept of the Jews, who expected a merely political Messiah. Therefore Wellhausen, Wrede, and other moderns do wrong when, from that prohibition imposed upon the demons, they conclude that Jesus never, or at any rate not yet, held himself to be the Messiah.

2. By himself presenting himself as the messianic Son of Man. Jesus indeed does not yet assume the title of Messiah, because — as we have already said and shall show more fully in another place — the Jews falsely understood this title of a political Messiah, i. e. of a certain glorious son of David and king of Israel who was to overthrow the Roman empire. Hence, if he had at once publicly called himself the Messiah, the Jews would have turned his messianic work into a national insurrection. For this reason Jesus, meanwhile omitting the name of Messiah, takes upon himself the title "Son of Man". From the first day of his manifestation he calls himself the Son of Man¹⁴ and loves this name of his above all others even unto death.¹⁵

Since none of the disciples calls him the Son of Man, this appellation is found eighty-two times in the Gospel from the mouth of Jesus.

The reason why Jesus chose for himself the name of Son of Man is open and manifest. This term, on the one hand, did not at all admit of a political interpretation; on the other hand, it possessed full messianic significance. "Son of Man" (barnaša) in the Aramaic language indeed simply means man. Yet by usage, after the prophecy of Daniel 7, 13 sq., the Son of Man was commonly called also the Messiah promised in the Old Testament.¹⁶ It escapes no one that Jesus claimed this title for himself with a messianic meaning. For to what purpose, after all, would he have said with emphasis throughout his whole life that he was a man! Indeed, from the beginning of his manifestation he clearly declared that he was the messianic Son of Man.¹⁷ Moreover, as his public life proceeded, he bound to this title "Son of Man" his entire messianic preaching.

Indeed, in the course of his Galilean sojourn Jesus manifested his messiahship ever more clearly day by day: by attributing to himself the privileges of the Messiah, by performing the works of the Messiah, by claiming for himself the name of Messiah.

1. By attributing to himself the privileges of the Messiah. With the apostles chosen, Jesus traverses all of Galilee, preaching the gospel of the messianic kingdom.¹

But the greatest part of this gospel consisted in this, that the Son of man attributed to himself the excellent endowments and offices which pertain to the Messiah. The Son of man descended from heaven and will return to heaven.² The Son of man was sent and anointed by God.³ The Son of man calls all to the messianic kingdom and saves all sinners.⁴ The Son of man teaches with divine authority.⁵ The Son of man by his own power adds the New Testament to the Old.⁶ The Son of man will come again at the end of time as the glorious prince of the kingdom of God and the judge of the whole world.⁷ Hearing these things, no one could doubt that Jesus ascribed to himself messiahship taken in the strictest and most sublime sense.

2. By performing the works of the Messiah. To win for himself the faith of Jewish witnesses, Jesus continually strengthens and confirms the gospel of the Son of man with miracles. He works almost innumerable signs upon the elements, the sick, the possessed, and the dead. For Isaiah had prophesied that the Messiah would perform very many and very great miracles.⁸ The Jews knew this prophecy very well; as the Gospel testifies, they said: “When the Messiah comes, will he do more signs than this man does?”⁹ But Jesus himself also continually appeals to his miracles as the criteria of his messianic mission.¹⁰

He invokes these criteria more solemnly when John inquires through envoys about the messiahship of Jesus. For the Forerunner, “when he had heard in prison of the works of Christ, sending two of his disciples,¹¹ he said to him: ‘Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?’”¹² But Jesus, multiplying miracles before the eyes of the two envoys, answers: “Go and report to John what you have heard and seen: the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise again, the poor have the gospel preached to them, and blessed is he who is not scandalized in me.”¹³

3. By claiming for himself the name of Messiah. Indeed, the Jews were still scandalized at him because he refused to play the role of the political Messiah expected by them. Therefore, having seen and experienced his miracles, very many indeed recognized him as a great prophet, but not as the Messiah.¹⁴ The few, however, who seemed to believe for the moment, believed only on this condition, that they would forthwith make Jesus the Messiah-King by stirring up an insurrection against the Romans.¹⁵ For this reason Jesus did not yet dare to bear the name of Messiah publicly before the Jews.¹⁶

With the Samaritans he could converse more openly, because they did not know the political-national Messiah of the Jews. Hence also before the Samaritan woman he declares in express words that he is the Messiah. After he had first shown himself to her as a “prophet” by revealing her hidden life, the woman said: “I know that the Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ); when therefore he comes, he will tell us all things.” Jesus says to her: “I am he, who am speaking to you.” And from that city many of the Samaritans believed in him and said: “For we ourselves have heard and we know that this is truly the Savior of the world.”¹⁷ Behold true faith in a spiritual Messiah!

Before the apostles too (who were gradually educated in the faith by divine patience¹⁸), Jesus claims for himself the name of Messiah. For when they had come to Caesarea Philippi toward the end of the Galilean sojourn, Jesus asks them: “But who do you say that I am?” Answering, Simon Peter said: “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” But Jesus, praising and extolling the messianic confession of Peter, said: “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah: because flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.”¹⁹

At the time when Jesus, toward the end of his life, remained in Judaea and Jerusalem, he set the crowning touch upon the testimony of his messiahship: by correcting the messianic conception of the disciples, by perfecting the messianic instruction of the people, by completing the messianic confession before the judges.

1. By correcting the messianic conception of the disciples. The disciples already believed in the messiahship of the Master with full faith, although they did not yet regard Jesus as establishing a politico-messianic kingdom. Indeed, they had no doubt at all that he would soon erect this glorious kingdom of David. To correct this erroneous conception, Jesus "from that time [after the confession of Peter] began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and scribes and chief priests, and be killed, and on the third day rise"¹ and "so enter into his glory"² Hitherto he had spoken of his death only in parables.³ From then on he is wholly intent upon teaching the apostles that the Messiah was to suffer and die, and so to erect the spiritual kingdom of God.

This messianic conception, however, the disciples could scarcely, if at all, grasp. Peter rebukes Jesus when he speaks of the passion⁴ and likewise, at the time of the passion, intends to fight with the sword, thinking that the politico-messianic kingdom was at hand.⁵ The sons of Zebedee likewise desire to obtain the first places in that kingdom.⁶ Indeed, not even after the death of Jesus do the disciples understand the suffering Messiah,⁷ but rather hope that he will immediately restore the kingdom of Israel.⁸ Once the fact of the resurrection is fully understood, the apostles at last lay aside political messianism.

2. By perfecting the messianic instruction of the people. Jesus likewise, toward the end of his life, instructed the Jewish crowds more and more from day to day, publicly illustrating his messiahship by words⁹ and by wonders.¹⁰ With the greatest care, too, he warns the people believing in him¹¹ that he has not come as an earthly king of the Jews, but rather as the spiritual savior of the whole world: "For the Son of man also is not come to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a redemption for many."¹² He will not enter messianic glory except through passion and death.¹³ "For as the lightning flashing from under heaven shines upon the things that are under heaven, so will the Son of man be in his day. But first he must suffer and be rejected by this generation."¹⁴

This teaching the people did not grasp. Many indeed acclaimed Jesus as the Messiah, but as a politico-national Messiah. Therefore they lead him into Jerusalem in triumph, acclaiming: "Hosanna to the son of David!"¹⁵ "Blessed is the king who comes!"¹⁶ "Hosanna, blessed is the king of Israel!"¹⁷ "Blessed is the kingdom of our father David that comes!"¹⁸

3. By completing the messianic confession before the judges. The Pharisees and the scribes avail themselves of the messianic ovation of the people in order to destroy Jesus.¹⁹ Before the Jewish judges they accuse him of having preached an apolitical messianism; before the Roman judge they denounce him as one preaching a political messianism, making himself a king and stirring up the people. On both occasions Jesus professes his messiahship in the most solemn manner.

When, namely, the judges of the Sanhedrin were assembled, the high priest interrogates Jesus: "I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you are the Messiah, the Son of God." Jesus says to him: "You have said; nevertheless I say to you, from now on you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of God and coming on the clouds of heaven."²⁰

Brought before the Roman governor²¹ and asked by him: "Are you the king of the Jews?" he answers: "My kingdom is not of this world",²² signifying that he possesses a kingdom above the world. Asked again: "Then you are a king?" he answers Pilate: "You say that I am a king. For this I was born and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice!" He professes, therefore, that he has been sent into this world as the teacher of absolute truth and the prince of the spiritual messianic kingdom. But such a king and such a kingdom Pilate does not grasp.²³ Hence he judges that Jesus aspired to the politico-messianic kingdom dreamed of by the Jews. And this he announces in the words written above the cross of Jesus: "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews".²⁴

In reality, however, Jesus had throughout his whole life recoiled from this messianism. To restrain his followers from this pseudo-messianism, he had devoted the most diligent effort. At the beginning, in the progress, and at the end of his preaching he professed himself the Messiah, but a Messiah foreign to the ideas of his Jewish contemporaries.

With the fact of Jesus' messianic testimony established, it seems evident that He attributed messiahship to Himself in this sense: that in the name and by the authority of God He would teach men a perfect religion and unite them, redeemed, in the kingdom of heaven. Yet modern rationalists deny that Jesus understood His messiahship in this Christian sense, although He rejected the messianism that was current among most Jews of His time. In order to resolve fully this question of the gravest importance, one must first investigate the messianic concept held before Jesus, and then the messianic concept of Jesus Himself.

Although certain messianic notions or opinions are found among almost all peoples,¹ nevertheless messianism proper was first committed to writing in the books of the Old Testament, and was afterwards variously interpreted by the Jews down to the age of Christ. Hence we shall set forth the messianic concept both of the Old Testament and of the later Judaism.

That the books of the Old Testament are genuine is proved ex professo in the Introduction to Scripture. It is not, however, our concern to inquire into the genuineness of these books; it suffices to know that they already existed long before Christ. And in fact it has long since been established and conceded by all that the Hebrew canon of the Old Testament was in existence at least three centuries before Christ, and that the Greek version of the LXX was written at least by the middle of the second century before Christ, although it can easily be shown — and is universally conceded — that many books of the Old Testament are much more ancient.

That these books, moreover, treat at length of the future messianic legate of God is likewise established both by the countless testimonies of the books themselves,¹ and by the faith of the Jews, who drew their messianic hope from the sacred Scriptures of the Old Testament,² and finally by the consensus of both friends and foes of the Christian cause.

The messianic concept, however, which the books of the Old Testament contain, concerns both the person and the kingdom of the Messiah.

1. The person of the Messiah is described by the titles given to him. The Savior awaited by the whole Old Testament is called the Messiah simply, the Son of David, the Servant of God, the Son of Man, the Son of God.

a) Messiah. In itself, indeed, the messianism of the Old Testament is in no way connected with the name "Messiah" ("Christ, the Anointed One"). By this name are called everywhere in the sacred books the kings and priests upon whom the royal or priestly office was conferred by anointing. Since, however, the future Savior was awaited as a priest and king — said with emphasis — the title of Messiah was fitting for him as well. This title, however, is attributed to him only three times in the whole Old Testament.³ Finally, as the Christian era drew near, the longed-for Redeemer began to be commonly called the Messiah, the other messianic titles being nevertheless retained, of which the most frequent:

b) Son of David, or even David without any addition. For because David was a type of the Messiah, the latter himself is often called David.⁴ More often, however, he bears the title Son of David, both because the Messiah was to be descended from the family of David,⁵ and because he was to possess the throne of David forever.

For a twofold promise was made to David by God, the one conditional, the other absolute. Conditionally, a temporal, political kingdom was promised to David, to last as long as the Davidic line should not fall away from God.⁶ This condition the Davidic line and the people governed by it did not fulfill, but they fell away from God and were therefore rejected, the temporal political kingdom being overthrown.⁷

Absolutely, however, there was promised to David a son king, whose throne and kingdom should stand forever: "Once have I sworn by my holy one, if [surely] I shall lie to David: his seed shall remain forever, and his throne [immutable] as the sun before me, and as the moon perfect [it shall be perfect] forever, and a faithful witness [God] in heaven."⁸

In fact, although the political power of the house of David was taken away and its family fortunes ruined, nevertheless it is constantly promised that the Son of David will reign over Israel forever,⁹ nay, that he will rule over all nations,¹⁰ a dominion, to be sure, spiritual and religious. The Son of David will teach all the peoples of the whole world perfect ways and truths.¹¹ "In his days shall justice spring up and abundance of peace, till the moon be taken away. And he shall rule from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth. And all kings of the earth shall adore him, all nations shall serve him. And in him all the tribes of the earth shall be blessed."¹² Therefore the Messiah is said to be about to obtain the kingdom of David in this sense, that he himself will rule in a spiritual manner the people of God of the whole world, whom David governed in a temporal respect in Judea alone.

c) Servant of God. Whereas the title Son of David exhibits the Messiah as the head of a religious and universal kingdom, the Messiah is described under the title Servant of God as suffering and dying¹³ for the sins of men, and by this work of redemption meriting the glory of the messianic kingdom.¹⁴ Him God sends not only for the conversion of Israel, but that he may be "a light to the gentiles" and for salvation "to the end of the earth".¹⁵ For since he himself "committed no iniquity, neither was there guile in his mouth",¹⁶ by his vicarious passion and death he blots out our iniquity: "Surely he has borne our infirmities and carried our sorrows... But he was wounded for our iniquities, he was bruised for our crimes; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his bruise we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray, every one has turned aside into his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all."¹⁷ He expiates the sins of the whole world.¹⁸ Through him "all the ends of the earth shall be converted to the Lord, and all the kindreds of the gentiles shall adore in his sight".¹⁹ Finally, having died, he will rise again to a new life and at the right hand of God be crowned with eternal glory.²⁰

d) Son of Man. Leaving the right hand of God, the Messiah, in the form of the Son of Man, will come again on the clouds of heaven to judge the world and to take up the dominion of the messianic kingdom acquired by his passion, death, and resurrection. For this is the meaning of Daniel's prophecy concerning the Son of Man: "I beheld therefore in the vision of the night, and lo, with the clouds of heaven one like the Son of Man came [to judgment], and he came even to the Ancient of days. And they presented him before him. And he gave him power and honor and a kingdom, and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve him: his power is an everlasting power, which shall not be taken away, and his kingdom, which shall not be destroyed."²¹

e) Son of God. Considering the altogether superhuman dignity and office of the Messiah, we do not wonder that he is proclaimed God. In almost innumerable places of the Old Testament God himself is promised to come to redeem his people, e. g.: "Jahve himself will come and will save you".²² "Prepare the way of the Lord [Jahve], make straight in the wilderness the paths of our God [Elohim] ... Behold your God [Elohim]; behold the Lord God [Jahve Elohim] shall come in strength."²³ In the second psalm the Messiah Redeemer is more explicitly called the Son of Jahve. For to the Messiah, sent and anointed by God,²⁴ are attributed the words: "Jahve said to me: You are my Son; today I have begotten you."²⁵

More expressly Isaiah calls the Redeemer Emmanuel, i. e., God with us: "Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel."²⁶ That Emmanuel is true God is clear from this, that he is identified with Jahve, the Lord and ruler of Israel.²⁷

Moreover, what lies hidden, as it were, enclosed in the single name of Emmanuel, the prophet openly declares thus: "To them that dwelt in the region of the shadow of death, light is risen... For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us; and the government is upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called: Wonderful, Counsellor, God the Mighty, Father of the world to come, Prince of Peace. His empire shall be multiplied, and there shall be no end of peace; he shall sit upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom, to establish it and strengthen it with judgment and with justice, from henceforth and forever."²⁸

The names given to the Messiah in the text appear to be appellatives of deity: "Wonderful" [Hebr. "miracle"], Counsellor, "Prince of Peace", but especially "Father of the world to come" and "God the Mighty". "Father of the world to come" — or, according to the Hebrew text, "Father of eternity, eternal Father" — only God can be called. A fortiori, only Jahve — and he indeed is often called "God the Mighty" [Hebr. "El gibbor"] in sacred Scripture.²⁹

With this testimony of Isaiah agrees that of Malachi: "Behold, I send my angel, and he shall prepare the way before my face. And presently [Hebr. unexpectedly] the Ruler shall come to his temple, whom you seek, and the angel of the covenant, whom you desire; behold, he comes, says the Lord of hosts."³⁰ The divinity of the Messiah is clearly declared by these words, in that 1° he is called the Ruler, by which appellation, everywhere except in our passage, nothing but Jahve, the true God, is designated;³¹ 2° he comes to his temple, although the temple of Jerusalem is God's alone; 3° it is the same to prepare the way for the Ruler and to prepare the way before the face of the Lord of hosts.

In these passages of the Old Testament the divinity of the Messiah is proclaimed so clearly that St. Justin reproaches the Jews of his time (2nd cent. A. D.): "When we bring before them those Scriptures which show in express words that Christ is passible, adorable, and God, they indeed, constrained by necessity, assent that they were spoken of Christ; but this man [Jesus of Nazareth] they dare to deny to be the Christ, while they confess that one is to come who will suffer and reign and be adored as God."³²

The person of the Messiah having been described by these titles, the messianic concept is completed by another technical term, by which the work to be accomplished by the Messiah is more precisely set forth; namely:

2. The Kingdom of the Messiah. "The kingdom of God" or "the kingdom of heaven"³³ is, according to Semitic usage, the royal dominion over the world exercised by God and acknowledged by men.³⁴ Thus the synagogal theocracy, by virtue of the covenant entered into between Jahve and the people of Israel, could have been called the kingdom of God. Nevertheless, with this name the prophets emphatically designate only the kingdom to be founded and governed by the Messiah. And indeed they so describe the nature of the messianic kingdom that it is a kingdom new, universal, and spiritual.

a) A new kingdom, the old covenant being abolished. For in place of the law, priesthood, sacrifice, and worship of the old covenant there will be substituted a new law, a new priesthood, a new sacrifice, and a new worship. The new law: "Behold the days shall come ... and I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Juda: not according to the pact which I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt: the pact which they made void, and I had dominion over them, says the Lord. But this shall be the pact which I will make with the house of Israel: I will give my law in their bowels, and I will write it in their heart: and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."³⁵

The new priesthood: For since the Mosaic priests were chosen from Israelites alone and indeed from the tribe of Levi alone, it is predicted that in messianic times priests are to be taken from all nations: "And I will take of them [the gentiles] for priests and Levites, says the Lord."³⁶

The new sacrifice and new worship: For of the sacrifices and the whole worship of the Israelites it is written: "I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not receive a gift of your hand. For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is great among the gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation: for my name is great among the gentiles, says the Lord of hosts."³⁷

Since, moreover, the new covenant extends even to the gentiles, it is clear that the kingdom of the Messiah will be:

b) A universal, not a national kingdom. The Mosaic covenant, although men of other nations could subject themselves to it, nevertheless regarded only the Israelites. The kingdom of the Messiah, however, will begin from Judea and Jerusalem, from there pass over to the gentiles, and by their continued accession grow and gradually extend even to the ends of the whole world.

"For out of Sion shall the law go forth, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem."³⁸

"And I will send of them [the Israelites] that shall be saved, to the gentiles into the sea, into Africa and Lydia ... into Italy and Greece, to the islands afar off, to them that have not heard of me and have not seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory to the gentiles; and they shall bring all your brethren out of all nations ... to my holy mountain Jerusalem."³⁹

"All the ends of the earth shall remember and be converted to the Lord; and all the kindreds of the gentiles shall adore in his sight."⁴⁰

But a universal kingdom must necessarily be:

c) A spiritual, not a material kingdom. That the Messiah will also bestow earthly and political goods, many texts of the prophets announce. It is true, indeed, that the prophets for the most part use these material things to signify immaterial things; nevertheless, at times they seem to promise goods that are strictly material too. Nay, just as the observance of the divine law had always been for the Israelites the most abundant source of earthly blessing, so the Jews, if they had received the Messiah, would also have inherited material happiness and been preserved from political ruin.⁴¹

That spiritual and religious goods, however, will be essential to the messianic kingdom is already clear from what has been said about the person of the king, the Messiah. In fact, the kingdom of the Messiah will abound in divine knowledge, grace, and pardon.

Divine knowledge. Idolatry being removed, the messianic kingdom will bring a perfect and unfailing knowledge of divine things. "And it shall come to pass in that day, says the Lord of hosts, that I will destroy the names of idols out of the earth, and they shall be remembered no more."⁴² "The earth is filled with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters covering the sea."⁴³ "This is my covenant with them, says the Lord: my spirit, which is in you, and my words, which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth, nor out of the mouth of your seed, nor out of the mouth of your seed's seed, says the Lord, from henceforth and forever."⁴⁴

Divine grace. The kingdom of God will shine with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and with charisms. "And it shall come to pass after this: I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions. Moreover, upon my servants and handmaids in those days I will pour out my spirit."⁴⁵

Divine pardon. In messianic times the sins of men will be remitted and blotted out: "In that day there shall be a fountain open to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for the washing of the sinner."⁴⁶ "In those days and at that time, says the Lord, the iniquity of Israel shall be sought for, and there shall be none; and the sin of Juda, and it shall not be found: for I will be merciful to them."⁴⁷ "I will be merciful to their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more."⁴⁸ "If your sins be as scarlet, they shall be made as white as snow; and if they be red as crimson, they shall be white as wool."⁴⁹ "I have blotted out your iniquities as a cloud, and your sins as a mist; return to me, for I have redeemed you."⁵⁰

Hence the messianic concept of the Old Testament may be defined approximately thus: the Messiah, heir of the Davidic house (Son of David) and endowed with a divine nature (Son of God), will by his vicarious death redeem all men from their sins (Servant of God) and will call them into a new religious society (kingdom of God), to be governed by him and at the end of time judged by him (Son of Man).

There was not one single messianic view among all the Jews who lived shortly before Christ or were contemporaries of Christ. Most cherished rabbinic messianism, others an eschatological, others a biblical one.

1. Rabbinic or Pharisaic messianism.¹ Pharisaico-rabbinic theology flourished most from the Babylonian exile down to the age of Christ, although it was committed to writing only in the first Christian centuries. Led by zeal for the Mosaic law, the rabbis, almost wholly neglecting the other books of the Old Testament, extolled the Torah alone, i. e. the Mosaic Pentateuch, in so far as it contains precepts. To the Torah they added the Mishnah, i. e. the tradition of the fathers embracing innumerable prescriptions.² Finally, to the Mishnah itself the rabbis, by force of cabbalistic exegesis,³ added the Gemara (Talmud).⁴ Rabbinic nomism, therefore, consisted of a threefold concentric circle: the Torah or the law; the Mishnah or the body of law, and the Gemara (Talmud) or the commentary on the body of law. According to the rabbis these three, taken together, constitute the revealed Law of Moses.⁵ The nucleus, however, of the threefold law is messianism.

And indeed, according to the rabbis, the kingdom of God descended from heaven together with the Law on Mount Sinai.⁶ With the Mosaic covenant concluded, the people of Israel was redeemed;⁷ all nations were subjected to the dominion of the Israelites; all material and sensual goods were conferred on the children of Abraham; nay, paradise itself was again established on earth.⁸

This kingdom of God, alas, perished through the adoration of the golden calf and will return only upon the perfect observance of the Law.⁹ In the time of David that happy observance of the Law was almost at hand, and the kingdom of the Messiah had begun to unfold, but it was hindered by the sins of David and of his son Solomon. But on the first day on which all Israelites shall have fulfilled all the prescriptions of the Law, the Messiah will appear, will increase the zeal for the Law, himself the most ardent of all the rabbis, will raise the throne of David more gloriously, will destroy the Roman empire, will make all nations tributary to the Jews, and will restore the whole Sinaitic kingdom of God with all its earthly goods.¹⁰

That this rabbinic messianism differs from the messianic concept of the Old Testament by the whole heaven is evident. Over against the spiritual and universal "kingdom of God" is set a political, material, earthly, national kingdom of the Jews. Since this kingdom is the reward of the legal observance of the individual Israelites, who are already redeemed,¹¹ and since it belongs to the Messiah alone to proclaim the kingdom on the appointed day, the Pharisaic Messiah is not the suffering and dying "Servant of God" for the sins of the human race. Nor is he the "Son of Man" described by Daniel, still less the true "Son of God", but he plays the part of some great rabbi and cares only for earthly things. The Pharisaic Messiah is a mere secular "Son of David", the greatest politico-national king of the Jews.¹²

2. Eschatological or apocalyptic messianism.¹³ Against the rabbinic messianism which pleased most Jews, some set the eschatological or apocalyptic. It is called apocalyptic because it took its origin from certain apocalyptic books written about the age of Christ, the principal of which are: the Book of Henoch, the Book of Jubilees, the Assumption of Moses, the Sibylline Oracles, the Apocalypse or fourth book of Esdras, and the Apocalypse of Baruch. It is called eschatological because it made the Messiah and his kingdom coincide with the last things, i. e. with the end of time and of the world and with the last judgment.

For certain "pessimists", seeing the Romans more and more taking possession of the public affairs of the Jews, despaired of obtaining the establishment of the Davidic-messianic kingdom in this world. Hence, neglecting the other messianic prophecies, they clung only to the prophecy of Daniel concerning the "Son of Man" who was to come at the end of time, to judge the world, and to govern the kingdom of God. They thought, therefore, that this worst of worlds must first be destroyed and another heavenly age created. Once this was done, they said, the Messiah, still kept in heaven, will descend in the clouds upon the new earth, will judge men, and will forthwith establish the kingdom of God.

This eschatological kingdom of God they imagine as wholly politico-national and material. The Messiah will subdue all kingdoms and all kings hostile to the Israelites, but will hand over to the Jews the government of the whole world.¹⁴ All nations will adore the sons of Israel and will be pressed into their harshest servitude.¹⁵ The Jews, however, will enjoy immense riches, unheard-of pleasures of the senses, and perpetual beauty and youth;¹⁶ protected and beatified by the presence of the Messiah.¹⁷

Hence eschatological messianism is politico-national and material without qualification, just as much as rabbinic messianism. It differs from the latter only in this, that it assigns the Messiah and his kingdom to a transcendental world and age. With the Old Testament this messianic eschatology has nothing to do. It indeed snatches up the prophecy of Daniel concerning the "Son of Man", but torn away from the other messianic prophecies.

3. Biblical or prophetic messianism.¹⁸ There were not wanting Jews who retained the messianic concept of the whole Old Testament, expecting already in this world the Messiah, the redeemer of all men, and a religious, universal kingdom of God.

Zechariah exults in that celebrated messianic canticle because the Messiah will procure for the Jews not only holiness, justice, knowledge of God and the remission of sins, but will also enlighten all nations with religion: "That being delivered from the hand of our enemies, we may serve him without fear, in holiness and justice before him ... To give knowledge of salvation to his people unto the remission of their sins. The orient from on high has visited us, to enlighten those [nations] who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death."¹⁹

That Joseph, the spouse of Mary, expected the Messiah as a spiritual Savior is evident from the words spoken to him by the angel: "Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins."²⁰

Simeon proclaims Jesus, the "Messiah of the Lord",²¹ to be not only the glory of Israel, but also the salvation and light of all nations; nay, he foresees the passion of the Messiah: "My eyes have seen thy salvation [Iahve], which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples, a light to the revelation of the gentiles and the glory of thy people Israel... Behold, this child is set for the fall and for the resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be contradicted, and thy own [Mary's] soul a sword shall pierce."²²

John the precursor professes more clearly the spiritual operation of the Messiah and his vicarious death for sinners. For he announces that Jesus, the founder of the kingdom of heaven,²³ will baptize "in the Holy Ghost and in fire",²⁴ i. e. will confer the spiritual gifts of the messianic kingdom, and that he is "the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world",²⁵ i. e. a lamb sacred, to be offered to God, and by this oblation to take away the sin of the world.²⁶

The Samaritans, too, expected the Messiah not as politico-national, but as the "Savior of the world".²⁷

Finally, all who searched the Old Testament with a devout and upright heart necessarily repudiated messianism, both rabbinic and eschatological.