wounds at once, he only opens one and closes one, saying, Perhaps I may be wanted at the very minute, so that there should be no delay.' Another view is presented in the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan on Gen. xxxv. 21, where it is said that the Messiah will be revealed at the place where Jacob spread his tent after the death of Rachel, beyond the tower of 'Eder. This, I presume, is founded on the prophecy of Micah :-1And thou, O tower of 'Eder [ as in Genesis, rendered 'flock' in the Authorised Version], the stronghold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion.' The expectation that the Messiah would appear first in Galilee is found only in very late authorities.2

The descent of the Messiah from David had been so clearly announced by the Prophets that it was simply taken for granted in later times. It is explicitly asserted in the Psalms of Solomon, Fourth Ezra, and the Targums.5 The view of the Talmudists is given in the title 'Son of David,' to be presently noticed."

1 iv. 8.

2 See the passages in Gfrörer, Jahrh. d. H. ii. S. 231.

3 xvii. 5 sq. and 23.

4 xii. 32, in all the versions but the Latin.

5 See Isai. xi. 1; xiv. 29; Jer. xxiii. 5; xxxiii. 15; and for his descent from Judah, Zech. x. 4, and Jer. Targ. Gen. xlix. 11.

For the concealment of the Messiah compare John vii. 27: 'When Christ cometh no man knoweth whence he is.' For his earthly manifestation see John i. 31, and for his revelation, connected by the Christians with his second coming, see 1 Cor. i. 7; 2 Thess. i. 7; 1 Peter i. 7, 13; iv. 13.

CHAPTER X.

TITLES AND NAMES OF THE MESSIAH.

THE future and ideal Ruler of Israel is referred to under various designations. That which has supplied a name to the religion of the most cultured races-Messiah, Christ, Anointed-occurs in its special sense for the first time in the Psalms of Solomon. In xvii. 36 he is called, according to the present text, 'Christ the Lord, χριστὸς κύριος, but we cannot help suspecting that we ought to have the genitive κupíov, the Lord's Anointed.' The same expression occurs in xviii. 8; but as both words are in the genitive, this does not help us to a decision. In xviii. 6, however, we have χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ, where αὐτοῦ refers to eós, and this may give some support to the suggested emendation. Hilgenfeld 1 believes the reading to be genuine. His appeal to Christian writers is hardly relevant, and may be disregarded; but he refers to one instance in the LXX., where the words rendered by χριστός κύριος.” It is difficult to suppose that any Jew can have seriously adopted this translation; but if the reading be not in both instances due to an error of transcription, it is probable that the words in the Psalms of Solomon are, like those in the LXX., due to a misunderstanding of the Hebrew expression. The name 'Messiah (but without the addition) occurs also in Fourth Ezra

1 Mess. Jud. p. 32.

2 Lament. iv. 20.

are

3 vii. 28, 29, (where the Latin, however, with an obvious falsification, reads 'Jesus' in 28; and 29 is omitted by the Arab. and Arm.), and xii. 32 (according to the Lat., Syr., and Arm.)

and the Apocalypse of Baruch.1 In the Targums and the Talmud it is found so frequently that it is unnecessary to cite particular passages. In the former it is often preceded by the title of King.'

The designation 'Son of David' is used only once in the pre-Christian writings, Psalms of Solomon xvii. 23. Among the Targums it is found in Canticles iv. 5, where it is employed to distinguish him from the other Messiah, the Son of Ephraim.' In the Talmud it occurs several times.2

The title Son of man,' if we have been right in our criticisms on the Book of Enoch, is adopted only in Christian literature. If any adhere to the Messianic interpretation of Daniel vii. 13, I may remark that the expression is not there used as an appellative, but only by way of comparison.

The title Son of God,' however, which might seem more distinctive of Christianity, is met with a few times in our present texts. In the Book of Enoch cv. 2 we read, 'I and my Son will unite ourselves with them [the sons of earth] for ever. We have seen how little dependence can be placed on the accuracy of the text in regard to isolated expressions of this kind, and I am inclined to suspect that we have here a Christian interpolation; for there is nothing in the context to indicate who is meant by my Son.' In saying that the expression might be understood from the Old Testament, Dillmann 3 is right to this extent, that it finds some support in the Old Testament; but unless current use had already sanctioned it (and of this we have no evidence), I doubt whether it would have been intelligible, and the writer

1 Chs. xxix. xxx. xxxix. xl. lxx. lxxii.

2 See, for instance, the passage already quoted, pp. 220-1.

3 Das Buch Henoch, S. 325.

would probably have added some further epithet to explain its meaning.

The case is different in Fourth Ezra; for there, in the first passage in which the title occurs, the addition of the word Messiah' removes the obscurity. Other circumstances, however, seem to me to excite a just suspicion that in this book also the term may be due to the tampering of Christian transcribers. In order to judge of this we must examine the passages one by one.

The first is in vii. 28, 29. In the Latin the text stands thus: For my Son Jesus will be revealed with those who are with him, and will rejoice those who have been left, for four hundred years. And it shall come to pass after these years, my Son Christ shall die, and all men who have breath.' Here the word 'Jesus' Here the word 'Jesus' proves that a Christian hand has been at work, and raises the question. whether the word 'Son' may not have been inserted in both verses. We turn, then, to the Syriac, and we find 'my son Messiah' in each verse; but here too the Christian copyist betrays himself by the change of four hundred' years into thirty.' The Ethiopic has in the first verse my Messiah,' without 'Son.' In the second. verse it has my servant Messiah.' I am obliged to depend upon the Latin translation; but it is suggestive. Laurence's famulus' is corrected in Hilgenfeld's edition into 'puer.' This must no doubt represent the Greek Taîs, and this again answers to the Hebrew 77, as in Isaiah xlii. 1, where " is rendered by the LXX. ó πaîs μov. IIaîs, again, might easily be translated filius,' in which sense, whatever may be the case in the Book of Acts, it certainly seems to be used of Christ at a later time.1 If this suggestion be correct, my Son' may

6

1 Cf. Hippolytus, Ref. Om. Hær. x. 33, тà dè návтa dioikeî ó λóyos ó beoû, ὁ πρωτόγονος Πατρὸς παῖς.

represent ultimately the Hebrew my servant,' the author having very naturally adopted the LXX. rendering of a term which he would most probably apply to the Messiah. We should then have an exact parallel with the Apocalypse of Baruch, where we read' my Messiah ' in chapters xxxix., xl., and lxxii., and my servant Messiah' in lxx. The Æthiopic, however, is not without evidence of intentional alteration; for it omits the four hundred years.' The Arabic has my Son Messiah' in the first verse, but omits the second altogether. The Armenian also omits the second verse, and in the first has simply, 'then will appear the Anointed of God.'

'

The next passage is in xiii. 32, where the Latin has, 'Then shall be revealed my Son, whom thou didst see as a man ascending.' The Syriac and Arabic have the same reading; but the Ethiopic has, Then shall be revealed that man,' while the Armenian has, The Most High will appear with great strength; this is that man whom thou didst behold.' Here, then, we have two of the versions opposed to the reading of the other three. Again, in verse 37 the Latin has these words, But my Son himself will convict the nations which have come.' The Syriac and Arabic confirm this reading; but the Ethiopic has, 'He, therefore, is that Son who will convict the peoples of their sins,' where the expression that Son' is so devoid of meaning that one must suppose the original to have been, 'He, then, it is who will convict.' This conjecture is confirmed by the Armenian, which simply carries on the previous nominative, 'he.' The expression recurs in verse 52, where the Latin reads, 'No one upon earth will be able to see my Son, or those who are with him, except in the time of the day [appointed].' The Syriac alone follows exactly the same reading. The Ethiopic has, None of those who are in the earth can have know